Old B&W discolored amber negatives?

jay moussy · Dec 11, 2019

I have a handful of old B&W negatives and they being from the 1930s, have taken an amber tint.

What is there to know about that?
I will just dust these, no aggressive move.

I do not dare say the quick and dirty work I did digitally....

AgX · Dec 11, 2019

What got an amber tint? The silver areas (densities) , the non-silver areas (non-densities) or both?

cmacd123 · Dec 11, 2019

also are they still flat?

railwayman3 · Dec 12, 2019

Presumably these would be film on nitrate base, in which case, would they be subject to the notorious "nitrate" deterioration ? In the case of any old negs or photos which are deteriorating, I'd suggest the best way of preservation would be to make the best possible archival copies or prints , analog or digital ?

BAC1967 · Dec 12, 2019

railwayman3 said:
Presumably these would be film on nitrate base, in which case, would they be subject to the notorious "nitrate" deterioration ? In the case of any old negs or photos which are deteriorating, I'd suggest the best way of preservation would be to make the best possible archival copies or prints , analog or digital ?

Not necessarily, Kodak started selling Acetate film as early as 1910. Nitrate film was not usually sold to consumers due to its dangers. Early acetate film usually said "Safety Film" in the edge markings so it could be identified.

Doremus Scudder · Dec 12, 2019

Pyro developers were more common in the past than today. They leave an amber to greenish yellow stain. Are you sure you don't have pyro-developed negs? A photo of the negative would help.

Doremus

koraks · Dec 13, 2019

Doremus Scudder said:
Pyro developers were more common in the past than today.

I'm not sure how popular they still were in the 1930s, and if they were the low-sulfite formulas that left stain. AFAIK in much of the 20th century higher sulfite pyro formulas were more popular and under those conditions there is no stain.

In negatives of this period the most likely cause of discoloration would be lack of adequate fixing and perhaps rinsing, mostly due to the lack of availability of rapid fixer. Many prints and negatives I've seen from the early 20th century suffer from silvering out and sulfur discoloration.

railwayman3 · Dec 13, 2019

BAC1967 said:
Not necessarily, Kodak started selling Acetate film as early as 1910. Nitrate film was not usually sold to consumers due to its dangers. Early acetate film usually said "Safety Film" in the edge markings so it could be identified.

Interesting. I have lots of my grandfather's negs (120 and 620) from the 1930's which are definitely nitrate (this is in the UK, don't know if it was different here).

Doremus Scudder · Dec 13, 2019

koraks said:
I'm not sure how popular they still were in the 1930s, and if they were the low-sulfite formulas that left stain. AFAIK in much of the 20th century higher sulfite pyro formulas were more popular and under those conditions there is no stain.

In negatives of this period the most likely cause of discoloration would be lack of adequate fixing and perhaps rinsing, mostly due to the lack of availability of rapid fixer. Many prints and negatives I've seen from the early 20th century suffer from silvering out and sulfur discoloration.

I guess I'm thinking of the Westons and AA and their use of pyro (ABC for E. Weston especially). I think pyro fell into disuse for a long time till Huchens and PMK and Sandy King and Pyrocat, which seem to both have found a large and loyal following in the last decade. Still, if the OP's negs have an even overall amber tint, they could have been developed in a staining developer. Most degradation is uneven. Silvering-out is quite different in color too.

Best,

Doremus

GRHazelton · Dec 13, 2019

railwayman3 said:
Interesting. I have lots of my grandfather's negs (120 and 620) from the 1930's which are definitely nitrate (this is in the UK, don't know if it was different here).

I remember my Father sometime in the late 50s demonstrating the dangers of nitrate film. It burns with almost explosive rapidity. He tacked each end of what was probably 120 film to a piece of lath and lit it - outside, of course. Very impressive!

removed account4 · Dec 13, 2019

jay

you could always do the "nitrate test" by trimming off a tiny bit of film and OUTSIDE putting it in a crucible / something and seeing if it lights on fire. I say outside because it will burn bright with black smoke and the vapors given off by burning non-safety film are TOXIC (what killed people in the Cleveland Clinic Fire
https://clevelandhistorical.org/items/show/573 )
i'd scan the negatives, put them in a fireproof safe someplace safe ! a friend had a ton of film like that that was gifted to him years ago and when he contacted kodak or whomever it was he contacted ( im talking like 1998-1999 ) they told him to store the film away from where he lived ( or something like that ).

good luck!
john

AgX · Dec 14, 2019

BAC1967 said:
Nitrate film was not usually sold to consumers due to its dangers.

The danger lies at huge amounts of nitrate films, plus the heat source. Thus for instance cinemas were the target of bothering. Also homecinema. But not amateur and professional still film.

Even Kodak, as market leader, produced still films on nitrate base until 1950.

Change-over to a different base was not easy as often assumed. Instead technical properties were a major issue. But also the price of manufacture of the alternatives.

Old B&W discolored amber negatives?

Moderator

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency