Plus-X circa 1961

[Mike Kennedy]

I just received a box full of old chemicals,2 bulk rolls of film and baKelite loader and this roll of plus-X that MIGHT be exposed. Think I will give it a shot using Rodinal 1:50.
The massive Development Chart states 13 minutes but I,m sure adjustments will have to be made considering the films age.

Suggestions Anyone?

Mike

 

[msage]

We use D-76 with Benzotriazole as a restrainer. Process for a one or two stop push. Works better then a straight processing. With a little work we have produced printable negs. I don't know if this works with Rodinal.

 

[Donald Qualls]

I've processed old film with HC-110, high dilution and low agitation, and usually about a one stop push; Plus-X exposed in 1980 gave pretty decent images when I processed it in early 2004.

 

[nworth]

This was not to long after the change to "thin emulsion" films by all the manufacturers (1957-1960, roughly). At that time, Plus-X became Plus-X Pan. There is the question of which one you have. Since you also have film on bulk rolls, you could also have Plus-X Negative motion picture film. It was common to bulk load motion picture film for still camera use in the 50s and 60s. An old Photo-Lab Index showed a development time of 10 minutes in undiluted D-76 for the old Plus-X. The 1969 Kodak Professional Films booklet (F-5) showed a development time of 6 minutes in undiluted D-76 for Plus-X Pan. The movie films, while different, could usually be treated the same as their still camera counterparts. The 1966 Kodak H-1 publication showed a development time of about 4-1/2 minutes in D-96 (machine processed) for Plus-X Negative. Old, unrefrigerated film will probably show a lot of fog due to age. Bezotriazole may help.

 

[nworth]

Extra note:

You can identify Kodak motion picture film by its edge markings. The 35mm films have footage markings in ink along one edge. For Plus-X Negative, the footage is prefixed with the letter "H". They also have frame line markings between the sprocket holes on the oposite side.

 

[Mike Kennedy]

Not Plus-X but Kodak Safety film (dot after the S)

Guess the film was rolled into an old Plus-X canister (PX 135).
There were no images after I processed it (Rodinal 1:100 for 14mins).
What should I do with these 2 cans of old film? One is Kodak High Contrast Copy film the other is Kodak Recording film,both circa 1960. I do have a vintage bulk loader but should I go through the trouble of shooting and processing ? I have Rodinal and HC-110 on hand.

Thanks,
Mike

 

[Konical]

Good Afternoon, Mike,

Since the High Contrast Copy is a very slow film, there's a chance it might still be usable, especially if it was stored in favorable conditions. Years ago, I used it for standard copy work and also to make B & W slides from B & W negatives. Development was either in D-19 or Dektol. I can't remember if I used the Dektol full strength or diluted 1:1. About all you can do with 45-year-old film is experiment a little. If it were my film, I'd say it is definitely worth the trouble of shooting and processing, at least to ascertain the film's condition. If you're really lucky, you could have 100 feet of usable fine-grain film which was a standard 35mm copy film pre-Technical Pan.

If memory serves me correctly, the Recording film is a high-speed film with lots of grain. Probably less likely to be usable now.

Konical

 

[Donald Qualls]

Best guess, the High Contrast Copy is probably okay, but the Recording Film (assuming this is the 2475 that was something like ASA 1200) is almost certainly fogged beyond usability. OTOH, it costs almost nothing to roll of cassette and try the Recording Film.

Of the two developers, I'd recommend HC-110; it's got very good anti-fog properties already and shouldn't need any additional.

BTW, the edge markings on the film that was in the Plus-X cassette are perfectly consistent with Plus-X Pan from the 1970s, at least -- Kodak marked everything as "Kodak Safety Film" from the time they started making the acetate base (non-flammable, unlike nitrate base, hence "safety") until sometime in the 1980s, possibly when DuPont stopped production of the last nitrate-based film.

 

[dancqu]

Adox KB14 and 17 circa 1960

Reorganizing a few days ago I came across four
rolls of Adox KB14 and 17 exposed but undeveloped.
What is my best chance? Dan

 

[Donald Qualls]

Dan the Adox KB14 is identical to current manufacture Efke KB25 (which, ironically, is now being sold as Adox KB14 in some locations). The KB17 is the same as modern Efke KB50. As I understand it, the emulsion for these films hasn't been changed since the Second World War, and Efke uses the original Adox equipment and formulae, so the process time for current emulsion should work fine for those 44 year old rolls. Good news is those relatively slow films are likely to show less fog than would be the case for faster films (Tri-X that old would be so fogged as to nearly cover any remaining image).

I would suggest using a low-fog developer, ideally one that gains speed, to offset latent image fading from the intervening time. HC-110 is known to work very well for this (I prefer Dilution E at twice the Dilution B time with agitation every 3rd minute, for 35 mm films -- I'd probably add an additional 20% to that time to allow for the old film), but I've heard good reports from those who've used Microphen and even Diafine or good old D-76.