Let me apologize for opening a new topic when it's a follow-up to a previous one. I confess to an obvious problem as I'm a old hockey puck to forums.
I processed the 2 rolls of film, the 122 Kodak Verichrome Pan 'dip & dunk' and the 120 Ansco conventionally in Microphen for 8 minutes with enthusiastic agitation.
To my surprise the 122 was hardly fogged with a single frame usable. The balance were blurred, double/triple exposed and it's apparent the photographer was not using the frame window. The photo is just what I'd hoped for and would like reactions. The 120 6x9 was almost black and this does not look like light leaks but perhaps storage conditions did this what could be physical density, any thoughts?
Not bad! Regardless what your get from old film, it's always a peek into the past.
what would be cool is to find these people and share the photo with them.
cemlaserman wrote:
what would be cool is to find these people and share the photo with them.
I agree and will be back there next June and will bring prints to see if I can find them now as senior adults. The before and an after at the same spot would be fun
Crombie wrote:
Let me apologize for opening a new topic when it's a follow-up to a previous one. I confess to an obvious problem as I'm a old hockey puck to forums.
I processed the 2 rolls of film, the 122 Kodak Verichrome Pan 'dip & dunk' and the 120 Ansco conventionally in Microphen for 8 minutes with enthusiastic agitation.
To my surprise the 122 was hardly fogged with a single frame usable. The balance were blurred, double/triple exposed and it's apparent the photographer was not using the frame window. The photo is just what I'd hoped for and would like reactions. The 120 6x9 was almost black and this does not look like light leaks but perhaps storage conditions did this what could be physical density, any thoughts?
Let me apologize for opening a new topic when it's... (
show quote)
My educated guess would be that the problem with the 120 film was your "enthusiastic agitation". At the best of times that is not recommended as it causes over development with dark to black results, and hugely increases grain. With roll film in a tank the agitation recommended is a gentle turn once every 60 seconds.
(Back in the days of sheet and roll film I spent a number of years as a darkroom technician)
Thanks!
My understanding is vigorous agitation mostly increases contrast which I figured would be necessary because of the film's age. The black between the fames and the leader which should have virtually zero density so this was the basis for my thinking of physical fog from perhaps from prolonged exposure to heat. Neither roll had any issues with moisture damage. This did not surprise me as both cameras are fungus and rust free and the light seal foam is still resilient on both of them...wow!
Crombie wrote:
Thanks!
My understanding is vigorous agitation mostly increases contrast which I figured would be necessary because of the film's age. The black between the fames and the leader which should have virtually zero density so this was the basis for my thinking of physical fog from perhaps from prolonged exposure to heat. Neither roll had any issues with moisture damage. This did not surprise me as both cameras are fungus and rust free and the light seal foam is still resilient on both of them...wow!
Thanks! br br My understanding is vigorous agitat... (
show quote)
It definitely does increase contrast, but more so increases grain and uneven developement.
It could be also that someone opened the camera to see if had film in it.
Crombie wrote:
Let me apologize for opening a new topic when it's a follow-up to a previous one. I confess to an obvious problem as I'm a old hockey puck to forums.
I processed the 2 rolls of film, the 122 Kodak Verichrome Pan 'dip & dunk' and the 120 Ansco conventionally in Microphen for 8 minutes with enthusiastic agitation.
To my surprise the 122 was hardly fogged with a single frame usable. The balance were blurred, double/triple exposed and it's apparent the photographer was not using the frame window. The photo is just what I'd hoped for and would like reactions. The 120 6x9 was almost black and this does not look like light leaks but perhaps storage conditions did this what could be physical density, any thoughts?
Let me apologize for opening a new topic when it's... (
show quote)
Can you post pix of the black 6x9 negatives? Which was the variety of ADOX film?
Thanks!
There's a wonderful spectrum with photography and there's always something new and exciting even if in this case rather on the old side. The Kodak 3A will have a new life despite no role film is available. I'm going to cut 4x5 film and hold in place with some tape and also do the same with enlarging paper as I'm enjoying shooting paper negs.
I'll post the results in a couple of weeks.
Hi,
The film is Ansco 'All Weather'. It's my rather vague understanding the Ansco brand was a North American packaging for an Agfa film.
The first frame on the roll is the one I posted, it appears, or rather my guess is the film was advanced to the end with the shutter open as it was virtually black with hardly visible out of focus streaming. And even in the posted image it appears as partial multiple exposures. This suggests after the first shot someone, maybe a child decided to become a shooter.
In any event the rest of this film was without interest.
DickC
Loc: NE Washington state
Good job, looks like a 50s vintage car in the background.
If you want to reply, then
register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.