Speaking of Film Developers!

[doubs43]

I scanned this image last night. It was taken during Christmas services at the Doubs Methodist Church in 1950. Each child was given a Christmas poem to memorize and recite. How well I remember giving mine!

The interesting thing about this (to me) is that the film is Kodak-XX and the developer my father used was Dektol diluted 1:2. He gave it 7 minutes at 68 degrees. No notes on agitation but I assume it was pretty much the standard method. The camera was a Rolleicord. IMO, the picture turned out reasonably well.



Walker

[kiev4a]

My dad developed a lot of 4 x 5 in Dektol. I souped some 35mm in it because I wanted lots of grain but I was using it with no dilution. Didn't know anyone used it on 120. Looks really good.

[doubs43]

kiev4a said:

My dad developed a lot of 4 x 5 in Dektol. I souped some 35mm in it because I wanted lots of grain but I was using it with no dilution. Didn't know anyone used it on 120. Looks really good.

Wayne, sounds like our fathers thought alike. When I used 2 1/4 x 3 1/4 cut film and 4 x 5 cut film, my father suggested that I use Dektol full strength in a 5 x 7 tray. As I recall, it worked very well but I don't think I ever used it on roll film. For that I stayed with D-76.

Kodak-XX was rated at ASA 200 I think and Dektol may have been a way of pushing it another f-stop. The envelope with the negatives doesn't record the film rating he used.

Walker

[GeneW]

Walker, that's another neat shot. I'd say it turned out well indeed! Kodax XX -- they simply changed the ASA from 200 to 400 and rebadged it as Tri-X. A few purists say Tri-X is still an ASA200 film.

I don't know if I still have the negs, but for a project once when I wanted lots of grain, I developed a roll of 120 Kodak Royal-X Pan in Dektol 1:3 or straight, I no longer remember. It sure was grainy! Anyone else remember Royal-X? I think it had an ASA rating for 1200, but I'm not certain of that.

Gene

[doubs43]

Gene, I recall Royal-X although I never used any. I'm certain that my father did but I haven't gotten into his 4x5 negatives yet. Actually, I was pleasantly surprised at just how tight the grain is on the XX using Dektol.

Walker

[kiev4a]

Walker:

My dad did most his shooting with a 2 1/4 x 3 1/4 Speed Graphic with cut film, too. And he usually used Dektol for it, too. I don't remember what film he shot but I do remember he ordered a lot of it from the military surplus places to save money.

[PeterW]

Gene,

I developed a roll of 120 Kodak Royal-X Pan in Dektol 1:3 or straight, I no longer remember. It sure was grainy! Anyone else remember Royal-X? I think it had an ASA rating for 1200, but I'm not certain of that.

Royal X Pan. My Goodness, that takes me back a bit. I used a 120 roll of it once, back in the late 1950s or early 1960s I think it was, for some shots of Dizzy Gillespie and Lester Young at rehersals under stage lighting conditions at the old Kilburn State Empire Theatre. I think the ASA was rated at 1250.

I also shot a couple of rolls of Ilford HPS (anyone remember that?) and was glad that I did. HPS was first rated at 400 ASA, but then Ilford raised it by a stop to 800 ASA without altering it. I rated it at 1600 ASA and push-developed it in ID11. Can't remember now how long I gave it, probably around 12-14 minutes instead of the usual 10 minutes.

The HPS gave good printable negs with medium grain when blown up from 6x9cm to 10x8 inches. The Royal X Pan was developed strictly according to Kodak's instructions in a developer they put out specially for it. The negs were over-contrasty, and the grain when blown up to 10x8 was like golf balls. I never used it again.

Ilford's technical literature approved of push-developing HPS to 1600, and Ilford was very cheeky in its adverts which called HPS "The fastest reliable roll film available"

Camera used, btw, was a Super Ikonta 6x9 with f/4.5 Tessar.

I don't know how long Royal X Pan was on the market, but I remember it had a reputation for having a very short shelf life. If kept at room temperature the ASA was reputed to fall to about 800 by the end of its printed expiry date, and after a couple or so more months at room temperature it got a horrible base fog. Most of the pros I knew tried it, but didn't like it and for low light level stuff went back to pushed HPS - later HP3 then HP4, then HP5 and then HP5+. Until they all switched to digital.

I believe Kodak also had a cut film in 9x12cm and 4x5 inches around the same time called just Royal X, rated at 400 ASA. Confusing or what?

PeterW

[GeneW]

Peter, that's right! It was ASA 1250. I recall wondering where they got the 50 from :-)

Another one from that era that I tried out was Kodak 2475 Recording Film, souping that in Dektol as well. I went through an 'extreme grain' phase.

Don't know that I'm yet out of it. I have several rolls of ISO 3200 and 1600 films in my fridge. I'll likely use them with Rodinal to maximize the grain. Hard to get really grainy grain these days -- the modern films are all so good.

Dizzy Gillespie and Lester Young? That must have been an assignment from heaven (or at least would have been if you could just sit back and listen)!

Gene

[kiev4a]

I know dad shot some Royal X Pan and Gene, I also shot recording film and souped in Dektol! Not many gray tones there!

[PeterW]

Gene:

Dizzy Gillespie and Lester Young? That must have been an assignment from heaven (or at least would have been if you could just sit back and listen)!

To my mind it was more interesting than a stage concert because they were working things out.

Then the sound balance engineers asked them to go through Night in Tunisia, over and over while they checked the sound in different parts of the auditorium.

After three or four times, Young got fed up with this and launched off into Peanut Vendor. I don't know if Gillespie had ever played it, but after the first chorus he joined in and they played a few improvised choruses, throwing the theme from one to the other, and borrowed a few bits from the old Stan Kenton version. They were being backed by British session musicians who soon picked it up as well. I'd finished my pictures by that time, and I just sat back in the front row and listened - Great!! I only wish I'd had a portable tape recorder with me as well as a camera.

I looked for the negs some time ago, but at that time Valerie and I moved from one apartment to another in London several times in two years before settling down and buying a house here in east Kent. I hate to say it, but the fee often included selling the copyright, and once a job was finished and published, and the publisher didn't want the negs, neither of us took a lot of care of them. They weren't ours, and they were yesterday's news. A lot of stuff like this, and the product shots, ice shows, motor shows, industrial exhibitions, factory processes and the like that we covered, and the copy I wrote to go with them, were just old work not likely to be used again, and got thrown out or lost in the moves.

PeterW