Brooklyncraftsman

Does anyone know where I might lookup frame markings? The only markings on this bulk roll of old B&W 35mm other than the frame numbers (5, 5a, 6, 6a, etc) is the code "B 364." Cannot find it listed anywhere... Thanks!

So maybe I'm confused here - I assume I have a good amount of base fog here - might try to use som benzo - but how can I tell underdevelopment from fog?

Thanks! 

Thanks! I shot this at 100 and developed with D76 at 1:1 for 8.5 minutes. So I will try another strip with longer development time and see what I can get! 

Hi - Im working on a project shooting panatomic-x in a leica IIIa to recreate old family images from the 1930s and 40s. Does anyone have a source for rolls/bulk rolls of expired pan-x? I missed out on a bulk 100' roll on eBay....

Thanks!
Darren

I have another unknown roll of bulk b&w film. I developed a test strip - any ideas about what it could be? I can read something like "B 364" on the right side. 

Thanks!

Thanks AJG! That is amazingly cool. One more film stock I just tried - super foggy - but it says "B 364" on the sprockets. Any idea? I shot it at EI 100 and developed at 8.5min in D-76. 

Hi! Circling back to this topic. I cut a bit of my mystery old film and spooled it on to a cassette in the dark. The film is white - any thoughts about what it is / if it is trash? 

2 hours ago, rodeo_joe1 said:

Yes. I'm afraid that looks more than 'a bit' fogged, but it's only to be expected with old film that's probably not been refrigerated all its life. 

The fog shouldn't hurt too much. It's not ideal, but scanning and a bit of image manipulation can cover up a multitude of sins these days. 

P.S. The Dmax looks not too bad. So maybe 7.5 to 8 mins development will get you there after adjusting the EI on a more 'average' scene. I suspect that the 32 ISO of early Panatomic-X might be closer to a realistic speed though. 

Great, I'll give it another try, perhaps with anti-fog additive. Does this seem consistent with very old Tri-x? what is a guess on what im shooting here? for what its worth, the color of the pan-x and 2496 emulsion in the picture above  is very different than this film in the bulk tin that was marked tri-x (but who knows what it is). Thanks again - the mystery of this film may not be worth it, but im hooked on getting it figured out!

Right, I can try another simple scene. Thanks. The film seems a bit fogged, yes? here it is next to a bit of HP5

Ok so I developed the leader until the darkness of the back and front equalled out and I got around 6.5-7 minutes. Then I took 8 frames from 50-800 EI and the developed at 7min D-76 1:1. Frames for 50 and 100 are closest to ok, the 200 and on is very thin (light negs) to nothing. Here are the two at 50/100. Pretty grainy quick scan - could this be old Tri-X that now wants to be shot at 50/100? The canister says Tri-x but this was possibly either Panatomic-x or 2496 as the box I found had some bulk rolled films labeled as such.  As expected, no frame markings about what the film is.

Thanks!

T

Thanks Rodeo Joe - that helps!

15 hours ago, rodeo_joe1 said:

Probably not. A lot of this anonymous stuff was old cine stock that wasn't edge-marked, or if it was it wasn't a continuous marking but maybe once per foot or something like that. Even a clear edge-marking might not give you much of a clue, since cine film often had no direct still film equivalent. 

I used to shoot a lot of cine-stock FP4, and sometimes the entire roll would show no edge markings at all. It behaved like FP4 sure enough, but you'd never know it from the lack of markings. I only had the supplier's word for it. 

Having said that, you'll have to do a clip-test anyway; to determine a good developing time and EI rating. 

Personally I'd run a short cassette of it through the camera with a range of 1 stop EIs from 5 up to 400. That's only 8 frames, but make sure you document the order. 

Then, for the development time - take the exposed leader and, in room lighting, dunk it in a cupful of your favourite developer at 20 degrees C and time how long it takes for the front and back of the film to look equally dark. Fix the clipping properly and, if you can, measure its density. A properly developed terminal exposure should have a density of around 2.5D to maybe approaching 3. If it's less than that it needs more time. If it's edging 3.0D or more, then less time. 

 

Wow, thanks. This will be a project to diagnose. I'm not sure I understand the second phase here. Cut the leader frame off and in the light see how long it takes for the front and back to look equally dark?  when I have the time, I assume that I can guess what actual speed film I might have here. I dont have a way to measure density. All this for 50' of unknown film, but im so curious what it is! 

Also - just to be clear - to see the frame markings on film do I develop or will they appear if I clear a bit of film with fixer? 

Thanks that is super helpful! I'm hoping this old 2496 works, and also the Panatomic rolls.

I have this tin of sealed positive film from ""Superior Bulk Film Co." out of Chicago - If I cut off a small bit in the dark and put it into some developer will I see labeling on the sprocket holes about what film it is?

Thanks! It helps a bit. Still not sure what I have here. If it's rated at 125, and it's who knows, 50 years old, what a good approach might be. 

Hi! New member here. I recently acquired a box of rather old film stock. It includes some bulk rolled canisters of Kodak 2496 RN 125, and some Panatomic. I want to try and shoot these films - any advice on how to develop them in d-76?

Also found in the stash: unopened Lumipan 100 in med format, and a canister of bulk film from "Superior Bulk Film Co." from Chicago with no other markings...

Thanks!