Found very old exposed Verichrome in vintage camera. How to develop?

[sterioma]

I have found an exposed Kodak Verichrome (not Verichrome Pan) in an old medium format folding camera that my local darkroom was about to dispose of.

I would like to attempt to develop it. Of course I have no idea of the storage conditions so just hoping for the best.

I have Rodinal and HC110. Any suggestion is welcome.

 

[Pentode]

I have found an exposed Kodak Verichrome (not Verichrome Pan) in an old medium format folding camera that my local darkroom was about to dispose of.

I would like to attempt to develop it. Of course I have no idea of the storage conditions so just hoping for the best.

I have Rodinal and HC110. Any suggestion is welcome.

I would try the HC-110, dilution B. As far as time goes.... it's a bit of a gamble. 7 or 8 minutes? Maybe even 9? It'll need more time than Verichrome pan. You might want to try a snip test before developing the whole roll.
There's likely to be a lot of fog. HC-B is active enough to keep the developing time fairly short, which will help to keep the fog in check.

 

[Ernst-Jan]

HC110 contains something that makes fog less visible, so that would be me choice for a long expired film.
Although I never used it.

 

[bripriuk]

I have used stand development with Rodinal successfully in the past, it's probably the safest option without the problem of choosing the correct time.
Use Rodinal at 1 + 100, one sharp tap and one inversion then leave for one hour at about 20C. Finish as usual. Use as much developer as your tank will hold, not just enough to cover the film.
The results have fairly low contrast, but are usable.

Brian P

 

[mooseontheloose]

I would second the use of HC-110. I've been suffering through some very badly fogged HIE film (not nearly as old as your Verichrome) when I used my regular go-to developers (D-75, Xtol, etc.) but got almost new-looking film when I switched to using HC-110. There was a photographer on photo.net (it's been many years since I used that site!) who dealt exclusively with old, expired films found in old cameras, and I believe he only ever used HC-110 to develop them. He had a website as well but unfortunately I can't remember what his name/username was.

 

[TheGreatGasMaskMan]

I've read Verichrome (not pan) is actually orthochromatic- so if you have a darkroom and a safelight, you could tray develop. all I can find is that hc110 is around 9-14 minutes.
however, I also found this- (skip to 2:40 for times)


Also, a while ago, I wrote film rescue about old film developing, and Greg told me that stand developments don't really work and he doesn't know why it's such a common recommendation.

Also, as a side note I actually have a 116 1946 expired verichrome, but no camera to use it or tank to develop- but I'd like to, so if you can find any other dev times,

 

[removed account4]

you might consider getting some dektol or ansco 130 print developers. 1:5 for 6-6.5 minutes.
im not familiar with using hc110 or rodinal ( have heard of them but never used them )
I typicaly go for the jugular with expired films .. and print developer is low fog, nice contrast and fast..

 

[Pentode]

Greg told me that stand developments don't really work...

That's been my experience as well. Expired film typically has low contrast already and high fog. Extended developing increases fog and stand developing lowers contrast. A lose-lose proposition. John (jnantz) is right: a strong, active developer works better in this application.

....as a side note I actually have a 116 1946 expired verichrome, but no camera to use it or tank to develop- but I'd like to....

I don't know if you use Paterson tanks or not, but there's a way to arrange Paterson reels in a two-reel tank that's a little goofy, but it will enable the developing of 116 and 616 film. I recently tried it with a roll of 616 and it worked.
This video shows how to arrange the reels:

 

[TheGreatGasMaskMan]

That's been my experience as well. Expired film typically has low contrast already and high fog. Extended developing increases fog and stand developing lowers contrast. A lose-lose proposition. John (jnantz) is right: a strong, active developer works better in this application.


I don't know if you use Paterson tanks or not, but there's a way to arrange Paterson reels in a two-reel tank that's a little goofy, but it will enable the developing of 116 and 616 film. I recently tried it with a roll of 616 and it worked.
This video shows how to arrange the reels:

I tried an hc110 stand development with some unknown west german film simply called "Supre tone roll film" that no one could identify. haven't had the film scanned yet, but the results were OK.

Also, I prefer arista spools since they're way easier to load, but I think that's what I'll do.

Still need a functional camera though.

 

[Donald Qualls]

It is correct that original Verichrome is orthochromatic. That means you can develop by inspection under red safelight. Don't attempt it with amber; the green sensitivity of ortho films is such that amber safelight will reliably fog them.

The developers most likely to have been used on Verichrome back in the 1940s would have been Dektol (1+4 in trays, IIRC) or D-76 (stock or 1+1). Tray developing or roll film (seesaw agitation) was common back then.

 

[MattKing]

You might find some useful information in this thread of mine: https://www.photrio.com/forum/threa...year-old-verichrome-and-super-xx-film.136477/

 

[Huss]

I develop Verichrome Vericarefully.

 

[sterioma]

I have finally managed to attempt developing this old film. There are good news and bad news.

The good news is that it worked: there are indeed usable photos from what appears to be 1940 or thereabout. I was hoping something would show, but I was also skeptical about it so it was really a great surprise!
The bad news is that there are only two exposures (although the roll was fully wound when I've found the camera). I am not sure if indeed it was not exposed, or I somehow ruined it.

The film (or better the two shots) is now drying, maybe I'll be able to share these two negatives.

I can't hide that I genuinely felt a chill down my spine when the film came out after washing and I could recognize a man and a woman in what looked like a snapshot from a vacation. The image looks a bit soft, even for "older" cameras. But there is surprisingly very little fog and the image is clearly visible. The second photo is less clear, I can see a field with a black car and sheep.

The rest of the film does not seem to have anything of value, it's like it's not been exposed at all. I may have made some mistake during loading or handling the film in red safelight (more on this later) but I would have expected to see at least something. Instead, I can only see some very faint bars of alternating densities.

Thank you Pentode for sharing the video with the trick to load the film on "one Paterson reel and a half", that's what I have done. I tried initially using my changing bag, but it was impossible to get the film on the reels that were not locked in position; I then moved to the darkroom, where I risked using the red-light. Even then, it was not easy at all and it took me a few attempts until I was able to finally load the whole of the film onto the spiral (I decided to load the end of the film first). Unfortunately, I had not considered the increased vertical height of this contraption (2 half reels on one side and one on the other), and when I closed the lid of the tank I pressed down a bit too much and ended up squashing the top reel downwards, which has caused creases on the film.

I had briefly considered tray development under safelight, but this would have been a new technique for me so I finally went for spiral and tank. I regret my decision a bit now that I have ended up making creases the films in many places.
I developed with HC-110 dil B for 10 minutes at 20 deg (averaging a few things I have found online), followed by water bath (I needed two to get clear water, it was slightly pinkish) and fixed for 4 minutes.

It was such a thrill, I wish I had another one to try once more.

 

[TheGreatGasMaskMan]

I have finally managed to attempt developing this old film. There are good news and bad news.

The good news is that it worked: there are indeed usable photos from what appears to be 1940 or thereabout. I was hoping something would show, but I was also skeptical about it so it was really a great surprise!
The bad news is that there are only two exposures (although the roll was fully wound when I've found the camera). I am not sure if indeed it was not exposed, or I somehow ruined it.

The film (or better the two shots) is now drying, maybe I'll be able to share these two negatives.

I can't hide that I genuinely felt a chill down my spine when the film came out after washing and I could recognize a man and a woman in what looked like a snapshot from a vacation. The image looks a bit soft, even for "older" cameras. But there is surprisingly very little fog and the image is clearly visible. The second photo is less clear, I can see a field with a black car and sheep.

The rest of the film does not seem to have anything of value, it's like it's not been exposed at all. I may have made some mistake during loading or handling the film in red safelight (more on this later) but I would have expected to see at least something. Instead, I can only see some very faint bars of alternating densities.

Thank you Pentode for sharing the video with the trick to load the film on "one Paterson reel and a half", that's what I have done. I tried initially using my changing bag, but it was impossible to get the film on the reels that were not locked in position; I then moved to the darkroom, where I risked using the red-light. Even then, it was not easy at all and it took me a few attempts until I was able to finally load the whole of the film onto the spiral (I decided to load the end of the film first). Unfortunately, I had not considered the increased vertical height of this contraption (2 half reels on one side and one on the other), and when I closed the lid of the tank I pressed down a bit too much and ended up squashing the top reel downwards, which has caused creases on the film.

