I think it's totally amazing that you pull these images back from the brink of Extinction and let us see people who are lost to the fog of time. we don't know who these people were but the fact that they did exist was important enough to somebody, so thank you very much😊
Wonderful video. Amazing the amount of time and effort you put into obtaining the faint images. Its rather emotional thinking these images were made so long ago waiting to be revealed. Moments frozen in time and to think what the subjects have experienced and more likely they have passed away by now.
In the early 70's I switched from Praktica SL to a Minolta SRT-102. Fast forward to about a year ago, I was cleaning out attic and found my old Praktica still with a roll of film in it. After rewinding it, it turned out to be Tri-X400. Still having a developing tank I was able to develop it. Except for the images having a very high contrast they looked great. So cool to develop film from the past.....I can just imagine the excitement on a 90-year-old role of film. Thanks for sharing.
Nice! Whenever I get a chance to develop a really old roll of film, I will set my expectations low as the older the roll, the less chance of the frames surviving the harshness of time! Good work on the editing and post-processing!
Hey, that's great! You used the method that I mentioned before. Your film was even older than the film that I developed, which was probably from the 1950s or 1960s (likely early 1960s). I'm impressed that you got those images! Great work!
These videos are great. I get so much wider view of the opportunities that film developing can give and I would like to use these cool little tricks in my own work at someday. I'm especially interested about these long development times and different developers that can be used in the process.
@@pukujukka I tried not to use too many different developers. I think it makes it more consistent for me. But I just got a package from Joni with a new developer. Looking forward to try this one.
I got some sheets with an old Voigtländer Avus from the 1920s - exposed but undeveloped… I soaked them like you and then used Rodinal 1:100 stand development and got some pretty decent results. Like yours a bit thin, but with scanning I got them to live. The advantage of Rodinal 1:100 is that the developer gets exhausted after 50-70min, but no harm is done when you extend the development even to days (don’t ask how I found that out…😇)
I have a roll of selochrome by Ilford that expired in September 1953. I rewound it on to 120 reels and will shoot it in my Mamiya C3 at some point. Really enjoyed watching this video and seeing the results of a film shot so long ao..
I did that on the other roll (check my older video about developing with a stronger developer by 5 degrees) and honestly I don't think there was much difference on the end result.
I'm sorry to say this, but I think stand development is the wrong method. It develops the film base and all the radiation input it has received during the years as much as it develops the actual images. I have developed 64 year old film, haven't tried 100 years old though, and I get much better results with better contrast and much more image info than "film base info" by developing for higher contrast. Stand development gives low contrast, and in my experience, you should go for the opposite. When I do modern artwork using old photographic paper (sometimes 30-40 years old) I develop exactly the way you do, stand develop, but this way I get to see the paper structure and all it's flaws in the final image, and that's exactly what I aim for.
@@key2adventureMaybe you want to have a look at the other video I did. I used there a very strong developer with only 6 degrees. I did test stripes before development and got more contrast out of it. But I am not sure if I would have got more information out of the negatives with it. Most people recommend to use Benzo to get rid of base fog, but it’s not easy to get here.
@@pdtech4524 thanks a lot. As some others wrote, Benzo could have helped to get rid of the fog. There are so many options to develop older film. Like using a very stein developer mixture and doing a cold development while doing a test stripe (I did that in a previous video)
@@mhaustria I usually use benzotriazole to clear up base fog + using a brown safelight usually allows me to see the picture a bit easier. Worked like a treat with my 1956 122 Verichrome. Its a bit of a hassle but also using the rocking method helps see whats developing on the film compared to a spool.
I think stand development, let alone with a phenidone based developer, is a very poor choice for aged film. Of course with film this old, it is hard to say, but my thought would be to use full strength D-76 with the addition of a small amount of potassium bromide (maybe 0.5g), and normal agitiation. (Also check into benzotriazole instead of bromide). This should have reduced some of the the fog, grain and uneveness.
@@TucsonAnalogWorkshop if you watch my last video about this topic, you see that I tried something similar you suggested. I did even test strips. And sadly Benzo is not easily available here.
I think it's totally amazing that you pull these images back from the brink of Extinction and let us see people who are lost to the fog of time. we don't know who these people were but the fact that they did exist was important enough to somebody, so thank you very much😊
@@tarstakars thank you so much, I am always excited about what I will discover.
Wonderful video. Amazing the amount of time and effort you put into obtaining the faint images. Its rather emotional thinking these images were made so long ago waiting to be revealed. Moments frozen in time and to think what the subjects have experienced and more likely they have passed away by now.
@@smithsphotography1 thank you so much! I agree and I can’t wait to hear back from the lady who owned the camera.
In the early 70's I switched from Praktica SL to a Minolta SRT-102. Fast forward to about a year ago, I was cleaning out attic and found my old Praktica still with a roll of film in it. After rewinding it, it turned out to be Tri-X400. Still having a developing tank I was able to develop it. Except for the images having a very high contrast they looked great. So cool to develop film from the past.....I can just imagine the excitement on a 90-year-old role of film. Thanks for sharing.
This is a part that I love about film. Even when you only shot it a week ago. Very welcome!
Ghosts from the Past. Well done!
@@gelderlandproduction thanks a lot! I enjoyed it.
My thoughts exactly! This is amazing.
