Processing Old (Vintage) B&W Film - Developer Choice & Time Suggestions

[ozphoto]

Hi all. Just been given a few rolls of 620 film that have been possibly been exposed and I was hoping to have some fun and try developing them.

No idea of age, but one is definitely Kodak Verichrome and 2 are Belgium, while the last is Kodacolor II, which I'll take to my local lab.

• Any developer better suited to vintage film over another?
• I know it will most probably have base fog, but any other things to look out for?
• Extend my development time?
• Presoak/no presoak?

I'm well aware that they may be duds - but I like to experiment and will really enjoy the process and printing any images that may be apparent.

Then again, the two Belgium films look as if they've not even been exposed, so I might just give them a whirl in my Kodak Junior 620 and come back to this thread for processing help.

 

[Jojje]

I'd use Rodinal 1+100 stand development for exposed ones.
I've been photographing with Ilford HP3 glass plates from early 1940's, exposed at ISO25 (originally 200) and developing the heck out of them with ID-33. Some other powerful, contrasty developer, universal type or even paper developer should provide decent contrast negatives.
https://www.flickr.com/photos/jojjek/49463532907/in/dateposted-public/

 

[138S]

Main concerns with ultra aged film are:

> fog,

> the emulsion separating from the base,

> not knowing what good development time is suitable.

Film preservation depends on storage conditions: temperature, humidity, condensation and other...

You may find different tutorials in the internet with sometimes contradictory advices, but in general a low fog developer like HC-110 is recommended, if emulsion falls then a low temperature development can be played, with an ultra extended development time to compensate.

And, for the development time, you can cut a (say) 10mm film end from the beginning of the exposed roll, which was the end of the roll, that strip should not be exposed by light. You may develop that small strip to check Fog, I guess that if your development targets 0.15D to 0.25D in the Fog+Base reading then you are in the safe side. Personally I would allow a somewhat higher than normal fog to ensure a suitable development.

Also you may also develop "lights open" another strip cut from the film end, you do that in a tray. That fully exposed strip will develop while you witness how it turns black, when its quite dense you can stop, fix, and check density to see see if your development time was suitable.


Pre-soaking is not much recommended for modern films as they include surfactants in the emulsion to ensure an even development, is you pre-soak modern films then you remove those surfactants and if pre-soaking is too short you may end in a uneven developement, ilford datasheets discourage pre-soaking...

...but very old films may benefit from pre-soaking, so prehaps I would pre-soak for some 3min.


You may also develop by inspection, you may use safranin-o in the pre-soaking to desensitize the film so you may inspect development with red safe light, you inspect the film at the end of development to know if more time should be added.

Another way to inspect by development is using infrared night vision googles

https://www.instructables.com/id/How-to-Develope-VERY-Old-Film-and-Get-Good-Results/

Such ancient/aged film has to be handled with extreme care, it's may be quite easy to scratch it or to remove emulsion from the base in big areas.

 

[Paul Howell]

In the past I've used HC 110, but I think I would try a divided developer, no fussing with developing times, rather short times in the soup which should help with fog. Adorama sells Diafine in quarts, Photographers Formulary sells divided D76 their version of Ilford D3 which can used a divided or single shot developer. There are mix your formulas for D23 on line.

 

[Donald Qualls]

I don't see "exposed" on the bands for any of those, though the Verichrome's band is damaged enough it might have been lost. The Verichrome, unlike the Belgian rolls, is orthochromatic ("Verichrome Pan" was an upgrade to panchromatic for one of Kodak's most popular consumer films of the pre-War years) -- so the Verichrome can be developed by inspection under a dim, deep red safelight.

My old standby for old, old films was HC-110, back when it was syrup in the concentrate form. I don't know if the new HC-110 has similar anti-fog capability, but the old worked very well. More recently, I've seen a method for almost eliminating age fog: develop as cold as is practical, and add a few drops of 1% benzotriazole solution to the developer. The results at the link speak for themselves.

 

[MattKing]

Don't forget to keep the spools

 

[ozphoto]

Don't forget to keep the spools

Hehe - that's the *real* reason I accepted them. . . .

 

[ozphoto]

Main concerns with ultra aged film are:

> fog,

> the emulsion separating from the base,

> not knowing what good development time is suitable.

Film preservation depends on storage conditions: temperature, humidity, condensation and other...

You may find different tutorials in the internet with sometimes contradictory advices, but in general a low fog developer like HC-110 is recommended, if emulsion falls then a low temperature development can be played, with an ultra extended development time to compensate.

And, for the development time, you can cut a (say) 10mm film end from the beginning of the exposed roll, which was the end of the roll, that strip should not be exposed by light. You may develop that small strip to check Fog, I guess that if your development targets 0.15D to 0.25D in the Fog+Base reading then you are in the safe side. Personally I would allow a somewhat higher than normal fog to ensure a suitable development.

Also you may also develop "lights open" another strip cut from the film end, you do that in a tray. That fully exposed strip will develop while you witness how it turns black, when its quite dense you can stop, fix, and check density to see see if your development time was suitable.


Pre-soaking is not much recommended for modern films as they include surfactants in the emulsion to ensure an even development, is you pre-soak modern films then you remove those surfactants and if pre-soaking is too short you may end in a uneven developement, ilford datasheets discourage pre-soaking...

