well-matured Ilfospeed

[pdeeh]

I was given a box full of darkroom accessories today (it came out of a loft and was wrapped in newspaper dated 1981) ... amongst it all was this.

Presumably Ilford would be able to tell me the actual date of manufacture from the codes on the label.

Funnily enough, I was just thinking I ought to get myself a few sheets of 5x7 ...

 

[Ian Grant]

It's only 35 years old and it's Grade 3, it may be OK - just a bit slower and slightly less contrast.

On the other hand this was developer incorporated and just immersing it in an alkali solution was enough to develop it, I used tp process it in a home made activator in an Ilfoprint machine I used Hypam 1+4 instead of stabiliser and then put it in a weaker 2n fixing bath before washing & drying.

Ian

 

[BMbikerider]

If it has been in a loft since 198X then it will have had many years of heating up to I don't know what then cooling down again It may work but I am not so sure about the contrast. Fogging may put paid to that.

 

[pentaxuser]

Try it and then tell us. If it works fine then it is testament to Ilford products.Simon Galley might like to know as well

pentaxuser

 

[pdeeh]

just immersing it in an alkali solution was enough to develop it,

hmm so if I mix up a batch of borax or sodium carbonate that'll be good enough as a developer?

 

[pentaxpete]

Ilford papers go very SOFT and muddy with age -- you will have to put some 'Antifoggant' into the developer.

 

[Ian Grant]

I had some Ilfobrom from the 60's also Kodak Bromide papers and both were fine no base fog and not much drop in contrast maybe half a grade. I gave away about 500 sheets ironically on the Ilford car park at Mobberly.

It's warmtone papers that age the quickest but I've my fingers crossed for the Barnet paper I acquired recently.



I've also some plates for my Quarter plate cameras, I cut my teeth on HP3 .



You never know until you try these older items but might be surprised.

Ian

 

[Mike Wilde]

Fond memories. That was the paper I started on, printing so many years ago in the school darkroom creating print images, usually shot by others, for the school yearbook's paste up and layout crew.

I still have a bit of 2.44. So nice to set up the image in white light, and not screw around with filtration. I still do have stashes of fixed grade papers I like to use.

 

[pdeeh]

I dropped an email to Ilford (well, Harman) about this paper and part of the reply is as follows:

The product ... is a resin coated, graded paper. It is grade 3 - and a semi-matt paper (ie 24M indicates it is semi-matt).
The 04E denotes it was either coated January 2005 or Oct 1996 or July 1988 (depends on which no. cycle it was).
... it does not have a developer incorporated in the base/emulsion ... it simply needs processing as per normal photo papers! It does not require an activator

slightly odd that it was wrapped up in 1981 newspaper given the possible manufacturing dates (the Watford Post Echo if anyone's interested) ...

 

[pentaxuser]

Sounds as if someone collected and kept old newspapers longer than old Ilford paper Interestingly even Ilford, it would seem, puts nothing in the number sequence to distinguish earlier cycles from later cycles

pentaxuser

 

[Ian Grant]

The A77 at the bottom was Ilford's old code for the date, The first Ilfospeed was definitely developer incorporated but Ilford never admitted that, they wanted large users to switch to Ilfospeed and the new Ilfospedd processors and drop the Ilfoprint range, the machines went first.

There is a paragrapgh tucked away in an Ilford datasheet that says Ilfospeed could be used in an Ilfoprint machine but it was never publicised, I only found it years later. I was given an Ilfoprint processor, dry mounting press and big rotatry glazer thrown out by a newspaer who had switched to Ilfospeed. If an Ilfoprint print was fixed after stabilisation it was just as permanent as any other FB print.

I used the Ilfoprint processor with no problems to make many hundreds (probably thousands) of prints using an Activator which I formulated to give identical results to a conventional developer, it contained Sodium Hydroxide, Sodium Sulphite and Potassium bromide and there was no developing agent(s) needed. When Ilfospeed was revamped I was stuck with a useless machine, Ilford had cut the Hydroquinone from the emulsion and all I could achieve was an extremely weak image with the machine.

Ian

 

[pdeeh]

ah interesting about the date code, I overlooked telling them about the "A77" ...

 

[Mike Wilde]

Ian, too bad you chucked it. Later I think that MGIII was developer incorporated. It sure fogs a lot faster and to a more complete extent than earlier MG products.

 

[Ian Grant]

Ian, too bad you chucked it. Later I think that MGIII was developer incorporated. It sure fogs a lot faster and to a more complete extent than earlier MG products.

Mike, it only went to landfill a year or two ago, the rollers were perishedand the drive cogs were breaking up as the plastics were badly aged. After 1986 I'd switched almost entirely to Fibre based papers so had little use for it. A shame but it was well past it's useful life.

Ian

 

[pdeeh]

Well, I was doing a little contact printing last night so I thought it would be fun to try the 3.24M ... I tried developing an unexposed strip first, and it came out OK, just a hint of cream colour.

Here's a couple of scans (I have a very old, tired, low-res Mustek scanner so the quality isn't fabulous ... although also please bear in mind that I have only been printing for about two weeks)

These are contacts from Fomapan 200 5x4 sheet film (pinhole camera). One's on Fomalux 312 contact paper, the other on the Ilfospeed.

I expect you'll be able to work out which is which ...