• 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

ISO suggestion for ca. 1971 Verichrome Pan

Meyer Trioplan

Member
Allowing Ads
Joined
Nov 28, 2014
Messages
248
Location
Frederick MD
Format
Medium Format
While peeking about for a possible additional Kodak Autographic 3A for the collection, I couldn't resist pulling the trigger on a sale for two rolls of 122 format Verichrome Pan film that expired in 1971, at least one of which I want to run through my existing 3A to see what sort of results I get.

I'd likely ship the film off to Film Rescue for processing, but does anyone have any thoughts of what ISO they would shoot 45 year old film Verichrome Pan at, compared to the nomial 125 rating?!?
 

Sal Santamaura

Member
Allowing Ads
Joined
Nov 21, 2005
Messages
7,535
Location
San Clemente, California
Format
Multi Format
There was no ISO rating in 1971. Rather, an ASA speed of 125 was published for Verichrome Pan. However, I'm not aware of any changes to the protocol when ISO speeds replaced ASA speeds in 1979, so 125 would still have been correct.

Now that I've gotten all that nomenclature snark off my chest, to answer to your question -- which should have referred to a suggested exposure index (EI) rather than an "ISO" -- here's a wild guess. To overcome the likely four plus decades of fog, try your first roll at EI 64 and add 10 ml of 1% benzotriazole solution to each liter of developer. Adjust as appropriate for the second roll. If you're sending the film off somewhere that specializes in old stock, it will probably do the same. Good luck.
 

Gerald C Koch

Member
Allowing Ads
Joined
Jul 12, 2010
Messages
8,131
Location
Southern USA
Format
Multi Format
Whatever you do save the paper backing and spools. They are valuable.
 

480sparky

Member
Allowing Ads
Joined
Nov 28, 2014
Messages
602
Location
Corn Patch USA
Format
Multi Format
Have you considered developing it yourself? It's not any more difficult than any other film.
 

Hatchetman

Member
Allowing Ads
Joined
May 27, 2011
Messages
1,553
Location
Chicago, IL
Format
Multi Format
Add one extra stop exposure. Develop normally. Do it yourself or send it to a regular lab. This doesn't need any special treatment. You should end up with something like this, unless the film was horribly mistreated.

 

Bill Burk

Subscriber
Allowing Ads
Joined
Feb 9, 2010
Messages
9,469
Format
4x5 Format
Remember, film rescue is intended to salvage latent images that were made decades ago probably by someone who used the film at its rated speed.

Rescues of vintage exposures are critical and difficult processing challenges, because potentially priceless, historic and irreplaceable shots are involved.

You'll know whether you are shooting something important or not.

When you shoot old film today, just blast through the fog and have fun. A fresh exposure on old film is a strong latent image.

But the film may have acquired a good amount of fog.

It'd be nice to test for contrast but you don't have a lot of film.

I think Hatchetman has the right idea, just develop normally. (Me? I'd develop a little more than normal just to avoid thin negs).
 

480sparky

Member
Allowing Ads
Joined
Nov 28, 2014
Messages
602
Location
Corn Patch USA
Format
Multi Format
........., unless the film was horribly mistreated..........



Aye....... and there's the rub. One doesn't know how the film has been stored over the past 40+ years. It may have been in a freezer since then, and it may have been forgotten about in someone's attic. Unless you have a LOT of it (and of the same emulsion batch!) and can shoot & develop a few rolls to characterize it, don't expect much more than 'just an image'.
 

Denverdad

Member
Allowing Ads
Joined
Apr 20, 2009
Messages
316
Location
Superior, Co
Format
Medium Format
Sounds like you're going to be having a lot of fun with that 3A!

As for exposure with the old Verichrome Pan, I might suggest adding one extra stop, i.e. rating it at 64 (like Sal suggested above). That provides a little margin against potential speed loss due to age/handling, but isn't enough to really harm anything should the film turn out not to have needed it.

As for development, I agree with the others that it isn't worth sending this to Film Rescue and that you should just plan to either develop it yourself or send it out to a "regular" processor depending on what your normal processing habits are. When it comes to which soup to use, HC-110 is often recommended for old film as a low-fog developer and I have always liked it for this purpose. If you go that route I don't know that you should bother adding any additional anti-fogging agent though. My understanding is that HC-110 has benzotriazole in it already and presumably Kodak found a decent balance between restraining fog and maintaining reasonable film speed.

Recommended development times for VP in various developers can be found in the Kodak datasheet here, and I would probably just stick with those times. Some will suggest adding additional exposure time due to the age of the film, but in this case I'm not sure that will help, and might actually be going in the wrong direction if you are exposing longer to compensate for potential speed loss. Well, that's my take on it anyway.

Good luck!

Jeff
 
OP
OP

Meyer Trioplan

Member
Allowing Ads
Joined
Nov 28, 2014
Messages
248
Location
Frederick MD
Format
Medium Format
Thanks to all for the responses and insights. I definitely like the idea of shooting at an EI of 64 to try to counteract the decades of aging. Supposedly the film has been stored properly, but that will obvious bear out in the testing.

Developing the test roll remains a bit of a fly in the ointment. I totally get what you are saying about the purposes of places like Film Rescue and Rapid Photo, and would certainly use a more conventional service if I was shooting 120 or even 616 film, but there seems to be very few options when it comes to finding someone to process 122 format film, and my family logistics at home preclude me from setting up a home darkroom, while the "see-saw" method hardly seems like the first thing I'd like to experiment on after not having developed my own film in about 25 years.

Any suggestions for a state-side developing service of 122 film that is not a rescue service? One thing I like about Film Rescue is that they will mail you back the spools and presumably the papers on request.
 

480sparky

Member
Allowing Ads
Joined
Nov 28, 2014
Messages
602
Location
Corn Patch USA
Format
Multi Format
How to develop 122 film using ordinary Patterson nylon reels:

The parts needed: Patterson System 4 tank and two adjustable nylon reels. You will also notice two pieces of plexiglass in this image... a rectangle and a donut.


This method uses off-the-shelf nylon reels, and two custom-cut pieces of plexi. The square piece is to position the reels once they have been prepared, the donut to space two pieces that are mated in an unusual fashion (more about this later):




The first step is to remove the reels from the fill tube and separate them into their 4 parts. Only 3 will be needed for this method.




Place the custom-made donut over the center portion of the 'inner' segment of one of the reels:





Take one of the 'outer' reel segments and place it on the 'inner' segment, only ---backwards---!




Apply enough pressure to overcome the resistance, and the two segments will pop together. The plexi donut will be the creamy center of your 122 Oreo.




The purpose of the donut is to keep the two segments parallel. Without it, the little feed tab on the left portion of the reel will cause the right part to skew. This will make feeding your 122 film into the final assembly impossible.

Now slide the single 'inner' part of the other reel onto the fill tube, making sure it's pushed all the way down.




Slide your Oreo-cookie assembly part of the reels onto the tube, making sure to line up the parts you feed the film into.




This method works if there's enough friction between the reels and the fill tube to hold everything in place. If your reels slide too easily on the fill tube, just use a little masking tape to fill the gap and tighten things up. Now for the square piece of plexi. I cut that out in order to space the two reels apart at the perfect distance to accept 122 film. I just set it in, push the Oreo portion down, and presto!



My custom reel assembly is ready to load. I keep this piece of plexi handy when loading as I may accidently move the reels on the tube. So having it ready in the dark makes it much faster to load the film in the dark if need be.

Now for the REALLY fun part..... loading the film. Since this film has been rolled up for at least 40 years, it doesn't want to unwind very well. So I found that pulling it into the reels to where it's past the ball bearings is the best way to start the film into the reels. Trying to push it in will only cause it to curl up at the corners and slip out of the reel.




Once the film is past the ball bearings, you can ----carefully----- twist the reals like normal and the film will load as usual. I find sticking my pinkies into the unloaded film prevents the tightly-wound part from getting too close to the start of the reels and causing it to jam up or stop feeding. With a bit of patience, the film is all loaded onto the custom reel and ready to be put in the tank.




One must be careful when handling the reels and tank once the film is loaded. Bumping it or shaking it too hard can move the reels and cause the film to come out of the spiral. So don't get too excited and treat everything with kid gloves. Tapping the tank should be done lightly during developing. I find 750ml of soup is sufficient.

With a lot of patience, and a tad bit of luck, you'll have your 122 film developed. And the nice thing is, not only did you do it yourself, but all the equipment can easily be reverted back to it's original state. So you can STILL use the reels for 120 or 135 film!
 

removed account4

Subscriber
Allowing Ads
Joined
Jun 21, 2003
Messages
29,832
Format
Hybrid

IDK ... some suggest 1 fstop / 10 years ...
couple of stops at least ..
i'd also process it in something fast n'furious like dektol
look up times for stand developing full strength ( like newspapermen used to do )
don't quote me on this, but i think it was 3 minutes full strength ( stock )
it will cut through fog and give you contrast that might be lacking in aged film.

good luck with the film and have fun with the camera !
i've a kodak autographic 3a, and LOVE using a graflex 3A,
perfect format !
john
 

fdonadio

Member
Allowing Ads
Joined
Jan 15, 2015
Messages
2,155
Location
Berlin, DE
Format
Multi Format
Add one extra stop exposure. Develop normally. Do it yourself or send it to a regular lab. This doesn't need any special treatment. You should end up with something like this, unless the film was horribly mistreated.


Is this in Chicago? I like it very much. Sirius Glass would argue that a square format would be nicer and would show more of the buildings and the sky. In this case, I would agree...
 

removed account4

Subscriber
Allowing Ads
Joined
Jun 21, 2003
Messages
29,832
Format
Hybrid
Is this in Chicago? I like it very much. Sirius Glass would argue that a square format would be nicer and would show more of the buildings and the sky. In this case, I would agree...

aaaah

the photograph isn't of the skyline or buildings or the sky
but of the train and the train yard.
the rectangular format, the bar across the top, the negative space
and the sliver of skyline work together to show this.
the sliver of skyline anchors the whole image ...
square format i think would take more away than it would lend
 

fdonadio

Member
Allowing Ads
Joined
Jan 15, 2015
Messages
2,155
Location
Berlin, DE
Format
Multi Format
jnanian, my post was meant more as a joke on Sirius than a critique of the photo. I like it very much as it is, but I guess I am just a little curious to see what's "outside" of the image.
 

Hatchetman

Member
Allowing Ads
Joined
May 27, 2011
Messages
1,553
Location
Chicago, IL
Format
Multi Format
I looked but I don't have a scan of the uncropped version. It was a square negative and I was on a bridge. I believe the problem was that big black bar cut right across the middle of the negative and really distracted from the rest.
 

Denverdad

Member
Allowing Ads
Joined
Apr 20, 2009
Messages
316
Location
Superior, Co
Format
Medium Format

Oh right, the size complicates things doesn't it! (sorry, I wasn't thinking about that aspect of it). Aside from Film Rescue, another possibility you could look into would be Rapid Photo.

Jeff
 

PinRegistered

Member
Allowing Ads
Joined
Jul 5, 2015
Messages
41
Location
San Diego
Format
35mm
Watching the thread for updates pertaining to "ancient" film. I need to reduce age fog from a 50 ft roll of Kodak infrared film expired in 1971. Please direct me to relevant discussions. I can soup in daylight tanks in the kitchen. I want to give it a go, before I give up.

Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk
 

Sal Santamaura

Member
Allowing Ads
Joined
Nov 21, 2005
Messages
7,535
Location
San Clemente, California
Format
Multi Format
...I need to reduce age fog from a 50 ft roll of Kodak infrared film expired in 1971...
IR fogs from heat. It has the worst shelf life of any film. I don't think there's enough benzotriazole in the known universe to help with that one.

...Please direct me to relevant discussions...
No fish for you. Instead, here's how to catch fish:
  • Go to Google
  • Enter your search terms
  • Add this to the search terms: site:apug.org
  • Click "search."
 

PinRegistered

Member
Allowing Ads
Joined
Jul 5, 2015
Messages
41
Location
San Diego
Format
35mm
Thank you for both suggestions. I have had difficulty searching the forum through tapatalk. Terrible.

Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk
 

removed account4

Subscriber
Allowing Ads
Joined
Jun 21, 2003
Messages
29,832
Format
Hybrid
jnanian, my post was meant more as a joke on Sirius than a critique of the photo. I like it very much as it is, but I guess I am just a little curious to see what's "outside" of the image.

LOL

i thought you were pounding the table with the 6x6 hassle blad shoe
sorry, i didn't get the joke
i agree outside the image is nice to see !
 

480sparky

Member
Allowing Ads
Joined
Nov 28, 2014
Messages
602
Location
Corn Patch USA
Format
Multi Format
Thank you for both suggestions. I have had difficulty searching the forum through tapatalk. Terrible.

Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk

I usually search with Google, adding the forum name to the search.

Sent from MyOuthouse using ToiletPaper.
 

nosmok

Subscriber
Allowing Ads
Joined
Jun 11, 2010
Messages
698
Format
Multi Format
So you got some of that! I just missed it. Anyway, if it's 1970s Verichrome Pan, overexpose by 1-2 stop and develop as normal. I use Caffenol C for 10 minutes at 20 C/ 68 F and get great results.

Another way to develop 122 in tanks is to get a 20-exp 35mm metal developing reel, cut it in half, and affix the halves to a maple dowel of appropriate length and thickness. The 20exp reel has the same film length as the 122 roll. This way you don 't have to worry about the moving parts of the Paterson. I've done a lot of verichrome 616 in Peterson reels and that's why my Nikor 616 metal reel is one of my cherished possessions.
 

480sparky

Member
Allowing Ads
Joined
Nov 28, 2014
Messages
602
Location
Corn Patch USA
Format
Multi Format
...... This way you don 't have to worry about the moving parts of the Paterson.........


One can also purchase a second fill tube and epoxy the reels to it.