Kodak Portrait Pan expired 11/49

[Paul Howell]

While rummaging around in my film closet I found a box of Portrait Pan, I have a vague memory of getting it with an Federal Enlarger I bought online, maybe 20 years ago. I have developing times from the 1963 Kodak Master Data Guide, the box does not list the recommended ASA. I guess it doesn't matter, but if it was a 400 speed film I would shoot a sheet at 50, if 125 or 80 at 25 or even 10. Anyone recall using it.

I will develop DK 50 1:50 stand development in a refrigerator for 24 hours.

 

[MattKing]

Sounds to me like your film closet may be similar to Hermione Granger's beaded handbag

 

[Paul Howell]

Not really, I have maybe 20 rolls of 35mm, 15 rolls of 120, 4 boxes of 4X5, most of the space is devoted to negatives. This box was stashed in a corner that I just did not see as above my eye level.

 

[RalphLambrecht]

While rummaging around in my film closet I found a box of Portrait Pan, I have a vague memory of getting it with an Federal Enlarger I bought online, maybe 20 years ago. I have developing times from the 1963 Kodak Master Data Guide, the box does not list the recommended ASA. I guess it doesn't matter, but if it was a 400 speed film I would shoot a sheet at 50, if 125 or 80 at 25 or even 10. Anyone recall using it.

I will develop DK 50 1:50 stand development in a refrigerator for 24 hours.

Keep as a novelty and buy new film!

 

[Sirius Glass]

Keep as a novelty and buy new film!

I agree with Ralph.

 

[Paul Howell]

I have 50s sheets, the box is open, I will give a try with one sheet, I doubt that I get anything expect a very, very, did I say very, fogged negative, that is if the emulsion does not come off.

 

[reddesert]

My Kodak Reference Guide from 1945 shows Portrait Pan was a medium speed film. The actual speed is a little obscure because of the redefinition of ASA that happened later, but basically, they recommended the same speed as Plus-X. In the film speed chart shown here, "Kodak Speed" is like the ASA Speed technical measurement of the time, and EI is the EI they recommend, which includes a safety factor. So it's a little confusing to translate these to a modern EI, but it's similar to Plus-X and then there's your large margin for speed loss. The handbook has a datasheet with sensitometric curves, etc (the film has a long toe, or had).

 

[nosmok]

I think you'll be pleasantly surprised at what you get-- those old Kodak emulsions are tough, and I've had good results with Commercial and Super Panchro Press from the late 50s- early 60s just in the past year (and that's in Caffenol, not even in "real" chemistry!). Might want to restrain a bit even with the stand, I use 30ml/L benzotriazole these days for the really old stuff.

 

[Paul Howell]

I have some retainer used for development by inspection, I'll add a packet to 50oz DK 50 1:50, I have a Color (that the Name of the Tank) which is 4X5 daylight tank that takes hangers. I expose at ASA 25 and see what turns out. I have no recollection where the enlarger came from, no idea how the film was stored or in what kind of climate. Also the enlarger was a 6X9 not a 4X5.

 

[pentaxuser]

I will develop DK 50 1:50 stand development in a refrigerator for 24 hours.

This is the interesting part. So will you give it an initial agitation for x secs and then let it sit undisturbed in the developer at say 3-4 degrees C for 24 hours?

I never realised that DK50 can operate at such a low temperature. It surprises me but apparently no-one else as no-one has said anything about using fridge temperature

Is DK50 unique in this quality of activity at 3-4 degrees C and if so why or are there others that also work at this low temp?

pentaxuser

 

[Paul Howell]

As far as I know most if not all developers can be highly diluted then refrigerated for an extended period of time. I'm using DK 50 because I have it on hand. 1:50 is just a guess, if I was using Rodinal I would dilute 1:100. I will agitate for the for the first 30 seconds or so, then let it sit. William Mortensen would shoot a ring around, leave the negatives in the developer in a refrigerator until the negative was at near max D then print grade 0. In this case my thinking is that by keeping the film cold I have less change that the emulsion will come off. The film is now 72 years old. I will use a cold water rinse, use refrigerated fix, I normally use T4 for film but will a standard fix with hardener and fix for double the time to 10 minute. If I have a usable image will use Perma wash and cold wash. I built a water chiller that uses bagged ice, ever in the summer I get the wash down to 50 degrees. In general I am not fan of stand development, this is just a shot in the dark.

