1960's Kodacolor ASA rating in 620

[jonathan_stark]

Hey, team,

I've been Googling but can't find the answer quickly. What Kodak

brand color print film would have been available in 620 size in the

early 1960's, and what would its ASA rating have been? I assume it

would have been some version of Kodacolor, but I'm not able to get a

clear picture of the evolution and specs of the various emulsions

sold that way.

TIA, Jonathan

[h._p.]

I imagine it would have been Kodacolor which, if I recall correctly, was rated at 80ASA. I believe that Kodacolor started out at 40ASA in the 'fifties but 'gained' a stop when Kodak, along with most other manufacturers, changed the standard gamma to which they developed.

 

This change was still going on when I started taking photos seriously around 1965 so it was sometimes difficult to know what to rate film at from one week to the next!

[kelly_flanigan1]

Kodacolor-X was asa 64 in 1964.<BR><BR>Kodacolor was asa 32 in March 1959; from kodak color films; E-77.<BR><BR>Kodacolor was asa 25 in may 1946; via Color films; in the kodak reference guide. It was only available in 127; 120; 620 116; 616 then; NOT in 35mm. Film then processed in kodacolor had a notch code punched at the negative edge; during processing; for color correction settings.

[jonathan_stark]

There was a question behind my question, which I should make clear. I'd been wondering to what degree simple cameras like a Brownie Flash Hawkeye, which was presumably optimized for Verichrome Pan (ASA 125?) in bright sun would have been considered compatible with the color print film of the day. Would print film latitude cover all sins? Did Kodak and others market slightly higher grade cameras with a few adjustments as specially for color?

 

We had a Brownie Hawkeye in the early 1960's which the family considered, rightly or wrongly, as a "black and white" camera. Mom & Dad bought Verichrome Pan exclusively for it. Around 1967-68, we got an Instamatic 134 which had an "electric eye" and presumably some sort of automatic exposure adjustment, and that was deemed to be "for color."

 

I'm curious whether there was something to my parents' film choices, or whether it was mainly ignorance of photographic processes (and susceptability to Kodak marketing?) Thanks, Jonathan

[kelly_flanigan1]

In the era of about 1958 to 1962; the asa standards for many types of films were revised. The film speeds on film boxes jumped on some; then jumped back; then settled. Kodacolor before the X version was sometimes at 40 too; panatomic-X was once 40; before 32; and decades ago was 25; then 32. <BR><BR>I believe the X version was developed abit for kodapak ie instamatic of 1963; with a snappier asa 64 rating.

[david_m]

The last Kodacolor I used was 80asa, before that it was 64asa.

[tgh]

Interesting question, Jonathan. I kind of suspect that if you'd asked most people with a camera in the early 1960s what the ASA speed of their color film was, they'd not have been able to tell you. I just ended up with two "new" rolls of Verichrome Pan in 620, both expired June 1960. There's no indication of the film speed on the outside of the boxes.

 

So I looked at the Brownie Flashmite 20 I've got, still with its original box and instruction book. Also no mention of film speeds anywhere. But the camera has only instant and bulb speeds, with the instant being about 1/50th. It also has three waterhouse aperture settings, one marked EV13 for Color and two more marked EV14 & EV15 for B/W. These would correspond to roughly f/11, 16 and 22.

 

The Flashmite 20 sold for about $15 between 1960 and 1965, so to answer part of your underlying question, yes, Kodak did make some modest priced cameras with adjustments for color exposure.

[glenn_thoreson]

Verichrome Pan was a favorite for simple cameras because it had a two layer emulsion. One was rather low contrast and the other was a bit higher contrast. With "standard" developing, it was very forgiving and you almost always got an acceptable picture. Most were contact prints with nice deckled (?) edges. Fancier drug stores even returned them as a little booklet. Prior to 1954, Verichrome was an ortho film.

[connealy]

When I shoot 100 speed film in my Brownie Hawkeye Flash (or most of my other box cameras) it seems to me that in bright sun I'm over-exposing by about a stop. It may be that people were shooting 125 speed film of some sort in the cameras by the 1960s, but I would guess they were over-exposing a bit too. According to McKeown's, the camera was in production from 1950 to 1961. My guess is that the design was meant to accomodate somewhat slower film.

[silent1]

When I last had a Brownie Hawkeye Flash, I routinely used Kodacolor X and Kodacolor II in it when I could afford them (this was just about the time of the C-22 to C-41 transition, and I recall using both).

 

It is correct that the Hawkeye Flash (and most other simple cameras) overexposed by a stop or so; in fact, the Hawkeye Flash overexposes ISO 125 by two stops in bright sun (f/16, 1/30), but this allows the camera to be used over a range of about four stops (+2, correct, and -1) with acceptable exposure for printing -- which covers about 80% of outdoor photography as practiced in the 1960s. Originally, it would have been +1, correct, and -1 on old ASA 32 (new 64), still covering Sunny to Cloudy Bright. I've even shot Ektachrome (probably the early E-4, 64 speed) in similar cameras (a Brownie Holiday with 127) with good results in full sun.

 

This was, of course, also before commercial processing routinely overdeveloped B&W film by about a one stop push...

[h._p.]

"The reason there's not many amateur color snaps in our shoebox is the cost of processing."

 

Or possibly because you don't know which end of a camera faces the subject?

[james_elwing]

Interesting discussion. As a young person in the early 60's I used a Cartridge Hawkeye for Verichrome Pan and Kodacolour, the only 2 films available. D&P via Kodak, both printed satisfactory, and the Kodacolour still has some colour. You stood with the sun behind you. Given that the camera was probably made in the 1920's, both films were probably heavily overexposed.