Very Old Freestyle Arista DMax 400 Development Strategies

[Robert Ley]

Cleaning out my Film freezer and came across a 100ft roll of DMax 400 from I think 1996. The film is almost 30 y/o but has been in my freezer since I got it. I suspect that it will have some increase in the base fog but I'm going to try use it.

My choices of developer, readily available to me are HC-110, Ilford DDX and Rodinal. I also have the basic chemicals and I could mix any number of other developers. I will be using SS tanks and reels and processing by hand agitation. I will be scanning the negatives as I no longer have a darkroom.

I had heard years ago that HC-110 was good for older films as it was a cleaner working developer and didn't increase the base fog.

What would be your choice for developer and do you have any experience shooting this film? Also, anyone have any idea as to the original source of this film?

 

[Disconnekt]

If it says "made in england", its most likely Ilford Delta 400. Try shooting a short roll at 200 iso & develop normally (using 400 times) in hc110

 

[Robert Ley]

Thanks, that sounds like a good first try. I only have one film loader so I have to spool up a few rolls and I'll do a shorty for the test. At present I'm experiencing winter and it is just too damn cold to go out and shoot. BTW it says Made in England right on the can so it is probably Delta 400. Any idea how well these T-grain films age? I guess I'm going to find out

 

[Paul Howell]

I would second HC110, it is often recommended for expired film. I would go with D B, as I think a shorter time in the developer will reduce fog to some degree. If the first roll look good then I would try DDX. My best guess is that is rebanded Foma 800 which was sold rebranded by Freestyle and Photo Wearhouse, Ultrafine, which is selling it again. Although Foma sold as an ISO 800 film, I don't think it was ever good at 800, same as current Foma 100 and 400 are best at half speed. If my guess is right then Photo Wearhouse then here are the times posted on the MDC, I would cut ISO down to 200.

Ultrafine T-Grain 400	D-76	stock	400	6	20C
Ultrafine T-Grain 400	D-76	1+1	400	10	20C
Ultrafine T-Grain 400	HC-110	B	400	5	20C	[notes]
Ultrafine T-Grain 400	TMax Dev	1+4	400	8	20C
Ultrafine T-Grain 400	Ultrafine Liquid	1+2	400	8	20C
Ultrafine T-Grain 400	Ultrafine Liquid	1+4	400	12.5	20C
Ultrafine T-Grain 400	Ultrafine Powder	stock	400	6	20C
Ultrafine T-Grain 400

 

[cmacd123]

My best guess is that is rebanded Foma 800 which was sold rebranded by Freestyle and Photo Wearhouse, Ultrafine,

I can't imagine that FOMA film would say "Made in England"

 

[gkardmw]

I use to use the DMax100 and yes, it is/was similar to Delta 100. I know I have used very old TMax and it did not seem to age at all. Yes, HC110 would make good sense to reduce fog. Don't go overboard with overexposing, maybe just EI 320/250 at the most.

Oh, just noticed that I still have a bulk roll of DMax100 in the freezer so I should get that out and use it too.

 

[Paul Howell]

I can't imagine that FOMA film would say "Made in England"

I must have missed that, where in OP does say it was made in England, second post says

"If it says "made in england", its most likely Ilford Delta 400." Has OP confirmed that the packaging says made in England or UK?

In the 90s and ILford, prior to change in ownership after the collapse of the film market ILford did not reband any Ilford products. Same with Kodak, but Foma did.

 

[MattKing]

I'm a firm believer in saying things in pictures.
Can we see photos of as much of the labeling as possible?
And have you reached out to Freestyle?

 

[reddesert]

Yer not gonna believe this, but ...

In one of my old Kodak Darkroom Dataguides, I stuffed a bunch of developing information: old film boxes, charts printed off Usenet groups, data sheets, and so on. One of the most valuable pieces of paper, worth its weight in silver nitrate, is a half sheet torn from a Freestyle catalog from the 1990s - see attached photo. I used to buy Arista Pro ISO 125 and 400, which were FP4+ and HP5+, and had a bulk roll of Ultra Pro 50, which appears to have been Pan F+ on an oddball bluish base. I never actually used Dmax 400, but it is on this chart, and a quick comparison of the dev times can assure us that it was Delta 400.

