Processing ancient Verichrome?

[chris_rini1]

Hello,

I found a roll of ancient Kodak Verichrome (Not Verichrome Pan) in

one of my box cameras. Any advice for processing times and

developers? I know about Rocky Mountain, but would prefer to try my

own. Thanks a lot.

Chris

[User_502260]

Earlier this year I developed a very old roll of black & white film. It was a roll of 120 size film which was marked Made In Belgium. My guess is that it was made either by Gevaert (before the merger with Agfa) or by Agfa. The speed was 100. I looked up the developing time for Ilford FP4 Plus in straight Microphen. Then I doubled the time and developed at 68 degrees (F). The negatives were quite dense but I was able to make prints. I made them with a 60mm f/4 Bogen Wide Angle enlarging lens at f/4. I used f/4 because I was afraid the negatives would get too hot and buckle with a longer exposure.

 

If I had to do this again I would probably still use Ilford Microphen (straight) but I would develop for 1.5X the normal time for a traditional (not T Grain) black & white film of approximately 100 (speed). I don't know if the fog or extra density was from overexposure or the fact that the film had been sitting in the camera for more than 30 years.

 

I noticed that frame numbers appeared on the negatives and at first I thought the film might have been x-rayed when my friend mailed it to me. A more logical explanation, which I later read on a photo.net thread, was that the frame number marking on the backing paper imprinted itself onto the emulsion side of the film. The ink had transferred from one to the other. There is no way of knowing whether this might happen with your old roll. I hope my experience is helpful.

 

Jeff Adler

[john_shriver]

<p>17 minutes in D-76 (full strength) at 68°F was Kodak's time for this film when it was current. In fact, all the roll films used that time then. It used to take a lot longer to develop film. You will have base fog.</p>

 

<p>By the way, the antihalation dye is a VERY bright magenta color. Don't be surprised if you pour out something so tinted...</p>

 

<p>Note that the film is likely to be cellulose nitrate base. If it isn't imprinted "Safety" in the margin, it probably is nitrate. (They only make Safety Verichrome from 1952 to 1956.) Nitrate film base gives off gases as it decomposes that catalyze the decomposition of film emulsions and bases. It also burns violently. Store it separately.</p>

[lex_jenkins]

As Jeff suggested I too would try Microphen, either as straight stock solution or at a 1:1 dilution - no more dilute than that.

 

In my limited experience developing old film (exposed several years ago and left undeveloped) Microphen did an excellent job. Besides being a speed enhancing developer it keeps contrast in check so you generally don't have overdeveloped, unprintable highlights, and in most cases the negatives have moderate to fine grain.

 

The key to getting the best results with Microphen is to use moderate agitation: No more than three inversions once a minute at most. Sometimes I'll extend the intervals between agitations to three minutes.

 

It might also be a good idea to use a plastic tank/reel system rather than stainless if you happen to have one. That might be easier on potentially brittle film since film doesn't need to be pinched slightly as when loading onto stainless reels. However if the film is really brittle the ball bearings used in most plastic reels as anti-reverse mechanisms might damage the edges. It's a tossup.

[kelly_flanigan1]

Verichrome of 1945 was Ortho film. One can use a safelight; a Wratten Series 2; (deep red). Here the developement time is 13 minutes at 68F in a tray with continuous agitation; or the 17 minutes at 68F in a tank with intermitant agitation. Be sure you have the real NON PAN film; ie Ortho; before you develop by inspection under red safelight. Ortho film is not sensitive to red light. Neither the film or the safelight filter has a "brick wall" response; so use caution to prevent even more fogging.<BR><BR>Many decades old roll films can have curl problems; that reduce film flatness; and cause focusing errors. They can sometimes be a bugger to load on a film reel.<br><BR>Decades old film gets fogged by radiation. Here the base fogg of the film rises; and no magic Harry Potter developer will eliminate the fog; the film is already exposed abit. My lost bulk roll of Plus-X pan asa 125 film that is 30 years old; tested as a real asa 32 today. The base fog massively has increased; due to room temp storage; and the bogey cosmic rays. Fumes from moth balls; and other chemicals also add fogg.<BR><BR>If you have several rolls; do some experiments. The ortho Verichrome; ie non Pan was an asa 50 in the late 1940's early 1950's. This had a asa 2X safety factor; in the pre 1960 asa definition. Today with fog; it might be an asa of 5 or 10; or less!..<BR><BR>

[patrick_ingram]

I've never developed an old, found, roll (not B&W, anyways). But

I've always thought that a divided developer would work best as this

eliminates most concerns about dev. times. Diafine would be

particularly good as you'd gain back a bit of speed.

[kelly_flanigan1]

Film fogging is the result of background radiation. With several decades of exposure; sometimes the film frame numbers disappear in to the film fog. The film is exposed with the frame numbers; when teh film was made. Later the "un exposed" film is exposed by background radiation. The Plus-X bulk roll that I have from 30 years only has a few film frame numbers; and film numbers; that are barely readable; in a 5 ft long strip of frames. The increased fog drops the real asa/iso. This is because iso and asa is measured with respect to base fog. The speed point moves as film ages; it travels up the DlogE curve; as the base floor of the film rises. No magic developer can take away exposure that is already there. Old film has more fog; which lowers the asa.

[silent1]

I've developed a couple rolls of found film (both color, looking for b&W negatives) in Diafine, and I don't recommend it. One roll, less than twenty years old, seemed to be about normal density and would have scanned okay; the other, Kodachrome from 1964, came up completely black even after removing the remjet coating. Since there isn't any indication that I've found suggesting a silver antihalation layer in Kodachrome, I figured the Diafine probably helped age fog destroy any images that might have been on the film.

 

On the other hand, I've have good results with HC-110 on older film; I've recently done Verichrome Pan from 1978 and Plus-X Pan a couple years newer, and got very good results, though the Plus-X seemed underexposed; it might well have been, due to a bad battery in my Spotmatic when I shot the roll. Neither roll had significant fog.

 

Based on my experince, I'd have to recommend HC-110, and recommend against push developing old film because it doesn't help the old image much, but it does increase fog.

[lex_jenkins]

My experience with old film in Diafine matches Donald's: It exaggerates fog. Diafine is great with fresh film but I wouldn't recommend it for older film, whether film that was exposed long ago and not developed or old film that has recently been exposed.

 

Microphen does not seem to exaggerated fog. One reason I like it is that in extended processing it's very forgiving and does not produce excessive base fog when pushing film. That would seem to make it suitable as well for old film.

 

HC-110 is reported excellent for keeping down fog but I've never tested this assertion.