Tested Plus-X bulk roll that expired in 1972

I have a 100 foot roll of Plus-X with the original packaging, which I had assumed wasn't any good at all based on what was said by the previous person who had it (co-worker). But I never got around to actually testing it.

So popped it in one of my loaders, spooled up about 24 frames (well I wound to about 26~27, giving me a little extra). Rated it for ISO 50 in my Canon 7 rangefinder and just shot off a few stuff while I was watching the digital lab and printing off the photo 102 student's work for the hallway display.

Later in the day I popped back into the darkroom and developed the roll in Microphen 1:1, 68F, for 10.5 minutes (the usual recipe is 8.5 minutes, but figured I'd bump it about 25% due to age), constant agitation first minute, and an inversion once every minute. (used the school's Sprint Stop, rapid fixer, fix remover, and photoflo for rest of the process and popped it into the dryer).

The bulk roll is apparently numbered, though the numbers appear to be repetitive (guess as a guide since 1 thru 34 would be distinctive per roll if you cut no more than 36 frames per cartridge).

A straight scan off the school's scanner (I just scanned the whole transparency bed and moved the rows together), showing all but the last strip of 6. It's going backwards, first frames on bottom going up, left to right.



The first frame was this one, which was the night before when I popped it into the camera, and just figured 1/30th @ f/2 based on what the room light has been in the past for 100/200/400 (I'm always snapping a candid here or there).



The first few shots after that one was just based off the Canon's internal Reflective meter which indoors tends to be pretty spot-on compared to either my Minolta IVf or Gossen Digisix, outdoors, tends to read a bit high.



And a couple selfies with the Canon 35mm f/2.8, incident metered with the gossen digisix to give 1/2 @ f/11 for ISO 50
Frame 1: 1/2 f/11
Frame 2: 1/2 f/8
Frame 3: 1/4 f/5.6




The negative sleeve sheet held flat under glass on a light table so can see approximately the relative density between the frames (also kept the leader at the top for 100% exposed vs 0% exposed).



Exposure Notes For each frame starting from top, left to right :

First Row - Canon 50mm f/1.8 Type-6 for this row
1st Frame (Headshot) : 1/30th @ f/2, internal reflective metering off the wall
#2 to #5 (internal reflective metering): 1/500 f/4 , 1/250 f/4 , 1/125 f/4 , 1/60 f/4

Note to self in regards to the last frame, and first frame of next row... remember that the viewfinder and lens do not always have the same thing in front of them obstructing the view. (I apparently blocked the lens with the little beam that goes across the window).

Second Row - Canon 50mm f/1.8 Type-6
1st frame : 1/30 f/4
Frame #2 thru #6, Incident Metered with the Gossen Digisix resulting in 1/15 @ f/2.8 for ISO 50.
- 1/15 f/2.8
- 1/15 f/2
- 1/15 f/4
- 1/8 f/2.8
- 1/4 f/2.8

Third Row - Canon 50/1.8, then Canon Serenar 35/2.8 for printers
Frame 1 and 2 continues from Row 2: 1/2 f/2.8, then 1 second f/2.8
Printers (frames 3-6), incident metered 1/4 @ f/2.8, Canon 35mm f/2.8
- 1/4 f/2.8
- 1/8 f/4
- 1/2 f/2.8
- 1/8 f/2.8

Fourth Row - Canon 50mm f/1.8 Type-6

Metered for 1/125 f/2 (incident), I didn't write down each frame for the Fed-2A sitting in the window as I was called away by a student needing some help, but from my memory it was an alternation of 1/60 f/2.0 and 1/125 f/2.0 as I was changing focus (handheld).

Fifth Row - Canon 35mm f/2.8
Incident metered for 1/2 @ f/11
1/2 f/11
1/2 f/8
1/4 f/5.6

Don't recall the exposure info for the remaining frames, Also I need to pay attention to my frame count as I get near the end of the roll. Since I'm shooting into the tail that's exposed when bulk loading.

I'm thinking maybe, at the current development recipe, I should probably aim for ISO 25, *maybe* 12. If I want to wet print it using split-contrast filters.

Nice tests. I have Plus-X from 1977 and this gives me hope for it.

i always appreciate your photo diaries also your great pictures/website, and a pen collection to boot!

thanks

jvo said:

i always appreciate your photo diaries also your great pictures/website, and a pen collection to boot!

thanks

Click to expand...

I held off on buying any new pens over the last year now. Kind of found the grouping I liked though still trying to sell my 70s Montblanc which I haven't used in a while.

Right now I got the Lamy 2000 and Lamy Al-Star (matte black) inked, with Noodler's X-Feather and Diamine coral. Both of which easier to clean if I don't use them for a little bit (neither advanced digital photography, not po126 film processing require much writing, but this summer I'll have EN102... so plenty of reasons to write then).

