Processing very old Verichrome?

[dave_snay]

<p>Hi all,<br>

I have been asked to develop one roll of very old Verichrome (not Pan) film. I have ready access to both HC-110 and D-76. I haven't been able to find any data on development processes for this ancient stuff. Any suggestions?</p>

<p>Thanks,<br>

Dave</p>

[notraces]

<p>Dave -- take a look at this link: -- he says it's pan -- but it appears to be verichrome to me -- pan came into being around '56 --</p>

<p>http://silverbased.org/dev-old-vp/</p>

[dave_s]

<p>Look for Gene M on the Classic Cameras forum. He probably knows more about developing ancient film than anyone on the planet.</p>

[david_carlisle1]

<p>I bought 4 rolls of Verichrome Pan recently with use by date of 1987. I exposed one at rated 100ASA and had it developed at a commercial lab in Perth Australia. Despite warnings that a film this old would have lost sensitivity, the negs came back with perfect density.</p>

[kelly_flanigan1]

<p>If you are *REALlY REALLY SURE* if is not pan film; ie just early 1950's era Verichrome you can develop it under red light safelight. A typical found verichrome roll today is NOT this typw; ie it is pan film.<br>

<br /> ****From my 1952 Kodak Films 50 cent 5th edition booklete 9-52-CH F1 ; page 32 and 33:<br>

<br /> Verichrome Exposure Index 64 in daylight; 32 in tungsten *(remember it is ortho; thus not sensitive to red light).<br>

<br /> D76 in tank with intermittant agitation 16 minutes at 68F<br>

Development time is only 13 minutes at 68F with continous agitation in a tray.<br>

<br /> One can load up the film on a reel; develop then gingerly unroll the leading part and see how "it is going" as far as development; and if one requires more one gingerly places the leading part back and develops some more.</p>

<p>re; Development time is only 13 minutes at 68F with continous agitation in a tray<br>

This is the classical "soup bowl" method some of us were milked/weaned on as kids. You hold both ends of the film and hole each end up in the air. The lowest point goes in the soup/d76. One works the film back and forth and watchs the image form. *ALOT* of dumb 120/620 was processed this way.<br>

<br /> With found old unexposed Verichrome it is going way slower than asa 64 today; since one has base fog due to age and radiation; thus expose even more say 25 or 32. Pre WW2 verichrome had a todays equalvalent speed even slower; say 50 when new; thus expose say at 20!</p>

<p>be darn sure it is plane old ancient ortho before using a safe light or you will ruin the entire roll. I am sure you know this but if you did not I would feel abit bad!</p>

[kelly_flanigan1]

<p>The development times I gave were for fresh in date Verichrome when a B52 bomber was just being born. Today an old exposed roll from that era has some/alot base fog; and thus many of us develop abit more say 15 to 25 percent. If it really is ortho one has a great way to judge development; ie safelight/inspection.<br>

I once had a PRO LAB ruin the entire shoot of aerial films I shot because they assumed the films were ortho; even with the warnings that is was pan. It too was with a film that was for along time ortho; then went pan. The knuckleheads ruined all the rolls; even when the work order had marked in big letters that it was pan; they were told over and over too. This was stuff shot from a plane and had to be reshot. All the special warnings did not work; or calls; or extra care and comments.</p>

[robert_meyer3]

 

<p>I recently was asked by a friend to develop 5 rolls of old pictures that were taken by his mother, and then put away in a drawer and forgotten. There were 4 rolls of Verichrome (not Verichrome Pan), and 1 roll of un-named "panchromatic film" (the only identifier). The changeover from Verichrome to Verichrome Pan apparently took place in about 1954, so 4 of the film rolls were about 50 years old. The other roll is probably about that old. I tried several different methods with these rolls, and checked the densities on my Kodak Color Densitometer Model 10-k. The results were somewhat unexpected, so I thought I would share them.<br>

I checked development recommendations for Verichrome, and found the prevalent recommendation was 17 minutes in straight D-76. I processed the first Verichrome roll this way. The result was extremely high background, but some picture detail was observable in the freshly-processed film. However, as the film dried (I hung it in my darkroom and left if for a week), it got progressively darker. At this point almost no detail is observable. I measure an optical density (OD) of 1.84-2.05 pretty much everywhere. Comparing this with zone system densities I found on the net, this corresponds to approximately zones XI-XIII, and is approximately the maximum achievable negative density.<br>

The next roll of verichrome I processed in straight D-76, but added on Kodak anti-fog tablet to 1 quart of developer (as prescribed in the directions on the anti-fog bottle). Here I followed the previous procedure. Some detail was initially observable, but the negatives got progressively darker with drying. After 1 week I found OD of 1.95-2.0. Again, approximately zone XIII. The antifog tablet did nothing to reduce fog.<br>

The next roll I processed in straight D-76, but reduced processing time to 13 minutes. Again, some detail was initially observable, but the negatives got progressively darker with drying. After 1 week I found OD in the base +background (fog) of 1.62. The darkest area has OD=1.90. Here some detail is observable, with a density range in the negative of about 0.3. This is about 1/3 the density range in a "properly exposed and processed" negative, encompasing about 2 zones. A good negative should have about 7 zones.With high contrast paper I may be able to get decent prints.<br>

I processed a 4th roll using the same parameters as in the paragraph directly above. I found OD of base +background =1.44. The maximum density is 1.70. Again, approximately 2 zones range.<br>

The panchromatic roll I couldn't identify, so I followed my usual procedure and processed it in Diafine (which processes all films the same, 3 minutes in each of 2 developer baths). Here I found base +background = 0.67. Maximum OD=1.08. This density range of 0.41 is about 2 1/2 zones, only a slight improvement in tonal range. However, the overall background level is greatly reduced. I believe these negatives will produce acceptable (not great) prints. I'm uncertain whether the film is much newer (I doubt it), or whether the Diafine produces much less background (the view I favor).<br>

I'm uncertain at this point how to recommend processing of old verichrome. I definitely wouldn't use 17 minutes in D-76. I would use either 13 minutes in D-76, or Diafine. I have several rolls of old unexposed Verichrome 122 that I want to try in a Folding Pocket Kodak 3B, and several rolls of expired Verichrome Pan 620 that I want to shoot in my Kodak Medalist. If I resolve the issue I will publish the results here.<br>

Note that I was able to get marginally acceptable prints off all of the rolls of film by using high contrast paper and long exposures (via a point source head).</p>

 

[lex_jenkins]

<p>Robert, 13 minutes in D-76 stock solution is rather long for almost any film. Try it at around 9-10 minutes (assuming temperature of 68-70F and conventional agitation).</p>

<p>I'd avoid Diafine for older, long expired films. As much as I like Diafine, it seemed to increase base fog on the expired films I tried it with. I had better luck with HC-110 and Microphen. Some folks report they see too much fog with Microphen but I've been satisfied with my results. Again, I aim for no more than around 10 minutes.</p>

[kelly_flanigan1]

<p>Old Verichrome non pan had long times; 13 minutes in a tray/bowl with agitation; of 17 minutes in a standard tank are the Kodak times right out of the 1952 handbook for 68 F. It is a thicker emulsion.<br /> <br /> 55 to 60 year Verichrome film is already fogged at the base; time; radiation ie cosmic rays, exposure to gases (moth balls, natural gas, coal gas).<br /> <br /> Imagine if today you fogged somewhat your exposed Tr-x film because you loaded in a poor darkroom. Imagine the film was just shot this morning and it is fresh. One has 2 exposures; the wanted images you shot with the camera; and the secondary fog due to a poor darkroom. You have this holy crap sick feeling as you realize that there is a light leak under a door while you are loading the film on a reel.<br /> <br /> There *IS NO* magic bullet; eye of newt development scheme that makes the one of the two exposures "go away". The base fog exposure is already there. All different development times does is move the slope around of DlogE curve. There is no developer out there that hunts for rouge exposure and magicallly erases them.<br /> With expired old found films it is the same thing; the base is already exposed. The unexposed film edges and between film frames are not going to be only 0.3 density like on fresh film; they will be more like 1.0 to 1.5 many times with 60 year old film.<br /> <br /> The age added fog as exposure; it cannot be unconvolved by anti fog or a special developer; since this is already done its deed.<br /> <br /> If one radically underdevelops say for only a few minutes; the film edges and base fog will be alot less; but the actual details wanted will be closer together too; or not show up at all.<br /> Here I have an expired bulk roll of Plus-x from 35 years ago that was asa 125 then; and is about say asa 20 to 25 today. It was stored at room temp. When I load up some rolls to play with; no developer removes the base fog; because is aleady there.<br /> <br /> Your really only hope is that the 60 year old film were well exposed; thus there are details that are above the *inherent* base fog that cannot be removed; unless one is Harry Potter.<br /> <br /> ****I think the confusion is that eye of newt stuff to fight fog is for newly exposed ; old films and papers. There is no magic bullet to remove double exposure.<br /> <br /> Benzotriazole; ie Kodak Anti-Fog No1 here seems to be more for where oen wants to use new old stock expired film and papers; then developing film exposed 60 years ago. Its main usage years ago was in warm climates; where on could not get to 68F and one got more fog with hot temperatures; ie warm weather processing. In my develeping old old expired films shot eons ago; I have found here that anti-fog tablets did little if anything. Another issue it is hard to dissolve too. In Astronomy I used sometimes Kodak Anti-fog Number 2 nitrobenzimidazole-6 nitrate. Benzotriazole effects have a greater anti fog with higher Ph developers; thus it is not just the fog tablets; it is the combo too to study.<br /> <br /> I am not saying anti-fog stuff doesnt work in old found films; I am saying here it has done little if any. Thus here I often snip the film and develop a part of it to dial in developemt times. The Downside is you might cut in half Lex by a Pontiac Straight Eight 1950's car; upside is one gets some feedback and the rest of the rolls images can be developed more or less; and one gets Lex in a coonskin cap! :)</p>