For the developer - when dealing with old film, especially old film that's mostly been in the fridge, I just use whatever developer and times I normally use (which for me was typically D-76 or Xtol or an Xtol copy).

 

[reddesert]

Also relevant here, a few years ago I used the Internet Archive to browse old versions of Freestyle's website, and I retrieved a developing chart from 2001-2002 that has a slightly larger list of films, and also has times for a wider assortment of developers than my precious piece of paper. So for example it does give Xtol and Tmax-RS times (and some other developers no one will ever see again). You can likely find all sorts of odd stuff on the archive.org version of Freestyle's site, but the chart is attached here for posterity.

 

[F4U]

I don't believe I'd be using Rodinal on a 400 speed 35mm film. Opting for a D-76 type developer or D-23 should work just fine.

 

[Robert Ley]

Thanks all for the info on this Film. Reddesert: thanks for the PDF...lots of good info. Matt: I've got some pictures of the film can as you requested I think that when spring finally springs in WNY, I'm thinking May, I will be able to get out and try this old film and will use HC-110 as my first developer. Gkardmw: thanks for the info on Dmax100, it will be interesting to see how well this film has aged. I think that the fact the film has been frozen will help. Once I get the first few rolls processed I'll get back to everyone.

​

 

[loccdor]

Freestyle catalog from the 1990s

China's Finest 100? Wow, never heard of that, and it does not show up in web searches at all.

 

[pentaxuser]

If it says "made in england", its most likely Ilford Delta 400. Try shooting a short roll at 200 iso & develop normally (using 400 times) in hc110

Did the old "Ilford" as it was before the bankruptcy of 2004/5 and subsequent management buy out and renaming as Harman not have a policy of not producing its own films for anyone else? If so, this would rule out its being Delta

However maybe the policy of not making Ilford films for anyone else was only started after the buy-out and the era of what we might call Simon Galley

Maybe someone can clarify this?

pentaxuser

 

[reddesert]

Did the old "Ilford" as it was before the bankruptcy of 2004/5 and subsequent management buy out and renaming as Harman not have a policy of not producing its own films for anyone else? If so, this would rule out its being Delta

However maybe the policy of not making Ilford films for anyone else was only started after the buy-out and the era of what we might call Simon Galley

Maybe someone can clarify this?

pentaxuser

I don't have any idea about the time frame of Ilford saying they were not producing their own films for anyone else. (Nor do I know whether that was absolute or a technicality, like "we don't produce Film X for anyone else [but we do produce some film that's almost the same for rebadging].") But in the period of the late 1990s to early 2000s, it was clear that Freestyle was selling Arista Pro films that were rebranded Ilford. They basically let you know this, and I had bulk rolls of 35mm, and rolls of the Arista Pro 120 film that had the same spools and nearly-same backing paper as Ilford. One can look at the chart I posted with the identical developing times for Dmax 400 and Delta 400, or rely on some possibly inaccurate old internet lore to argue the point further.

Edit: plus, Robert's picture clearly shows the film was marked "made in England," Ilford was certainly in England, I do not recall if Kentmere made film at the time or just paper, but no one thinks this was Kentmere.

 

[reddesert]

China's Finest 100? Wow, never heard of that, and it does not show up in web searches at all.

I never had any of that - it might have come from Shanghai or Lucky, perhaps? - but you're not going to find that kind of thing in web searches. Plus the name is too generic to search easily. That chart I posted is probably from 1998-2000. You have a better chance of finding info by going to archive.org and using it to look at very old versions of Freestyle's web site.

 

[MattKing]

IIRC, the Ilford policy was not to manufacture for re-branding any of the films that they were selling under the Ilford name.
That doesn't mean that they weren't contract coating other films for others.
I don't know if there was an exception to that policy for the "Ilford Pan" lines of film destined for certain markets only - but I doubt it.
When the market nearly totally collapsed due to digital, everyone was scrambling to survive, including having to deal with product that could not be sold. The possibility exists that Ilford may have ignored their policy at that time, in a vain attempt to stave off receivership/bankruptcy. Kodak also did that with Freestyle.

 

[Paul Howell]

Well it is not Foma 800, at the time Kentmere was still independent. I think it was Simon Gallery (sp?) who stated on several occasions that ILford did not rebrands any of its emulsions.