I used to have a fountain pen when we were stationed in Germany, and it wasn't until a friend mentioned the cheap Chinese ones (I don't recommend those unless you only have one, and keep it going daily), it turned into a bit of an obsession from there, partly because they made very nice photographic subjects, and like some of our old cameras, they can be restored and tuned with finesse.

Very impressive results for 45 YO film, gives me some hope also for some old Plus-X I have.

As regards to fountain pens, you might like this video of a Japanese Pen Maker plying his craft;

bdial said:

Very impressive results for 45 YO film, gives me some hope also for some old Plus-X I have.

As regards to fountain pens, you might like this video of a Japanese Pen Maker plying his craft;

Click to expand...

As you can imagine, I've seen a number from the Masters series.

Looks to me like you made the right call about development... and it looks like shooting it at 50 (or maybe 32) would be good. (Just saw you guessed 25 or 12... that would be good too, because at 50 you are cutting it close to underexposure).

I was looking at this:

Second Row - Canon 50mm f/1.8 Type-6
Frame #2 thru #6, Incident Metered with the Gossen Digisix resulting in 1/15 @ f/2.8 for ISO 50.
- 1/15 f/2.8 - Looks good to me
- 1/15 f/2 - Looks even better

and...
- 1/15 f/4 - Woah, I wouldn't want to print from that thin a neg.

Bill Burk said:

Looks to me like you made the right call about development... and it looks like shooting it at 50 (or maybe 32) would be good. (Just saw you guessed 25 or 12... that would be good too, because at 50 you are cutting it close to underexposure).

I was looking at this:

Second Row - Canon 50mm f/1.8 Type-6
Frame #2 thru #6, Incident Metered with the Gossen Digisix resulting in 1/15 @ f/2.8 for ISO 50.
- 1/15 f/2.8 - Looks good to me
- 1/15 f/2 - Looks even better

and...
- 1/15 f/4 - Woah, I wouldn't want to print from that thin a neg.

Click to expand...

Though you'll notice frame 5 is slightly denser, despite being equivalent exposure. (1/15 f/2 vs 1/8 f/2.8), but I figured most my speeds to be about a third of a stop slower than actual on the Canon 7, may be some variations between the speeds.

Was either that or the window lighting changed and I didn't notice, which is possible because the shadow side away from the window seems to be the same in both frames, only the side that would get hit by the window light seemed to have changed.

But yea I'm thinking ISO 25, if it was consistent with the metered lighting. Dense enough without going too crazy on the speed.

kb244 said:

I held off on buying any new pens over the last year now. Kind of found the grouping I liked though still trying to sell my 70s Montblanc which I haven't used in a while.

Right now I got the Lamy 2000 and Lamy Al-Star (matte black) inked, with Noodler's X-Feather and Diamine coral. Both of which easier to clean if I don't use them for a little bit (neither advanced digital photography, not po126 film processing require much writing, but this summer I'll have EN102... so plenty of reasons to write then).

I used to have a fountain pen when we were stationed in Germany, and it wasn't until a friend mentioned the cheap Chinese ones (I don't recommend those unless you only have one, and keep it going daily), it turned into a bit of an obsession from there, partly because they made very nice photographic subjects, and like some of our old cameras, they can be restored and tuned with finesse.

Click to expand...

I guess I shouldn't be surprised at all that I'm not the only camera/pen guy. Haven't I seen you around FPN, now that I think of it?

To test the exposure index, expose a uniform target 4 stops under. The processed frame should be 1/3 stop darker than a frame with no exposure. You can estimate this or put the film over your hand-held meter to look for a 1/3 stop drop.
(1/3 stop is log 0.1 density).

bdial said:

Very impressive results for 45 YO film, gives me some hope also for some old Plus-X I have.

As regards to fountain pens, you might like this video of a Japanese Pen Maker plying his craft;

Click to expand...

Thanks!

In grammar school we were required to write using pen holder with nibs. Our desks had two cut outs containing small glass bottles with glass stoppers. Each morning teacher filled ink well and children filled other well with water. Prohibited from using ball point pens because some could be quite messy in those days. In 6th grade fountain pens were allowed. Have used fountain pens ever since because ball points are laborious to use because they require using too much force, although some roller balls are good.
About Montblanc. I still have and use a Montblanc pen that I bought from Columbia U bookstore in 1959. Heavily used with dented gold cap and chipped barrel. Years later damaged nib was skillfully repaired (parts no longer available) by Pen Hospital in N YC. In mid 60s bought a Masterstruck. Burglars stole my big Montblanc in 1980s. By that time their quality slipped and, like Leica, marketing acollectibles became Montblanc’s main business. Bought the big Pelican instead and love it. Pen I like to carry in my pocket is a Pilot vanishing point.
Most painful watching mellenials pressing down on a ball point, block printing a long text.
I have bulk roll of old ORWO film I bought in old GDR in 1977. Should give it a try.