Kodak Verichrome Pan film in Prewar folder - Developing

[DmaalaM]

So I purchased a Prewar agfa Jsolette with a roll of Kodak verichrome pan 120 film inside it. At first I thought it was slide film, but read somewhere it is black and white. I want to develop the film and give it a fighting chance of maybe getting something. I have D76 and microphen developer. I'm thinking I should use microphen because it needs to be pushed ( I believe). how much should I push it?

 

[snapguy]

vp

Verichrone Pan film was a b&w film made by Kodak for amateur photographers. It was said to have a a lot of latitude so you could goof up the exposure and still get images. Kodak used to fib about the proper film ASA so the user would overexpose their film and get something printable, which they might not get if they seriously underexposed. So I presume that, with a very old roll of the stuff, you should avoid underexposure.

 

[DmaalaM]

I'm sorry, I guess I didn't explain myself. I have rolled up the film and plan to process whatever is on it, hoping that I might get some images. I haven't any idea how old it is. I just don't know the best way to go around developing it in D76 or Microphen, whether to push it, or how much to push it. how much time, etc.

 

[resummerfield]

Since you don't know the age of the film, or the conditions under which it was exposed, everything is a guess. I've tried something similar a few times, and each time the image was very thin. So as a general guideline, I would use D-76 1:1, and process for at least 18 to 20 minutes at 68* with normal agitation, which is about twice the recommended time for that film.

 

[DmaalaM]

alright, well from some stuff I could find on the net it looks like D76 @ 7min is whats called for. The similar times for Plus X. Microphen on the chart for plus X says 19.5 stock solution, for a push to 400 iso. which is what an old film like this would need i think. so I'll be trying that in a few hours if anyone else has any tips

resummerfield - sorry, page just refreshed after i posted. thanks, that gives me some insight as to what to expect

 

[pentaxuser]

In my case I was given an Agfa Isolette I by a friend. It was his then recently deceased brother's camera. It had Verichrome Pan film inside it also. I cannot recall if I had my darkroom then or if I was wary of trying to develop what I knew to be an old film but I took the remaining 3 frames on it and had it developed commercially so I presume that the lab just used normal times and probably a proprietary developer such as ID11. I was amazed at how good the prints from those negs were.

I think you could risk longer development with Microphen than is suggested for fresh film but if my experience is normal then you should get printable negs with normal development.

In my case I now know from my friend that the negs had been in the camera for about 40 years based on the scenes and people he recognised in the prints

Best of luck and let us know how it goes

pentaxuser

 

[MattKing]

My 1977 Kodak Darkroom dataguide recommends 5 1/2 minutes at 20C/68F for stock D76 and Verichrome Pan.

You are sure that it is Verichrome Pan, and not the older Verichrome?

With older films, the shorter development times you get with undiluted developer may help with fog. On the other hand, longer times boost contrast.

 

[DmaalaM]

It says verichrome pan 120 on it

 

[pentaxuser]

It depends on how much you want to "dot the "i"s and cross the "t"s as they say but there was an APUGer who developed a lot of VP film from old cameras etc he had obtained with great success based on his prints. It might be worth doing a search on APUG. I cannot recall his "name" unfortunately but a search on Verichrome Pan should get you there.

pentaxuser

 

[Prof_Pixel]

So I purchased a Prewar agfa Jsolette with a roll of Kodak verichrome pan 120 film inside it.

The camera may be prewar, but Verichrome Pan film didn't come out until 1956.

 

[DmaalaM]

I ended up developing it in microphen for 15 min at 20C. The negs are very dark (dense?) and have a lot of fog. I can see all the images though. They're up drying now.

 

[Denverdad]

I ended up developing it in microphen for 15 min at 20C. The negs are very dark (dense?) and have a lot of fog. I can see all the images though. They're up drying now.

Great, I look forward to seeing what you get! Actually, I am not surprised you have images. From what I can tell, Verichrome Pan holds a latent image about as long as anything, and even with early rolls you seem to get something more often than not.

The person most often noted for developing found film (and perhaps to whom Pentaxuser was referring), is one "Gene M", or at least that is his i.d. over on the Photo.net forum which he frequents. Gene's website is inspirational for anyone wanting to develop old exposed film.

 

[Jim Noel]

After following a few strands concerned with development of outdated film over the past few years, I decided the time has come to do a comparative test of the same emulsion batch film and compare results then and now. What really gave me the idea was running across a film pack of Tri-X 320 in the darkroom cabinet which was probably removed from the freezer in 2010 when I set about some other experiments. This pack and its remaining nine (9) brothers had an expiration date of Dec. 1967, and all have the same emulsion batch number.
I must note that these tests were fast and dirty, not scientifically precise, but a comparison of the practical use of the film in 1970, goodness it is hard to believe it is more than 40 years ago, and today. I not only utilized the same film/developer combination, but the identical method of development.
Luckily, my files aren’t too well organized, I found my EI and development tests from the time when I bought the film in 1970.The notes indicated the use of HC 110 1+63 from syrup for 10 minutes gave an EI of 125. (I have never gotten an EI for this film faster than 160.)
I loaded the film pack and exposed 8 sheets. Four sheets with an EI of 100, and four with an EI of 25. I decided the best comparison would be to use the same developer and dilution as in the past, although I normally use a pyrocatechin based developer and slower films.
Development was in HC 110 1+63 from syrup, for 12 minutes. The additional time was chosen because I decided that the old film is like me and needs all the help it can get. Upon drying the fb+f for the film exposed at EI 100 is .58. High yes, but easily printed through since it is very even across the sheet. Film base+ fog for the film exposed at EI 25 is .70, almost ½ stop more dense.
Next came the addition of sodium benzotriazole to the developer. Rather than use the powder I dissolved 2 tablets of Kodak Anti-fog #1 in 91% isopropyl alcohol and added it to one quart of developer. The quantity was purely a guess since I don’t find any published data on use with HC 110.
Obviously this set of negatives was rather thin, so I did another pair for 20 minutes. I examined under the green light at 15 minutes, a 25% increase, and decided to go on. In this pair, the negative exposed at EI 25 is visually similar to the EI 100 developed without the benzotriazole. These negatives are OK for enlargement, but the scale is too short for my purposes.
The negatives developed with the benzotriazole for 12 minutes have a fb+f of .46, a very slight decrease, and the shadows are very thin.
The negatives developed for 20 minutes exhibit a fb+f of .69, a big increase of almost a full stop. This appears to me to be chemical fog induced by the long development time.

My conclusion is that the most practical way to use this film is an EI of 100, developed in HC 110, 1+63, for 12 minutes in a tray with agitation 5 seconds each 30 seconds. Since Tri-X has never produced significant expansion it makes no sense to attempt to use it for my normal printing processes. The same is true, and always has been, for all of the higher rated films. It will be used for those rare images I intend to enlarge.

I frankly was amazed at the results. I expected the fog to be so heavy as to mandate the use of the restrainer. I also expected the fog to be uneven across the film, heavier on the edges and lighter in the middle. These expectations were augmented by the fact that this particular film pack had been out of the freezer for so long. I was elated to be wrong.
I guess my next experiment will be to test a few sheets from one of my remaining boxes of 144 sheets of Super XX. It is about time to use this stuff up while I can. Yes, film used to be sold in boxes of 12 or 144.

Happy photographing!