 

[MattKing]

Well it is not Foma 800, at the time Kentmere was still independent. I think it was Simon Gallery (sp?) who stated on several occasions that ILford did not rebrands any of its emulsions.

He did, or at least Harman did not, but that was then qualified by him when they started selling films under the name of brand that they bought - Kentmere.

 

[pentaxuser]

Well it is not Foma 800, at the time Kentmere was still independent. I think it was Simon Gallery (sp?) who stated on several occasions that ILford did not rebrands any of its emulsions.

Yes but when Kentmere was independent it did not sell film but only its own darkroom paper which was made in a place many miles from Harman's, formerly Ilford, at Mobberley

So we can rule out it being Kentmere film when Kentmere was independent

We know what Simon Galley, formerly one of the managers who made a management buy-out which was called Harman has said on a number of occasions. What he said was as Matt King quotes

In 1996 of course, we cannot be sure what the former Ilford's policy was in regard to allowing rebranding of its own films unless someone can link to a statement from the former Ilford

So if it was called D400 then I agree it does seem strange as D400 as edge marking or on a film box, assuming it was on a box could be anything other than Delta 400

However if Arista was selling this and at a lower price than its price on D400 then this seems very strange behaviour ón the part of Ilford as it was complicit in allowing its own film to be sold in competition with its own film

pentaxuser

 

[MattKing]

However if Arista was selling this and at a lower price than its price on D400 then this seems very strange behaviour ón the part of Ilford as it was complicit in allowing its own film to be sold in competition with its own film

Just a reminder that "Arista" has always been a brand name for the distribution wing of Freestyle Photographic in the USA. Freestyle has purchased and re-branded as Arista many, many products over the years, but they don't make anything.
They got their start focusing on the educational market.

 

[cmacd123]

IIRC, the Ilford policy was not to manufacture for re-branding any of the films that they were selling under the Ilford name.
That doesn't mean that they weren't contract coating other films for others.
I don't know if there was an exception to that policy for the "Ilford Pan" lines of film destined for certain markets only - but I doubt it.

Just a reminder that "Arista" has always been a brand name for the distribution wing of Freestyle Photographic in the USA. Freestyle has purchased and re-branded as Arista many, many products over the years, but they don't make anything.

In my youth, (gad) freestyle was a regular advertiser in Popular Photography with a dense ad with all sorts of film. The disclaimer at the time was that anything not marked "fresh" was out of date but fully Guarantied. I belive at that time they were getting Military surplus, Hollywood short ends and charling ut overstocks. I recal being Jelous that one of the Members of my hgh school Camera club was able to afford a couple of 100 ft Rolls of ANSCO 400 B&W. My own purachases in the years afterward was a 100ft of Plus X areo, and some sort of Fuji 125ASA film. (both without edge printing)

One I wish I had of Bought more was a one shot deal of "film Pan 24 made in spain" in 120.

as that supply dried up, Freestyle did a pivot the "england's Finest", and "english Profesional" and later Arista film. It was assumed that all of this was made by what was then Ilford. I vaugly recall at least one 100ft roll that I think came from Freestyle of Ilford FP4 Movie film.

after the Inford "colapse" the new Harman company decided that they would no longer make Motion Picture film, and also decided that they would not make Private label film.

Freestyle turned to other suppliers AGFA for "arista II the next generation", Forte for Arista Edu, and then Foma for Arista EDU Ultra. Freestyle DID plan of getting some sort of Film (proably kentmere) from Harmon, But when the advertised it as "coming soon with broad hints that it was likly Kentmere, the project was abruptly called off. (none the less, it is strongly supected that Arista EDU DX is Kentmere.)

the line in the sand these days is that only Kentmere is used for Private lable products.

Harmon of course does contract converting, and they are quite likly doing so for Cine Still.

 

[Disconnekt]

I do have a 35mm roll of Ilford XP1 from the 80's that was "repackaged by FSC" (repackeged by Freestyle Photo). In a May 1982 ad in Pop Photo magazine they even say "loaded in our finest reusable cartridges"

 

[cmacd123]

Yes, freestyle did sell a lot of Bulk loaded film like that from time to time, when they could get those AGFA style cassettes easaly.