Processing old films, unknown exposure

[giellaleafapmu]

I received from a friend a bunch (=many, something like 40 or more) old b/w films which he apparently got from the drawer of some relative who has left them there for several years. I have no idea of how they were exposed (their nominal sensitivity, +1, -1...) and I have the task to rescue as many pictures as possible. Suggestions? The films are: T-Max400, Agfa APX 100 and APX 400, a few Kodak Tri-X and two FP4.

GLF

 

[sevo]

Well, if they are in their regular cartridges/spools, you can develop each type individually. But assuming regular exposure, all of them will be within one minute of their nominal standard time if you develop them for six minutes in HC-110 1+31 - as would just about any 100-400 ISO film, so that is a reasonably safe procedure for anonymous bulk film too. HC-110 is generally advisable if film is developed years after exposure, as it has the best fog suppression among ready-made developers.

 

[giellaleafapmu]

Well, if they are in their regular spools and properly labelled, you can develop each type individually. But assuming regular exposure, all of them will be within one minute of their nominal standard time if you develop them for six minutes in HC-110 1+31 - as would just about any 100-400 ISO film. HC-110 is generally advisable if film is developed years after exposure, as it has the best fog suppression among ready-made developers.

Yes, I know which film is which, I don't know how old they are and how were they exposed.

Thanks for the advice on developer.

GLF

 

[sevo]

Yes, I know which film is which, I don't know how old they are and how were they exposed.

The problem will be that you cannot assume that all films of a type were exposed equal - if you don't want to apply a standard development, you'll have to cut a clip from the start of each and test develop that to determine whether it individually needs pushing or pulling.

 

[giellaleafapmu]

The problem will be that you cannot assume that all films of a type were exposed equal - if you don't want to apply a standard development, you'll have to cut a clip from the start of each and test develop that to determine whether it individually needs pushing or pulling.

Ok, I am not going to use a long tank but rather to develop one at each time but to test the beginning of the films means I in purpose lose all the first expositions or is there any other way?

GLF

 

[sevo]

develop one at each time but to test the beginning of the films means I in purpose lose all the first expositions or is there any other way?

Well, you'll lose one frame for good, as there is a 8:1 chance that you'll cut into a frame. You may be off with the development of the test clip if the films were underexposed, but if you use a safe standard development time for the test clip, the frames on the clip will still be salvageable even if the development you apply to the rest of the film should differ.

Another idea might be to start with the fastest films - if any films were exposed for pushing if will be the 400 ISO ones, and if two of each should come out normal, you can risk treating the rest as normally exposed - a habitual underexposer would probably have done so throughout the batch...

 

[Roger Hicks]

Well, you'll lose one frame for good, as there is a 8:1 chance that you'll cut into a frame. You may be off with the development of the test clip if the films were underexposed, but if you use a safe standard development time for the test clip, the frames on the clip will still be salvageable even if the development you apply to the rest of the film should differ.

That's the approach I'd back too. Or just the 'safe, standard' time without a clip, favouring slight overdevelopment, at least for wet printing.

Cheers,

R.

 

[Trius]

The recommendation for HC-110 is a good one. Also consider Rodinal at 1:50. I have found those films to come in at 9 ~ 11 minutes. As a compensating developer, there's not a lot to lose with the higher value.

Depending on the age, the bigger concern is actual physical deterioration of the emulsion. I would NOT agitate much other than an initial 1 minute gentle agitation.

I once found a roll of exposed T-Max that I had completely forgotten. I processed it in Rodinal (1:100 IIRC) and was able to get useable images, but I had to do a lot of spotting in post to clean it up.

 

[sevo]

Depending on the age, the bigger concern is actual physical deterioration of the emulsion. I would NOT agitate much other than an initial 1 minute gentle agitation.

APX did not replace Agfapan until around 1994/95, so the films can't be all that old. They might of course have suffered coating damage in storage. If so, it can be hard to work around it, as any reduction in agitation, temperature or pH will require a correspondingly longer placement in developer - the official procedure would be pre-hardening with formaldehyde (lab with fume hood required, and it will affect development times).

 

[maddoc]

Last year (two years ago ?), I bought some IXMOO canisters off eBay and while inspecting these I found film in one of them... Since I had no indication of when they had been used the last time and which film was inside, I developed the film in Rodinal 1:100 (about 3 ml Rodinal in 247ml water) stand for 1 h assuming that the film speed would have been rather low and base fog high.

I did not expect to see anything but was very astonished to see very faint frames of what I assume were photographs of farm houses and people somewhere in the US maybe about 50 years ago. The film was very curly and brittle so I did not scan it ...

 

[sepiareverb]

I've just been running some 126 Verichrome film which expired in 1989. I mixed up HC-110b at 66° and ran it at the indicated time from the tech sheet. There was some small bit of fog, but nothing terrible. As Sevo says above, HC-110 does keep fog at a minimum.

 

[Photo_Smith]

I processed some negatives from 1939-41 on Agfa ultraspeed.

http://photo-utopia.blogspot.co.uk/2007/08/last-of-1940s-film.html

and
http://photo-utopia.blogspot.co.uk/2007_07_08_archive.html

I used Rodinal at first, and then D76 as ultraspeed is a little grainy, HC110 is a good developer also low fog and compensating.

 

[giellaleafapmu]

Well, thanks to everyone, I think I shall go for HC110, which I know better than other developers people recommended to me. I don't think they are so incredibly old, from the look I would not put more than five or six years on them, I'll try to cut a first negative from one roll of each type and hope the chap/lady who exposed them was methodical in the way he/she exposed each emulsion, cross my fingers and hope for the best. I plan to start this weekend, I'll let you know what happens, If necessary I shall use whatever digital or chemical trick to get as many usable pictures as I can. I have the feeling that all this will be just fun for the challenge but finally few pictures will be good if any at all, usually great sessions don't get forgotten in drawers...

GLF

 

[charjohncarter]

Gene M on photo net, has probably processed more 'found film' than anyone, uses HC-110. I do know he adds some time to MSDT, but I'm not sure how much. You might contact him.