Kodak Super-XX

Hello all,

After a recent move, I opened my film minifridge to ensure things had survived the lack of electricity, and I had forgotten the amount of Super-XX that I have in there. When I bought a Graflex 4x5 a few years ago, it came with a case stuffed with period accoutrements, including loaded two sheet holders, loaded Grafmatics, loaded Graphic film pack holders, and one unopened box of 1955 dated Super-XX. I think it's safe to conclude that case hadn't been opened in very long time. One of the film packs has six or seven exposed frames, and everything else seems unexposed. I take it that the holders and Grafmatics are also filled with Super-XX. While I don't expect miracles, I plan to finish the partially exposed film pack and send it off to Film Rescue International. There may also be one exposed frame in one of the Grafmatics; so, I'll probably get that sheet out in a darkbag and send it too. I just hope the bit of moisture everything in the fridge accrued during the time the fridge was unpowered hasn't fouled everything. I take it that Super-XX is the precursor to Tri-X. I don't often shoot B&W, more of a transparency person, but this would certainly be a fun exception as well as a chance for me to break out the Graflex again. Said Graflex took a backseat a long time go when I moved up to my Toyo 810G. All that said, I wanted to get some opinions from those familiar with the film. If my info is correct, it stayed in production in sheet form until 1992.

Regards and Happy New Year

The film loaded in the holders is likely mottled and useless by now. The small amount of air that circulates between the film and the dark slide doesn't have a good effect and those sheets are likely stuck to the holders. The remaining sheets in the film pack are probably down to iso6 with a major amount of fog. The unopened box - about the same (maybe a bit faster but a lot of fog).

Whatever is on the exposed sheets, though, is still there, with added age fog and mottling (unevenness) from the paper and possibly a bit moldy. They'll develop very dense but would still be printable - maybe not easily scanned.

I still have a box of Super XX in 5x7 from the 80's in my fridge. It was a workhorse, like Ektapan and Tri-X

Super-XX was one of the older thick emulsion films, prone to reticulation when badly out of date. Have fun with it, but don't get your hopes up.

A newer film with certain similar characteristics was Lotus or Bergger 200, one of my favorite 8x10 films of all time. But it's now long gone too.

Super-XX was NOT a precursor to Tri-X. These were very different and parallel to one another. When my brother attended a Photo Academy in the 60's, all the students were expected to master three sheet films : Super-XX as the most versatile commercial film with its exceptionally long straight line, Plus-X Pan as a studio portrait film with its very long toe and excellent highlight gradation, and Tri-X as a medium-toe journalistic type of film. Of course, people adapted these films and numerous others to all sorts of applications, but Kodak emphasized certain marketing applications. The older Kodak black and white film handbooks give a good idea of the key distinctions.

DREW WILEY said:

Super-XX was one of the older thick emulsion films, prone to reticulation when badly out of date. Have fun with it, but don't get your hopes up.

Click to expand...

I thought reticulation was caused by too abrupt change in chemical or water temperatures? A typical example would be fixing at 68° F and then washing at cold tap water.

My brother would sometimes deliberately reticulate Super XX by passing the sheets back and forth between hot and cold developer for a fun cracked pottery glaze kind of look. But in the case of seriously outdated film, humidity and its dimensional issues can get deep down into the emulsion, and reticulate portions of the emulsion right off. I've had edge frilling even with modern thin-emulsion films which were badly outdated - like odds and ends of film accidentally overlooked in a paper safe.