@@cdl0 thank you 🙏
Fantastic!
Thanks!
Real nice to see the love you have for the medium. Keep up the good work.
@@ThorsteinBerg thanks a lot, will do!
Nice!
Whenever I get a chance to develop a really old roll of film, I will set my expectations low as the older the roll, the less chance of the frames surviving the harshness of time!
Good work on the editing and post-processing!
@@SinaFarhat thank you so much. I was surprised what was possible.
Hey, that's great! You used the method that I mentioned before.
Your film was even older than the film that I developed, which was probably from the 1950s or 1960s (likely early 1960s). I'm impressed that you got those images! Great work!
Thanks a lot, yes I tried this time the "easier" way. I would really like to see the difference between these two methods
These videos are great. I get so much wider view of the opportunities that film developing can give and I would like to use these cool little tricks in my own work at someday. I'm especially interested about these long development times and different developers that can be used in the process.
@@pukujukka I tried not to use too many different developers. I think it makes it more consistent for me. But I just got a package from Joni with a new developer. Looking forward to try this one.
I got some sheets with an old Voigtländer Avus from the 1920s - exposed but undeveloped…
I soaked them like you and then used Rodinal 1:100 stand development and got some pretty decent results.
Like yours a bit thin, but with scanning I got them to live.
The advantage of Rodinal 1:100 is that the developer gets exhausted after 50-70min, but no harm is done when you extend the development even to days (don’t ask how I found that out…😇)
Nice! I won't ask :) But I guess I know the answer
really enjoy this! really gives me motivation to try if IR would work on recovering detail on old negatives I might have somewhere 🤔
@@tomgdownhill thank you so much! Good luck with your negative!
Very interesting Markus!
Thanks a lot Nejc
The other method with 5 degree cold developer and test strips was also very interesting, I would have loved to see the difference
I have a roll of selochrome by Ilford that expired in September 1953. I rewound it on to 120 reels and will shoot it in my Mamiya C3 at some point.
Really enjoyed watching this video and seeing the results of a film shot so long ao..
@@liveinaweorg Thank you so much, I guess you need to over expose you film by a lot
@@mhaustria I'm thinking ISO5 or thereabouts.
@@liveinaweorg what is the base asa?
@@mhaustria 50.
I just checked and it was September 1951 not 53 though I don't think that will make any difference.
In the future you might try cutting (sacrificing) a few strips off the backend of the roll and do a development test.
I did that on the other roll (check my older video about developing with a stronger developer by 5 degrees) and honestly I don't think there was much difference on the end result.
I'm sorry to say this, but I think stand development is the wrong method. It develops the film base and all the radiation input it has received during the years as much as it develops the actual images. I have developed 64 year old film, haven't tried 100 years old though, and I get much better results with better contrast and much more image info than "film base info" by developing for higher contrast. Stand development gives low contrast, and in my experience, you should go for the opposite.
When I do modern artwork using old photographic paper (sometimes 30-40 years old) I develop exactly the way you do, stand develop, but this way I get to see the paper structure and all it's flaws in the final image, and that's exactly what I aim for.
@@key2adventureMaybe you want to have a look at the other video I did. I used there a very strong developer with only 6 degrees. I did test stripes before development and got more contrast out of it. But I am not sure if I would have got more information out of the negatives with it.
Most people recommend to use Benzo to get rid of base fog, but it’s not easy to get here.
Incredible results, definitely some decent images there, considering how old the film is.
Do you think a longer developing time could have helped?
@@pdtech4524 thanks a lot. As some others wrote, Benzo could have helped to get rid of the fog. There are so many options to develop older film. Like using a very stein developer mixture and doing a cold development while doing a test stripe (I did that in a previous video)
Surprised you didnt develop under safelight with it being orthochromatic, but great results non the less!
Actually that is a good idea, I did not think about it. But otherwise you would not see anything before fixing
@@mhaustria I usually use benzotriazole to clear up base fog + using a brown safelight usually allows me to see the picture a bit easier. Worked like a treat with my 1956 122 Verichrome. Its a bit of a hassle but also using the rocking method helps see whats developing on the film compared to a spool.
@ I was looking at benzo, but didn’t get any easily here where I am, but I wanted to try it sometimes.
I think stand development, let alone with a phenidone based developer, is a very poor choice for aged film. Of course with film this old, it is hard to say, but my thought would be to use full strength D-76 with the addition of a small amount of potassium bromide (maybe 0.5g), and normal agitiation. (Also check into benzotriazole instead of bromide). This should have reduced some of the the fog, grain and uneveness.
@@TucsonAnalogWorkshop if you watch my last video about this topic, you see that I tried something similar you suggested. I did even test strips. And sadly Benzo is not easily available here.
The worst method for old film is stand development. Short and intensive one is the right choice
@@jakobolszewski6034 if you watch my precious video about old film development, I did exactly that.
Why not this time? It‘s a pity for such time capsule
@ because I wanted to try stand for this kind of film, to see the comparison. And at the end I still
Got results
Seems that the film was underdeveloped. And I flipped over the developing tank in my younger times.
@@JanFrankenberg there should have been enough developer for that size of film. And it was stirred at the beginning and at the middle.
Na klar, ier heißt Isopan weil er ortochromatisch ist.