Found some old bulk Kodak film - next steps?

[ufdlim]

Hi! I'm pretty new to film in general but have developed several rolls of color negatives via C41 at home. However, this is the first time I've dealt with B&W and bulk...

So I picked up 4 tins of bulk Kodak today at an estate sale - $0.50 each. Three are sealed, one is unmarked and opened so I assume the first few spools are toast.

Looks like Tri-X, Plus-X, and Panatomic-X. Based on Wikipedia, the Tri-X might be rated 200 and not the current 400 stock? The Plus-X would be either 160 or 125, and the Panatomic-X would be 32 or 40... All are likely older than 1990.

How should I approach getting started on bulk loading? And developing? Looks like FFP was selling expire 1981 Panatomic-X at $8.99/20 exp... Should I just sell? Lol...

 

[Huss]

Post this on the I hate lomo thread where that OP was complaining he couldnt get old film.
Sell it off.
https://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=168372

 

[Larry Cloetta]

If you are thinking about getting into B&W yourself, I would recommend hanging onto at least the Panatomic X, and not selling it unless you really need the money. Of the films you have there, the Pan X is the least likely to be affected by age and the most likely to yield really nice results without having to make continual guesses at compensation, and still being disappointed. It’s likely 32 ASA, and will likely still develop well at Kodak’s recommended processing for new film.
Plus, there’s no other film like Pan X. And, no, FP4+ isn’t like Panatomic X.
I wish I’d found it. Good luck, and happy days.

 

[David Hughes]

Seriously...

Seriously...

Hi,


Save the opened one for when you get that screw threaded Leica you've always wanted and then practice cutting the ends and loading the camera and cassette...


Regards, David

 

[ufdlim]

If you are thinking about getting into B&W yourself, I would recommend hanging onto at least the Panatomic X, and not selling it unless you really need the money. Of the films you have there, the Pan X is the least likely to be affected by age and the most likely to yield really nice results without having to make continual guesses at compensation, and still being disappointed. It’s likely 32 ASA, and will likely still develop well at Kodak’s recommended processing for new film.
Plus, there’s no other film like Pan X. And, no, FP4+ isn’t like Panatomic X.
I wish I’d found it. Good luck, and happy days.

Thanks. Good tip - I'll try Pan X first. No plans to sell since this is enough film to last me years and years. D76 seems to work just fine?

 

[donkee]

I ended up with a bulk loader labeled GAF 320 so I wrapped it up and stuck it in the freezer. I am hoping to find it usable, but ya never know.

 

[ufdlim]

Thought I'd update this thread with some findings from my first bulk load of the unlabeled can. Turned out it was Kodak TMax 400 Professional (TMY 5053). Can't tell how old it was... but if my Wiki-fu is strong, looks like the TMY was replaced by TMY-2 in 2007 - so at least 19 years old. Lots of the film was fogged, so someone probably opened the can to take a peek. Still some redeeming shots...

Shooting this film, I obviously had no idea what this was. I metered for ISO 100 hoping for the best. At development, I looked up the possible development times on the Kodak Reference Data Guide I also picked up from the estate sale.

I used D-76 1:1 @ 75°F, while the guide provided guidance at 20°C (68°F):
- TMax 100: 12:00
- TMax 400: 12:30
- Plus-X: 7:00
- Tri-X: 10

Using the longest time of 12:30, the reduction in time between 68°F and 75°F was ~69% based on other films that provide multiple temperature ranges. That put dev on this film around 8:30, which would be exact for TMax, pushing for Plus-X, just a little over for Tri-X, and whatever else the heck it might be would hopefully be okay.

I shot for dev time of 8:00. Fixing time based on leader strip was around 4:30 so double that would put me at 9:00 - I fudged this to 12:00 because I thought it was clearing a lot slower than I expected.

Surprisingly, an ISO 400 film exposed correctly at ISO 100 due to age? Can't really explain it...

TL;DR - didn't know the film; shot at ISO 100; guessed correctly on dev time 8:00; fixed for 12:00 to be sure; exposed just fine