Developing Very Old Film

[MartinCrabtree]

Hadn't thought about that.

 

[old-film-question]

"if the OP would list what kind of film it is"

I believe it was Tri-X. I don't know the format (my brother took the photos) but it was a twin-lens reflex camera.

 

[480sparky]

Probably 120. But it could still be something like 122 or 116.

 

[timor]

Probably 120. But it could still be something like 122 or 116.

Do you know any TLR made for this film formats ?
I am afraid, that it might be 620 shot in some false TLR and it might be grossly underexposed to begin with.
More info OP will have about this, better. Important information would be if flash was used, possibly name of the camera or at least the brand. If the film was all the time in that drawer inside the house. Here the question is about temperature and humidity variation and possible mold in the emulsion. If this is a Kodak, that is a good news, Kodak used good materials which may withstand a bit better haphazard storage.

 

[480sparky]

Probably 120. But it could still be something like 122 or 116.

Do you know any TLR made for this film formats ?......

You mean like a Mamiya 330? What is 'false TLR'?

 

[timor]

Probably 120. But it could still be something like 122 or 116.

Do you know any TLR made for this film formats ?......

You mean like a Mamiya 330? What is 'false TLR'?

I asked you, if you know any TLR made for 116 or 122 format film because I don't. That's all. Make me smarter.
Then I expressed worries. To many people pseudo TLR looks like real one, OP maybe one of them. Read my post.
I am trying to think of all problems, which may acure, it doesn't mean, that all of them will. Film will fog and will loose some of the latent image. This things could be dealt with. Proper developer, metol or glycin, as they work cleanly, not phenidon, with some restrained to mitigate the fog and some quinol for added contrast. Not too much sodium sulfit as it will weaken latent image some more. Sodium carbonate will be better, than borax as an activator and buffer. D76 1+1 seems good starting point, but would require addition of restrained and, as it bases on borax, sodium carbonate. About 40% longer dev time for depleted latent image plus additional 5-10% for restrained. Things no one can do much about are pigment transfer, reticulation, mold, cracks of the emulsion. But if the film is TriX odds are good.

 

[timor]

And there is always this:
Samples | Film Rescue International

 

[Derrel]

Probably 120. But it could still be something like 122 or 116.

Do you know any TLR made for this film formats ?......

You mean like a Mamiya 330? What is 'false TLR'?

I asked you, if you know any TLR made for 116 or 122 format film because I don't. That's all. Make me smarter.
Then I expressed worries. To many people pseudo TLR looks like real one, OP maybe one of them. Read my post.
I am trying to think of all problems, which may acure, it doesn't mean, that all of them will. Film will fog and will loose some of the latent image. This things could be dealt with. Proper developer, metol or glycin, as they work cleanly, not phenidon, with some restrained to mitigate the fog and some quinol for added contrast. Not too much sodium sulfit as it will weaken latent image some more. Sodium carbonate will be better, than borax as an activator and buffer. D76 1+1 seems good starting point, but would require addition of restrained and, as it bases on borax, sodium carbonate. About 40% longer dev time for depleted latent image plus additional 5-10% for restrained. Things no one can do much about are pigment transfer, reticulation, mold, cracks of the emulsion. But if the film is TriX odds are good.

I would stay the heck away from Rodinol....ugggg...I developed about 50 rolls of film in it in the mid 1980's and am now regretting EVERY SINGLE ONE souped in that stuff.

I'd go with Timor's D-76 developer suggestion and 40% more time than the stock recommendations found online or with the developer. I really don't think stand developing would be the way to go....the film is probably already fogged (cosmic radiation), or from leakage at the ends of the rolls. If you're really interested in getting it developed properly, look around a bit more. Timor's sort of our go-to-guy on film developement...

As far as not screwing this up...unless you're GOOD at loading 120 rollfilm, your chances of botching the job are pretty high, since this very old film will be curly,and have a very strong "set" to it, so just loading the developing rolls will be a challenge unless you've got the skills to do so.

 

[MartinCrabtree]

Rodinal is a love it or hate it developer.

I'm good for awhile.

 

[timor]

Rodinal is a love it or hate it developer.

I'm good for awhile.

View attachment 113042​

The only one developer you've got ?

 

[MartinCrabtree]

Nah I have some FA-1027.

 

[timor]

Nah I have some FA-1027.

Nice. I tried this one to. Photographers Formulary fluid version of D76 and actually formulation of it made by Kodak's chemists and rejected by the company. Kodak introduced Tmax Dev instead. And right so, why to have two very similar developers on the market. And good for me, I like Tmax Dev more, than D76 or FA 1027.