I never paid attention to the typefaces on the backing paper. Thanks for the tip. The film is from the 1950s or 1960s.From the serif typeface of the Kodak logo, that backing paper is more than 50 years old.
No. I developed a roll of "mystery" film and am trying to find out when approximately it was shot.Are you shooting such antique film?
I believe Plus-X predates Verichrome Pan, so the new emulsion could have been introduced for these two films simultaneously. The introduction of new development times could be either due to a change in the emulsion or the way film speed was measured.That label may correspond to when Verichrome Pan changed from using its own emulsion into a revised (and lower cost to manufacture) implementation of the same emulsion as was used for Plus-X.
I believe Plus-X predates Verichrome Pan, so the new emulsion could have been introduced for these two films simultaneously.
Ignoring technical questions regarding manufacture, coatings, etc., as I remember, Verichrome was the film usually purchased be those less sophisticated using cameras with only one or perhaps at most only three shutter speeds and produced suitable results as far as user was concerned. Does anybody else have similar memories? It was the film sold at kiosks in zoos, amusement parks, tourist attractions, etc.
Verichrome Pan was, of course, never available in 135. See Lachlan's post above about its evolution.
As I recall it from some of @laser's past posts, 120/620 Verichrome Pan was made in a more cost efficient way than Plus-X.
Which reminds me a bit of Harman/Ilford's description of the differences between current Ilford and Kentmere branded product.
I was a convicted Plus-X user
It is a bit difficult to compare Verichrome Pan and Plus-X" sharpness" experiences from my memories, because Verichrome Pan was never available in 135 or 120 sizes, and I didn't have or use a high end or even mid-range 620 or 616 camera until after Verichrome Pan was long out of production.
Verichrome Pan was very fine grain though - finer than Plus-X.
Verichrome Pan was definitely issued in 120 size.
Are you sure?
Verichrome was, but my memory says not when it comes to Verichrome Pan, and that is confirmed by the Wikipedia entry (at least) for discontinued film.
Undeleted duplicate information....
I have negatives my mother took in the early 50's on Verichrome using a Zeiss Nettar. As 620ish as Kodak was, I can't imagine they were going to ignore a much bigger market for the sake of a film spool. Kodak still makes 120 film, but no 620; guess they backed the wrong horse.
Perhaps I was editing as you typed. Please see post #18 and click the link. Kodak documentation beats Wikipedia any day of the week. And, yes... I'm quite sure as I used it. Kodak did state that sizes and catalogue numbers vary from country to country. Perhaps you live in a deprived country. LOL
p.s. You might want to go back and re-read Wikipedia ilist of disciontinued film. It indicates that both Verichrome and Verichrome Pan were issued in 120. You may have overlooked that inadvertently.
... I've never used both films in the same camera...
I was wondering what you wrote and thought to be redundant.
In my mind, if the vintage camera re-volution is real then Kodak really should reconsider issuing film in 620 and amend their prior bad judgement to cancel that format.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?