• Welcome to Photrio!
    Registration is fast and free. Join today to unlock search, see fewer ads, and access all forum features.
    Click here to sign up

Cheapest B&W 120 film available in USA?

In attempt to keep a tiring thread alive for some new direction. I was given to wonder if this Rodinal bit might have a use for salvaging outdated black and white film. Say, film marked for the early 90's and later. I would think anything earlier would turn out black in most any dresser-drawer storage. But how would you begin to calculate an ASA, even presuming you could get through a development process without fog kicking you over-the shoulder by 3 zones. What would 1992 Tri-X have as an ASA? Plus-X? Naturally I'd calculate 1992 Tri-X in 2013 at maybe 80. That's fair. So how about an hour in this Rodinal tincture? What if you glommed onto 10 rolls at once on ebay from 1997? or 2002?
With these questions I'm afraid I'd be stretching it by asking about Potassium Bromide.
 

You're a little off, Rodinal is definitely not the right developer for old film.

You need a developer that develops with really short times, it cuts down on fogging.

So thing like HC-110 with lower dilution mixtures like dilution (B) or Ilfsol 3

Both of which have super short dev times, 6 minutes or less generally. That's best for old films.

As far as exposure, assume 1 stop loss every 10 years (or so) if the film was only stored at room temp or hot temp the 10 year rule stands but if frozen it's probably a lot less. So a safe bet for Tri-x (400ASA) from 1992's would be EI 160.

Anyway hope that helped.


~Stone

Mamiya: 7 II, RZ67 Pro II / Canon: 1V, AE-1, 5DmkII / Kodak: No 1 Pocket Autographic, No 1A Pocket Autographic | Sent w/ iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Thanks Stone. Now that your name has been in front of me a few volleys. my wandering mind leads me to ask if you're finding any economy in this silver B&W work in a place like New York City. Or is is as dry as you would expect in rural NC? When wheatfields as the drive-by scenery can eat up 60 dollars in gas to get to a customer, is there a customer to get to? Not here. How about a bustling place like NYC? Not that I'd move there and freeze, but I sure hope you guys are finding something for yourselves up there in this field. If B&W dies, I die. The customer needs to know his photo this way will last a thousand years, which it will. No digital image is going to give that. OK, regards, friend.
 
StoneNYC said:
You're a little off, Rodinal is definitely not the right developer for old film.

You need a developer that develops with really short times, it cuts down on fogging.
Click to expand...

I have successfully been using Rodinal 1+100 to develop Kodak T-Max 100 that expired back in June 1995. I realize that is not terribly old as these things go, but it certainly didn't go out of date yesterday. My problem is not with fog but I am having to make adjustments to calm down the contrast. I am developing this film for 20 minutes in Rodinal 1+100 after a 5 minute pre-wash. I agitate continually for the first 30 seconds, then 3 agitations every 3 minutes after that. I have been keeping the developer temp as close to 70F as I can.

I have recently developed some T-Max and it seems to have turned out relatively decent, ignoring a couple rolls with black spots courtesy of a burned shutter curtain in my M6.

Rodinal may not be the first choice but don't write it off automatically. This old developer seems to be quite flexible and capable of handling lots of different tasks.

I am not necessarily a terrific photographer but I'll see if I can get some of this posted so you can make your own call.
 
As StoneNYC found out "agitation regime" is the key to many developers and Rodinal is no exception. I used to use HC110 del. B for TRi-X and time and temp were important to follow, but I never notice a ton of difference between negatives that I gave aggressive agitation and milder agitation. But Rodinal is different and I found out the hard way since I always think slightly more must always be better. Not with Rodinal. My first try was years ago and I developed Tri-X in Rodinal 1:25 with the same kind of agitation scheme as HC110 and decided Rodinal for me was out. The negatives had much more contrast and a real gritty grain appearance. Still, I kept seeing shots/pictures from people using this combination and their results certainly didn't mirror mine. At that time I was happy playing with HC110 and from time to time Edwal FG7 so I didn't mess with Rodinal again until I started messing around with some Kodak TechPan film and then used it very diluted, semi-stand and got very nice results. Then I read an article about the compensating ability of diluted Rodinal and became a little more interested. It wasn't until I did a shot of a big black steam locomotive on a very bright slightly overcast day with my 3.5E Rollei that brought out the bottle of Rodinal. I developed the Fuji Acros in Rodinal 1:100 @ 20C for 1hr. with 45 seconds of normal agitation first and then two very gentle inversions at the 30 minute mark. Now, first let me say that Acros is a very nice film and it's pretty simple to get nice results with many different developers, but this combo was what I had to call superb for this situation. Unbelievably sharp, held highlights and almost no sign of grain. I thought, what more could you ask for? Well some of us don't like long developing times, but I'm not one of them. Diluted developers also have a built in safety factor that highly concentrated developers don't and that is more forgiveness for human error, which I seem to be heavily blessed with. With a highly diluted developer and longer times their is a much less severe affect of a drift of a degree or two and a couple of minutes one way or the other. I consider it a winning combo and a nice tool in the tool box, plus it lasts forever, dilutes greatly and that makes it cheaper than dirt. I have never tried it with C-41 film like StoneNYC has, but I will someday. It really is a "MUST TRY" tool. JohnW
 
Remember with C-41 (and other x-processing films) there is a high amount of exposure adjustment. In my case Kodak Gold 200 shot at EI 50 and developed in Rodinal Stand 1:100 one hour, agitation 30 seconds then 3 minutes, then 20 minutes, then 40 minutes and 3 minutes before 1 hour (but very gentile agitation one inversion only except the 30 seconds). Shot on a 35mm Zeiss Ikon Continamatic II 1958 camera.