 

[JPD]

Show us the box. I can't find a single picture of Portrait Pan on the net.

 

[Cubao]

I never have developed such old negative but I have some experience with b&w negatives from mid of seventies. By far the best results with A49 plus potassium bromide the worst results with Rodinal (even with potassium bromide).

 

[pentaxuser]

As far as I know most if not all developers can be highly diluted then refrigerated for an extended period of time.

I had not realised this so thanks. While I presume that high dilution and very low temp decreases activity such that the normal 1 hour stand becomes 24 hrs, is there any other benefit to a very long dev time for old film? I presume for instance that a non-expired film does not benefit from 24 hrs at 3-4 degrees C compared to the usual one hour at 20 C ?.

William Mortensen would shoot a ring around, leave the negatives in the developer in a refrigerator until the negative was at near max D then print grade 0.

What does Mortensen's ring round consist of and how did he know when the DMax was reached as presumably he couldn't examine the film? What was the benefit of getting to D Max and using grade 0?

In general I am not fan of stand development, this is just a shot in the dark.

So this is the first time you have tried a very cold stand development?

The results will be interesting. Let us know if you will, thanks


pentaxuser

 

[Paul Verizzo]

As far as I know most if not all developers can be highly diluted then refrigerated for an extended period of time. I'm using DK 50 because I have it on hand. 1:50 is just a guess, if I was using Rodinal I would dilute 1:100. I will agitate for the for the first 30 seconds or so, then let it sit. William Mortensen would shoot a ring around, leave the negatives in the developer in a refrigerator until the negative was at near max D then print grade 0. In this case my thinking is that by keeping the film cold I have less change that the emulsion will come off. The film is now 72 years old. I will use a cold water rinse, use refrigerated fix, I normally use T4 for film but will a standard fix with hardener and fix for double the time to 10 minute. If I have a usable image will use Perma wash and cold wash. I built a water chiller that uses bagged ice, ever in the summer I get the wash down to 50 degrees. In general I am not fan of stand development, this is just a shot in the dark.

DK-50 at 1:50? Do you have knowledge that we mere mortals are not privy to?

I've never heard of DK-5 more diluted that 1:1.

OTOH, go for it! I'm a 42 year mentally ill person pursuing perfect developers, etc.

 

[Paul Verizzo]

This is the interesting part. So will you give it an initial agitation for x secs and then let it sit undisturbed in the developer at say 3-4 degrees C for 24 hours?

I never realised that DK50 can operate at such a low temperature. It surprises me but apparently no-one else as no-one has said anything about using fridge temperature

Is DK50 unique in this quality of activity at 3-4 degrees C and if so why or are there others that also work at this low temp?

pentaxuser

A thought.

Developing compounds have different temperature/activity coefficients. As I'm not a chemist, that might not be the technologically perfect definition.

But I can tell is that, for instance, metol has a quite flat temperature/activity curve, but hydroquinine is extremely reactive? I'm thinking eight times as much, best as I recall.

Garned with a defective memory from Haist.

 

[pentaxuser]

A thought.

Developing compounds have different temperature/activity coefficients. As I'm not a chemist, that might not be the technologically perfect definition.

But I can tell is that, for instance, metol has a quite flat temperature/activity curve, but hydroquinine is extremely reactive? I'm thinking eight times as much, best as I recall.

Garned with a defective memory from Haist.

