Developing old films (TechPan, Agfa Ortho, Delta 400)

[swchris]

Hi,

a friend gave me 4 films to develop. One Ilford Delta 400, one Agfa Ortho 25, and two Kodak Technical Pans.

The films were shot around 20 years ago, and since then stored in the basement (not frozen).
What might be the best way to develop them?

I think the Delta 400 won't be much of a problem, I would extend the recommended development time "a bit".

But how should I develop the two TPs and the Agfa Ortho? The pictures on these films are "pictures", not line art reproductions. One of the TPs was exposed with ASA50, and the other one probably with ASA25.

regards,
chrids

 

[swchris]

I would extend the recommended development time "a bit".

Using ID11 developer.

 

[Agulliver]

x2 on the ID11

Generally if you cannot develop it in ID11 or D76 (pretty much identical) then......you can't develop it. With unknown films I generally start at 8 minutes at 20C.

You can always try a clip test. You might lose part of one frame but clip off a few inches of the film, try developing it for 8 minutes in ID11 with inversions every minute and see what happens. Adjust the process for the remainder of the film if it seems necessary.

 

[Nodda Duma]

Tech Pan is very high contrast in normal developers, and requires Technidol or similar for continuous tone images. Photographers Formulary has a new-made Technidol equivalent, TD-3 which will give you the results for Tech Pan that you want. You may also be able to find packets of Technidol on ebay which you can probably use as well.

 

[Craig75]

The ortho you could develop under a red safelight so you can watch what it is doing. I would imagine it will be a very contrasty film (although i dont know what age will have done) so I would use a half or even quarter strength developer and observe what its doing every minute. If developer exhausts and film still looks too thin then just replace with fresh weaker developer and keep nudging contrast up.

The technodol might behave like microfilm perhaps. I have developed microfilm in low contrast caffenol - just coffee and soda no vitamin c. This produced very low contrast pictorial images with only 4 or 5 stops captured but it's something. You could copy any images that youd like to print onto a more easily controlled film to sort the contrast out there for printing.

Equally i could just blow everything as i have done numerous times.

 

[Pentode]

I would probably use diluted HC-110 (1:63) and add maybe 10% or 20% to the suggested developing time. HC-110 is good at keeping fogging to a minimum and it's very easy to work with. Slow films tend to hold up better under poor storage conditions than fast films do, so you have that going for you. Also, old film tends to lose contrast, but you should still expect very high contrast from the TP and Agfa. Try for gentle, minimal agitation if you can.

Another option might be to stand develop in Rodinal 1:100 for an hour.

Personally, I wouldn't go out of my way to seek out Technidol or TD-3 for only two rolls of film, especially when the film is old and poorly stored.

 

[Craig75]

Im assuming agfa ortho is the same as rollei 25 so the data sheet is here

https://www.digitaltruth.com/products/rollei_tech/ORTHOeng.pdf

 

[Carter john]

You will find my method for expired Kodak Technical Pan film with a photo here:

https://www.flickr.com/photos/carte...2c5zqua-2c1bKks-PWy5Mu-29jb93Y-2aYG8hN-NjqubH

 

[koraks]

Personally, I wouldn't go out of my way to seek out Technidol or TD-3 for only two rolls of film, especially when the film is old and poorly stored.

Not to mention that the TechPan was apparently exposed at 25/50 which is rather optimistic for continuous tone images to begin with.

 

[Bill Burk]

You will find my method for expired Kodak Technical Pan film with a photo here:

https://www.flickr.com/photos/carte...2c5zqua-2c1bKks-PWy5Mu-29jb93Y-2aYG8hN-NjqubH

Valuable information, but your scenario is new exposures on old film. There are different risks involved when developing old exposures on old film.

 

[EdSawyer]

25asa was the recommended speed for Tech Pan in technidol, not an optimistic exposure. I shot many rolls that way and they worked out perfectly for that combo of film/developer.

 

[john_s]

Slow film is often cited as lasting longer than fast film, but that's not the same as the lasting of the latent image. How do films of differing speeds fare in holding the latent image? I have read that Ilford Pan_F isn't good: what about the others?

 

[Pentode]

Slow film is often cited as lasting longer than fast film, but that's not the same as the lasting of the latent image. How do films of differing speeds fare in holding the latent image? I have read that Ilford Pan_F isn't good: what about the others?

Well, a single roll certainly doesn't count as any definitive test, but I did develop a roll of Tech Pan a few years ago that was exposed 20+ years earlier and the images were very, very thin. That film was also stored (accidentally) in a terrible environment with both hot and cold temperature extremes for most of those 20+ years. It's sort of a miracle anything was on it. I was able to scan them with so-so results but I don't think I'd even try to wet print them - there's so little there.

 

[swchris]

Thanks for your suggestions.
It came to me that some years ago (Feb 2015) I had exposed an old, feezer stored, TechPan. I developed it then in Rodinal, stand development, 1:100, 1h, one inversion after 30min. It came out OKish (the scans at least, need to look at the actual negatives again). Did not try to make prints from them, it was just some sort of test film.
If I don't find Technidol or a replacement for it, I might try this route.
regards,
chris

 

[EdSawyer]

I have some recent Technidol, and some 20+ yr exposed Tech Pan (35mm) that I will develop soon, to see how it comes out. I have probably 10+ rolls like this that need developing, so can experiment a little bit.