Very old black and white film

[mischivo]

I've been putting this off for one and a half years now, and time isn't making things better in this case. In 2008, I found an interest in an old Zeiss Ikon Super Ikonta 533/16. My guess is that it's older than my father, and he's not young. Inside this little gem (which works quite well, photos taken with it by me since than can be found on my site below) was a mysterious roll of film. It has no indications of type, brand, ISO, date, or whatever else might be relevant. I know that the film has been exposed, as the only text on it says "exposed", in Russian. The following are my best educated guesses:
1. The film is older than I am (minimum 25 years)
2. It is black and white
3. It is of Soviet origin
4. ISO was likely between 100 and 400.

Is there any hope of any salvageable images? If the answer is a remote yes, then I'll appreciate any advice you have to offer. This was my grandfather's camera, and he's been dead for 24 years. It'd be nice to see the last images he shot. Also, please note I can't develop film myself; I've never done it before and I'm not looking to start on this. If advice is given, I'll pass it on to a professional lab I use for black and white processing.

Thanks in advance!

 

[hans voralberg]

Why not start developing your own, go through a few rolls then start on it? Cause honestly I don't think a lab will handle that kind of film unless you're very familiar with them.

 

[kully]

It might be better to send the film to one of the people on this board. The labs will pop it through some machine using whatever chemicals they use for all the other film. If you want them to do it by hand the money is even more.

 

[mischivo]

Lab charges 6.00 CAD for hand processing for 35mm film. If memory serves me, the price is the same for 120 film. Perhaps I can coax them into helping out at an extra cost, but without any reprimand if the results are lacking? I'm just looking for your advice on how something like this could be developed, or if it should even be tried, given its age and the fact that no one knows what it is.

 

[Ronald_H]

Start to do your own developing. You only need some rudimentary equipment, and it's not hard. The hardest part is getting film onto the reel in the dark (I use a 12 euro changing bag and second hand Paterson system 4 tanks).

When you are pretty sure you can handle the film, try that old roll, with a developer like HC-110. For ideas on time etc. people here will have ideas. It would help though if they knew what film it was.

My oldest roll was 18 years expired Tri-X. However, this was 'freshly' exposed and promptly processed. Results were very grainy and a bit dark, but completely usable. I have seen scans of film exposed just before WWII, and processed in the 21th century. It can be done.

 

[chris91387]

i don't think you can put a price on this roll of film.

i suggest snipping some off and having it hand processed with the goal of at least being able to read the data on the edge of the film to see what kind it is. then, of course, wrap the unexposed film up in a light tight can and multiple bags and refrigerate.

mischivo, you might want to ask others on the board or do some research yourself to see what types of film were available in the soviet union 30-40 years ago. my guess is that there were not a lot of options.

please update us as this is an unusual and interesting project.

good luck,
chris

just my 2 cents.

 

[capitalK]

Has anyone ever tried these guys?

http://www.filmrescue.com/

 

[JohnTF]

There are some people who process "orphan" / old films, and I have seen quite acceptable results.

Certainly a basic developer, D76, perhaps Xtol, and perhaps a bit of anti fog chemistry would not hurt.

If someone here offers, great, and if the lab tells you it is hand processed in D76 or Xtol, -- you might get them to add some anti fog to the developer and the results should be as good as anything.
I seem to recall Potassium Bromide or Benzotriazol (obviously a WAG at the spelling) as being anti fog agents, to be used in moderation in the developer.

Snip test might be worth while, it will cost you a photo probably, but if the lab is willing to adjust the processing for you, and they know their stuff, you should be OK.

Where I live, I long ago gave up on commercial B&W processing, the kind where they put it in the machine and it comes out the other end, but hand processing is entirely different.

I think with old stock I generally added a bit of developing time to up the contrast, if the film is a bit over developed, it should still print OK.

If I hear anything special from Igor, I will pass it along, he probably was developing film in Russia 25 years ago. ;-)

I recently saw a post of some photos from the same time and the guy was pleasantly surprised to get actually decent negatives from a box camera roll of film from the 70's.

Fingers Crossed,

Regards, John

 

[imush]

I would try stand develop it in Rodinal 1:100. This method has dev time not dependent on speed of film, you will always get a result. If the scenes photographed were contrasty, the result may be very good; if flat, it will be dull but still usable. This method may not always be the best, but you always get a result (assuming the film is still good).

If you wish, I could do this for you at my home in New York. It's been over 20 years since I handled Russian film, it would be fun to try once again.