Thanks, Paul. What you say makes sense. You'd think there has to be an article, learned paper etc detailing this very phenomenon but I can't recall anyone here referring to it until your reference. The Ilford time/temp chart covers only a quite small range of temps and stops way above anything like 4 degrees C and it doesn't even hint at the range of effective temps being affected by the ingredients in the developer

pentaxuser

 

[MattKing]

AFAIK, some of the common developing agents - metol (monomethyl-p-aminophenol hemisulfate), phenidone (1-phenyl-3-pyrazolidinone), dimezone (4,4-dimethyl-1-phenylpyrazolidin-3-one), and hydroquinone (benzene-1,4-diol) - offer reasonable activity at lower temperatures like 4 C, while others rapidly lose activity at lower temperatures.
So if you lower the temperature of a developer that is a mixture of developing agents, the behavior of the mixture may differ radically from the room temperature version.
I'll let the chemists who know these things better than I tell you which developing agents suffer most from this.

 

[Paul Verizzo]

AFAIK, some of the common developing agents - metol (monomethyl-p-aminophenol hemisulfate), phenidone (1-phenyl-3-pyrazolidinone), dimezone (4,4-dimethyl-1-phenylpyrazolidin-3-one), and hydroquinone (benzene-1,4-diol) - offer reasonable activity at lower temperatures like 4 C, while others rapidly lose activity at lower temperatures.
So if you lower the temperature of a developer that is a mixture of developing agents, the behavior of the mixture may differ radically from the room temperature version.
I'll let the chemists who know these things better than I tell you which developing agents suffer most from this.

That would be a roundabout way of saying different temperature activity coefficients, no?

 

[MattKing]

That would be a roundabout way of saying different temperature activity coefficients, no?

Not quite.
One or more of the agents essentially "fall off the cliff" if the temperature goes down below a certain point. So the developer becomes quite different in nature - more like if that agent was omitted entirely.

 

[Paul Howell]

I had not realised this so thanks. While I presume that high dilution and very low temp decreases activity such that the normal 1 hour stand becomes 24 hrs, is there any other benefit to a very long dev time for old film? I presume for instance that a non-expired film does not benefit from 24 hrs at 3-4 degrees C compared to the usual one hour at 20 C ?.

William Mortensen would shoot a ring around, leave the negatives in the developer in a refrigerator until the negative was at near max D then print grade 0.

What does Mortensen's ring round consist of and how did he know when the DMax was reached as presumably he couldn't examine the film? What was the benefit of getting to D Max and using grade 0?

I have experimented with very cold stand, interesting but not my cup of tea, as the saying goes. In this case it is hopefully keep the emulsion from peeling off at a warmer temp. With film this old I don't expect a useable image.
Here is link to his method, not the super cold, just how he shot a ring around.

Here is link to site that explains his method.

Me and Mortensen: Chapter Two

amphoraeditions.com

I will post an image of the box later today.

 

[Don_ih]

keep the emulsion from peeling off at a warmer temp

Unless you smell something similar to vinegar from the film, it's not likely the emulsion will peel off. I've developed Kodak film from the 40s and 50s within the last couple of years with no trace of emulsion peeling.
I'd be more concerned that the film has already seen the light or that it's been half destroyed by fungus, since the package is already open.

 

[Paul Howell]

Good point, have no idea where or how it kept. I will likely have time tomorrow for the test shot, maybe I shoot 2 films, one I can tray process in Dk50 1:1 the other try the very cold stand.

 

[Paul Howell]

I followed up with a paper trail, I bought it 17 years ago from a seller in Alaska, today I tested a sheet. Rather than shoot a sheet I developed an unexposed sheet in Clayton P20, 2 minutes, 70 degrees, standard stop and fix, totally fogged. I don't think that even a restrainer will be of any help. It was still well packed, 2 layers of wrap, box in a box, nice think sheet, the emulsion held up fine.

 

[nosmok]

Well then, I guess that's that. Although, as opposed to just tossing it, I'd pay for postage to have it sent to me for experimentation . When the stuff's this old, one does not expose the film as much as one double-exposes it.