...but very old films may benefit from pre-soaking, so prehaps I would pre-soak for some 3min.


You may also develop by inspection, you may use safranin-o in the pre-soaking to desensitize the film so you may inspect development with red safe light, you inspect the film at the end of development to know if more time should be added.

Another way to inspect by development is using infrared night vision googles

https://www.instructables.com/id/How-to-Develope-VERY-Old-Film-and-Get-Good-Results/

Such ancient/aged film has to be handled with extreme case, it's quite easy to scratch it or to remove emulsion from the base in big areas.

Thanks for the insights - will definitely investigate further.

I don't see "exposed" on the bands for any of those, though the Verichrome's band is damaged enough it might have been lost. The Verichrome, unlike the Belgian rolls, is orthochromatic ("Verichrome Pan" was an upgrade to panchromatic for one of Kodak's most popular consumer films of the pre-War years) -- so the Verichrome can be developed by inspection under a dim, deep red safelight.

My old standby for old, old films was HC-110, back when it was syrup in the concentrate form. I don't know if the new HC-110 has similar anti-fog capability, but the old worked very well. More recently, I've seen a method for almost eliminating age fog: develop as cold as is practical, and add a few drops of 1% benzotriazole solution to the developer. The results at the link speak for themselves.

Yes, I thought the same, Donald, but admit I wasn't sure about that Kodak roll - and the rubber band has confused me a little: is it there because it's been shot, or because the band got damaged and it hasn't been shot and they wanted to "save" it.

Thanks for your suggestions on the developer and the link - I'll check it out to see what they have to say. Now I just need to decide what speed to expose at to have some unpredictable fun!

 

[Marc Estalella]

Hi all. Just been given a few rolls of 620 film that have been possibly been exposed and I was hoping to have some fun and try developing them.

No idea of age, but one is definitely Kodak Verichrome and 2 are Belgium, while the last is Kodacolor II, which I'll take to my local lab.

• Any developer better suited to vintage film over another?
• I know it will most probably have base fog, but any other things to look out for?
• Extend my development time?
• Presoak/no presoak?

I'm well aware that they may be duds - but I like to experiment and will really enjoy the process and printing any images that may be apparent.

Then again, the two Belgium films look as if they've not even been exposed, so I might just give them a whirl in my Kodak Junior 620 and come back to this thread for processing help.

View attachment 249279 View attachment 249280 View attachment 249281 View attachment 249282 View attachment 249283 View attachment 249284

I want to see the results! Post some of the photos once you develop them.

 

[Donald Qualls]

Now I just need to decide what speed to expose at to have some unpredictable fun!

The old rule of thumb is to reduce EI by one stop for each decade of film age, but that's mostly connected to age fog. The more fog, the more exposure you need to produce density you can print or scan above base + fog. If you can cut the fog to something close to the as-coated state, you can shoot at close to the original film speed.

The Belgian film is probably marked with DIN speed, which is the second number in the modern ISO (400/27 -- sorry, no degree symbol on my keyboard). That didn't change, but about 1959/1960, long after that Verichrome was made, ASA changed their testing method in a way that doubled the rating of most films. That Verichrome, for instance, is probably marked as ASA 50 or 64 -- but that would be the same, barring fog effects, as modern ISO 125/22.

 

[138S]

In the past I've used HC 110, but I think I would try a divided developer,

This is something it can be tried, perhaps it may work... The problem I see with it is that a regular divided developer controls DMax, being compensating to limit development in the highlights, but it may not control fog.

Divided Development depends on how thick is the emulsion, probably an ancient film may have a thicker emulsion, so we may carry (corrected) a lot of developer to the second alkali bath, this may promote the natural fog an ancient film is prone to.

Again, it would be interesting to use an strip of the aged film to be tested in the divided developer...

 

[Paul Howell]

This is an old the emulsion and is thick by modern standards, thinking that the increase in film speed will compensate for loss of speed due to age. With Diafine, the first bath is just to soak up the developing agents, might leave it in longer giving eht emulsion plenty of time to absorb bath A, the development takes place in B, 3 minutes, less time in less fog? Diafine is also pan thermic, so you chill bath A, B, down to like 50 degrees F, even cooler no stop bath, rinse in chilled water then into the fix. Wash the film using soak and dump, maybe 6 to 8 soaks, the distilled water for final soak before drying. Down side, likely will low contrast and hard to print.

 

[Donald Qualls]

admit I wasn't sure about that Kodak roll - and the rubber band has confused me a little: is it there because it's been shot, or because the band got damaged and it hasn't been shot and they wanted to "save" it.

Here's a reliable way to tell if the Kodak roll is exposed or not: start unwinding the paper (slowly!). You'll either come to a hole right through the middle of the backing, with the very edge of the film tail showing through it (if you're careful, you should be able to spot this before you fog anything but the film showing in the hole), meaning you're at the tail and the film has been wound through a camera (and presumably exposed), or you'll come to warning arrows for the number track (probably won't have a start mark like modern 120, because 120 and 620 had different backing back then and there weren't any (that I know of) cameras with counters that didn't start with a red window when Verichrome (not Pan) was offered.