By the way, old Soviet films will likely have speed less than ISO 100; they sold Svema 32 and 64 (in ГОСТ), which is equivalent to ~40 and 80 ISO respectively. They had faster ones too, but these were the staple.

 

[MartinP]

Assuming that the film will be "unwrapped" in an environment where it can be kept in the dark after unwrapping (eg, placed in a reel inside a dev tank, or triple wrapped in lightproof bags) then someone can have a good look at all of the backing-paper for further clues as to what it might be. Whatever you find on the backing can be posted here and you can hope someone has a better idea of what it is, and how it might behave.

At that age it will probably be less than 100asa - but this is irrelevant for developing as it is already exposed and there is absolutely no way to know if it was pushed. Pushing a film would in any case be relatively unusual, so just ignore that possibility.

When working in a lab, the strangest old film I was given to develop was actually not film at all !! That thing was a roll of paper-with-emulsion inside 120/620 backing paper. The problem of what to do with it was solved by a call to Ilford tech support and eventually there were images available for the customer.

 

[imush]

Is the film in one of those old Soviet plastic reusable cassettes? Before you carry or ship it to anyone, make sure to put it into another light tight container (like the round barrel boxes that new film is sold in). The cassette may easily crack, and the ends could snip off. They did not make very good plastic.

 

[blacknoise]

I had some FP4 that expired in 1980, I got it unexposed and shot it at ISO 64. I then gave it 20minutes in Ilfotec HC-110 at 18 Degrees. The lower temp helps to keep the fogging down. You should probably give it a longer dev because you cant overexpose it like I did. Maybe give it 30 minutes?

Rob

 

[crawdiddy]

I just shot a roll of Tri-X in 828 format, which expired in 1964. The film is old, alright, but not as old as me ;-).

I exposed it at 100 ISO and developed normally (D-76 1+1 10 minutes at 68F).

Btw, I shot it in a Kodak Bantam Special, circa 1936 (and the camera IS older than me).

Film turned out relatively dense, possibly fogged, but definitely printable. I haven't printed it yet, and don't have a negative scanner.

I really only wanted the 828 spool and backing paper, but the 45 year old Tri-X was a bonus.

 

[mischivo]

A thought comes to mind. I'll ask my other grandfather what types of films were commonly used in Russia at that time and see if he can remember. Thanks for all the advice so far!

 

[mischivo]

Oh, and Imush, the film seems to be wound on a regular plastic spool. The backing paper is red. The spool has no text or identification. There are some frame count numbers on the back; something to the effect of 12/6x6, etc.

 

[mischivo]

Okay, grandfather had no answers, except to say that they used standard developers found in Russia at the time the developer specified. However, a Google search found this, which looks identical to the spool I have except for the fact that the sticky paper with all the text is missing on mine.

So if that roll is identical to mine, its speed rating is 65 in the GOST system. Wikipedia says the equivalence is ISO 80. Does this help to isolate which development process is best?

 

[imush]

It says ФОТО-65. I also think this means the film speed is 65 ГОСТ, or about 80ISO.

There was only one widely available brand in 35mm (32 and 65 GOST), but I am not sure about medium format. An older Russian veteran photographer can probably be found on this forum to tell. However, nobody would know for certain what to do with it now. I suggest the Rodinal stand method.

 

[imush]

A thought comes to mind. I'll ask my other grandfather what types of films were commonly used in Russia at that time and see if he can remember. Thanks for all the advice so far!

The developer was also different, though, so it won't help very much unless he also remembers the dev time in Rodinal, D-76 or some other equivalent. I think Agfa Rodinal was used by some photographers; it was not widely available but lasts for many years once you get hold of it.

 

[JohnTF]

The formula for D76 was published long ago, and I would think many developers in the world were and are very close as it is a very good developer today.

I recall a lot of photo chemistry was published in the CRC handbook way back, it was printed in Cleveland, but every school purchased them.

Kodak had a great series of books, one also had a number of formulas.

Many of the Agfa formulas were published after the war, and R 09, an early Rodinal? is made and sold by Foma at present. Dilutions are a bit different, as are the times.

On one of my early trips to Brno, the director of Neobrom was spooling and selling Russian films under their name, and he just said they used MQ, (Metol Hydroquinone) formula developers.

Regards, John

 

[mischivo]

Is there a place online that you know of that could provide accurate step-by-step instruction for the Rodinal stand development method? I've done a web search, but it's difficult for me to determine what is reliable and what isn't, considering my lack of experience. Thank you,