As far as "jobs" I shoot both digital and film, and really that's a hard answer to answer, I drive 3 hours to clients sometimes, but the travel cost is on them, I have a 3 hour minimum as a flat $400 and $100/hour thereafter + travel + film cost per roll if they choose film.

And for my own projects its all TFP.

But even though my name has NYC in it, I live in CT... I work in NY and Massachusetts/Rhode Island and of course CT.

But I don't do a LOT of jobs.

I honestly wish I lived out where you live, I think it would be easier to get work, there are too many photographers here... Locations cost too much etc.

I would like to see some of your work sir, 2-5 images you're proud of since we can't tell what you're looking for.

Thanks.


~Stone

Mamiya: 7 II, RZ67 Pro II / Canon: 1V, AE-1, 5DmkII / Kodak: No 1 Pocket Autographic, No 1A Pocket Autographic | Sent w/ iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Thanks. I really don't have much of anything on this computer. Anything I do is film photography from going to an airshow, or driving around the countryside shooting barns, or such. No paying work. And when my last computer crashed and burned, I never re-loaded any of my negative scans back on this one. As for living where I live, you wouldn't find any work here--not like what you're used to. These people around here are poor ignorant people. Like what you'd expect to see on an episode of COPS or Jerry Springer or something. People like that don't buy photography. The closest metro is Charlotte, but English as a language is hard to come by there any more. I've only been on this site a short time. As time goes by, you guys will provide some inspiration, and I'll too, have some photos up. Til then, keep up the good work. Makes me think, even when I'm doing other things.
 

You'd be surprised, those kind of folks are great for models who are trashy, you can get some really crazy modeling images off of the lower class situations, not in any way that takes advantage in a negative way, but capturing that kind of life, really you can make money anywhere as a photographer you just have to figure out the local scene and what works.

Good luck and welcome


~Stone

Mamiya: 7 II, RZ67 Pro II / Canon: 1V, AE-1, 5DmkII / Kodak: No 1 Pocket Autographic, No 1A Pocket Autographic | Sent w/ iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Thanks for the welcome friends. I know what you're saying Stone, and I did that kind of thing when I was younger. Something happens when you get older--you don't want to even see those kinds of people any more; certainly not to spend precious film on. There is such a culture blight that it truly pulls down your spirit and sense of creativity. I'd really like to see some well-dressed quality people to photograph, but there are none. I ask you to imagine seeing fat, sloppy, redneck white trash, women in stretch pants with barbecue sauce down their sloppy t-shirt, and that's all there is. Not inspiring one bit. I can see why a lot of northerners hate the south, because it really is a struggle to find people of culture or refinement.
Finding barns and country scenery is getting harder too, because all that is being bulldozed at an alarming rate for big corporate farming. Frankly, while I am a southerner and a conservative, I am nevertheless in a perennial state of culture-shock myself. I shutter a bit at the thought that I am actually going to hit the "post" button on this one, because it is a bit over the border on propriety to this site.
 

Hey, the South doesn't have a monopoly on rednecks, trust me! I do see the divide getting wider between the North and the South and that does bother me a bunch. It seems there are many folks in the South that want to turn the clock of progress back and enjoy the, so called, good old days all over again. Trouble is those idiots forgot just how bad the good old days really were for 95%+ of the people. Well, that's if you didn't own a plantation that is. About the only thing I like from the old days are my cameras, cars and antique firearms in that order. Oh, and Rodinal! Can't get much old in photo related products than Rodinal. JohnW
 
Thank you. I had worried about what I wrote. Yes, the divide does seem worse. I think it's the red and blue map business in the media. Another Rodinal fan, huh? That's one preference that leaves me scratching my head. Thanks for making me feel better. I want to keep up an air of forum etiquette here.
 
Sometimes grain is good, it makes sure people know it's film and not digital

Also, I can just go to Walmart and find the slovenly people


~Stone

Mamiya: 7 II, RZ67 Pro II / Canon: 1V, AE-1, 5DmkII / Kodak: No 1 Pocket Autographic, No 1A Pocket Autographic | Sent w/ iPhone using Tapatalk
 
I've thought the same thing StoneNYC. Grain does indeed define it as the genuine long-lasting silver photography. These photographic companies have expended great effort to manufacture a paper base that can stand the ages. And encasing the silver in a selenium or gold plate makes the image on top of it something that is forever.
I also pictured the Walmart people videos now making their way around youtube (which I can't bear to watch). What if you saw that 24/7 everywhere you went? This is my dilemma in my desire to photo people these days. I'd live to see just ONE thin girl, not to mention the same female in a dress. Seems like that kind of thing stopped after the '80's. People-shooting is tough nowadays.
 
Yup, if you wish to see a cross section of the country all you have to do is park your rear on a bench at Walmart and open your eyes. People shooting is no harder then it was back 30 or 40yrs ago. It's just that the costumes and makeup has changed a bunch. JohnW
 
removed by author as inappropriate to decorum of this forum.
 
No, I removed it because I notice myself straying off topic unnecessarily. These other people seem to play it straight. I mean to be of like quality.
 
noacronym said:
No, I removed it because I notice myself straying off topic unnecessarily. These other people seem to play it straight. I mean to be of like quality.
Click to expand...

Oh, I see the "author" part now! If I stray or get off topic a little to get a certain point of view across I usually don't get to carried away with the point of view and throw a few references to the topic in the post also. A post that is a rant without any reference to the topic in general will surely be a "red flag" for a moderator. Well, now back to Rodinal and 1:100 stand development. JohnW
 

Huh? No, I really didn't get in trouble, but I felt like I might, so I pulled it. Yeah. back to the Rodinal. But if we're discussing Rodinal, this is where I move on. As far as rants, I can do that all-to-well. But not here, hopefully. Rodinal away, folks.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register