I had briefly considered tank development under safelight, but this would have been a new technique for me so I finally went for spiral and tank. I regret my decision a bit now that I have ended up making creases the films in many places.
I developed with HC-110 dil B for 10 minutes at 20 deg (averaging a few things I have found online), followed by water bath (I needed two to get clear water, it was slightly pinkish) and fixed for 4 minutes.

It was such a thrill, I wish I had another one to try once more.

I actually ordered a pre exposed 116 verichrome (not pan) to try and develop for this thread. Was going to try 8 minutes dil. b, but I think I'll try your ten.

Also, it's not at all uncommon for old kodak films to turn the developer pink after development. I've had this happen with just about every verichrome pan I've developed in sprint standard, d76, and hc110.

 

[sterioma]

I actually ordered a pre exposed 116 verichrome (not pan) to try and develop for this thread. Was going to try 8 minutes dil. b, but I think I'll try your ten..

Is there really a market for very old exposed films? This is so fascinating!

Let me know how it works for you.

 

[TheGreatGasMaskMan]

Is there really a market for very old exposed films? This is so fascinating!

Let me know how it works for you.

People do sell some found films on ebay, almost always overpriced though.

 

[TheGreatGasMaskMan]

Alright... my roll was delivered today. I'll be doing my development sometime today.

 

[TheGreatGasMaskMan]

update- not tonight. until I can find a way to load this outside my darkbag, the film keeps jamming on the reel.
what's frustrating is I almost had it twice.

 

[sterioma]

update- not tonight. until I can find a way to load this outside my darkbag, the film keeps jamming on the reel.
what's frustrating is I almost had it twice.

If I did not have a red light i would have never been able to load that film (and even then it took me a good ten minutes).

 

[TheGreatGasMaskMan]

I may try light sealing my bathroom door just to have space to move.

 

[TheGreatGasMaskMan]

update... again
I did it, but the film is getting a several hour pre soak because the film stuck to the backing paper and there's still pieces on the film.

even if this ultimately doesn't work, at least I'll know what to do when I get to shooting and developing my 1946 expired roll.

 

[TheGreatGasMaskMan]

OK, my film is developed and is hang drying.
I got a couple frames but I didn't get a fully exposed roll. Additionally, this may well be the most fogged roll I've ever seen. it's not great but I got results. though there are some spots where there's missing emulsion, but surprisingly the bits of backing paper didn't seem to affect the development of the frames.

But yea... spooling the film was FRUSTRATING.

 

[sterioma]

Are the exposed frames at one of the ends of the film? That is what happened with mine.

I wonder if the ones just happened the most internal one whenthe roll had been finished and thus more "protected", if that makes any sense.

 

[TheGreatGasMaskMan]

Are the exposed frames at one of the ends of the film? That is what happened with mine.

I wonder if the ones just happened the most internal one whenthe roll had been finished and thus more "protected", if that makes any sense.

There's four kind of faint but seriously fogged frames, all at the beginning of the roll. my guess is the film may have been forgotten and eventually just wound through the camera.

You do have an interesting theory though. I remember having a found Kodacolor vr 100 developed and come out blank, and turn a nice green (I've been previously told that's what happens when the film gets really hot), yet I could still see the shape of some frames. I also shot an expired provia 100 over two and a half years ago, and the first third (minus one frame), came out extremely blown out while the rest of the roll was fine.
there's so many factors involved, it's often hard to tell.

 

[sterioma]

I can't hide that I genuinely felt a chill down my spine when the film came out after washing and I could recognize a man and a woman in what looked like a snapshot from a vacation. The image looks a bit soft, even for "older" cameras. But there is surprisingly very little fog and the image is clearly visible. The second photo is less clear, I can see a field with a black car and sheep.

I may have been a bit overenthusiast that night re-reading my words about the quality of that negative, it must have been the excitement

I did manage to scan that first frame from the roll, the only one that is clearly saved. We'll never know what happened to the rest: frames that were never shot, film ruined by decades of storage or simply my clumsiness with something so different.

So here is a negative scan of that first frame (I thought at bit about it and decided to crudely blur the faces of the man and the woman in the photo).