Jon Pop Posted January 22, 2012 Share #1 Posted January 22, 2012 Advertisement (gone after registration) I have several old rolls of b/w film to develop - they were shot sometime in the early 80s, but have fortunately been refrigerated for this whole time. They are primarily Ilford (HP5, PanF, FP4, etc....some of them are 20 exposure rolls, rather than 24!). I'm not concerned with getting the 'perfect' image - my brother can't recall what's on these. They just somehow never got developed by my brother in his darkroom when he had it. But I would like the best shot at not spoiling them completely. Any tips, cautions, etc from users out there? Developers I have are Ilford DD-X, and Rodinal, and some Ilfosol 3. Ilfostop for stop, and Ilford Rapid Fix for fixer. The Ilfosol has turned in colour a bit though, so I'd probably be most comfortable using the DD-X as it's pretty predictable I find. Or should I send them to a pro lab? I've usually been pretty successful at processing my own negs. Please let me know what you think. Jon Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted January 22, 2012 Posted January 22, 2012 Hi Jon Pop, Take a look here Processing Old Black & White - Advice sought. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
too old to care Posted January 22, 2012 Share #2 Posted January 22, 2012 A couple of years ago I had a similar experience. I found a roll of 120 that I had shot in the early 90s but never developed. It had been sitting in a desk drawer, not even in an airtight container. I developed it in D-76 and allowed about 50% more developing time. My negatives came out dense, as though I had over developed them. I think I would try a batch of fresh developer, do one roll increasing time a bit, maybe 25% and see what happens. I cannot say for sure, but I think you will be surprised at how well they come out. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
MPerson Posted January 23, 2012 Share #3 Posted January 23, 2012 Diafine has always been my friend in this situation. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lucklik Posted January 23, 2012 Share #4 Posted January 23, 2012 I have never developed a film that old. But I would try semi stand developing. Rodinal 1+100 @ 20C 60 minutes Turn 5 times at start Turn twice at 20 and 40 minutes Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jeverettfine Posted January 23, 2012 Share #5 Posted January 23, 2012 You have a big advantage in that the film had been kept refridgerated. My feeling is you could develop the film normally. One problem, however, is your current standard development for film may be different than that required for the old stock. I might be tempted to sacrifice the first couple of frames for a test. Even so, I wouldn't be too worried about developing as per normal. Stand development is a standard technique for many photographers to enhance shadow development, somewhat like pre-exposure. The developer exhausts most quickly in the dense areas of the negative and continues working in the shadows. It is used most often for high contrast subjects where you want to enhance shadow detail. It also tends to make the grain structure finer. It was the recommended developing technique for Leica back in the 1920's. To use it for roll film you really need to adjust your exposures accordingly. I doubt it would fit your old film as exposed. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
earleygallery Posted January 23, 2012 Share #6 Posted January 23, 2012 Ditto, I'd try the first roll at the standard development time (or cut a short length to develop first but you risk cutting through what could be an important image!). You can almost certainly make up for any issues when you scan the negs. Buy fresh chemicals and check out the massive developer chart for a starting point. Let us know how it goes! (I too have some old films that were found recently and need to get around to processing them although some are C41, no idea what's on them!). Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jon Pop Posted January 23, 2012 Author Share #7 Posted January 23, 2012 Advertisement (gone after registration) Thanks for the feedback everyone...I tried the one roll (PanF) in fresh DD-X. Came out very, very faint....that being said, I don't know if these shots were actual mountain scenics shot at night. Though the numbers on the edge of the rebates were also very, very pale. I think I might send the other stuff off to a pro lab with some warnings...I just don't want to screw them up b/c they're not my rolls. I'd thought about stand developing in Rodinal; should I give that a go with the HP5? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stealth3kpl Posted January 23, 2012 Share #8 Posted January 23, 2012 Try one more with Diafine. Pete Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
gravastar Posted January 24, 2012 Share #9 Posted January 24, 2012 I believe one problem with developing films that were exposed long ago is base fog. Two developers which minimise this problem are Diafine and HC-110. I don't know if / how developing times neeed to be adjusted though. There's a guy, Gene M on photo.net who specialises in this. You may be able to find more information on his site or on photo.net discussion forums by using photonet's search function. ETA: Also see here, here and here. Bob. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jon Pop Posted January 24, 2012 Author Share #10 Posted January 24, 2012 Seems like Diafine might be the ticket...only problem is, I don't know where to get it (I'm in Edmonton, Alberta, Canada....there's places that sell it online I'm sure, but none of them usually ship darkroom chemicals.....). Anyone know of a place in Canada I can get it? Cheers, Jon Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlanG Posted January 24, 2012 Share #11 Posted January 24, 2012 What you are experiencing is called "latent image fade." When light hits a silver crystal it makes a tiny speck on it. Development expands this speck over the entire crystal. The longer you wait before development, the more the speck on the crystal fades. I'm not sure if some b/w films are much better than others regarding latent image fade. Additionally as pointed out, base fog will occur over time increasing the minimum density and lowering overall contrast. There are some anti fogging agents that one can buy to add to the developer. I think these are made from benzotriazole. Potassium bromide added may also help. So you have two factors at work - the overall density is dropping and the base fog is increasing which further reduces contrast. I'd suggest cutting off a 6 inch test strip of this film and processing it a developer that has an anti fogging agent added for quite a lot longer than the normal processing time. Since your first roll was so thin, maybe start at double the time or do some research and see if you can get advice from someone who has tried it. (Not too easy to find I'd think.) It is better to risk a few frames rather than an entire roll. Although you are probably processing this as a curiosity and won't have much use for the images. But you never know. If the cut image is important, you can always scan both parts and re-assemble it digitally. Scanning the negatives and adjusting the tone curve might recover some detail. I think the stand development recommended above is the opposite of what you need to enhance contrast. You might consider trying Dektol paper developer. I don't know what dilution or time to start at. Maybe do some tests on underexposed new film first and then try it on our old film. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
MPerson Posted January 24, 2012 Share #12 Posted January 24, 2012 Jon - Try Film Plus (Toronto). Problems with shipping Diafine across the US/Canada border with suppliers like Freestyle etc. But, a friend has had it shipped by Calumet (US). I would check with their customer service centre first though. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
JeTexas Posted January 24, 2012 Share #13 Posted January 24, 2012 The Caffenol guys who mix up their own developer from instant coffee have been using regular table salt as an anti-fog agent. I tried the Caffenol-C formula on some Kodachrome 620 Pan that expired in 1981 and went 1.5x on the developing time. They came out really faint. Kodak Experiment 03 by ffacker, on Flickr Reading up on it, if I was to do it again, I would have loaded the solution with salt and gone 2x on the time. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jeverettfine Posted January 24, 2012 Share #14 Posted January 24, 2012 HC-110 has always been a favorite of mine. The various dilutions can be very useful. Looks like you need a high acting, low fog developer. Take a look at the discussion of HC-110 on covingtoninovations.com "Where HC-110 really shines is in scientific work or push-processing, where film is deliberately overdeveloped to increase contrast and speed. HC-110 gives surprisingly little fog even with very prolonged development. In this respect it resembles D-19, Kodak's high-contrast scientific developer. I normally use HC-110 (A) for 10 minutes to develop gas-hypersensitized Kodak Technical Pan Film, which fogs severely in other developers." Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.