Kodak Royal X Pan 120

mongo141 · Dec 7, 2008

I did a search and didn't find much so its time to ask. I have a roll of exposed Kodak Royal X Pan 120 that came in a camera I bought. Marked in both English and French on a steel spool. I am tempted to try and develop it and see what happens. I have both Rodinal and HC110 handy but could use a time. Thanks, Dave

df cardwell · Dec 7, 2008

Kodak's time was HC-110b for 8 1/2 minutes @ 68˚.

bdial · Dec 7, 2008

One of my older Kodak Darkroom Guides shows the following for HC-110 Dilutions A and B and DK-50 for Royal-X;

HC-110 A 4.75 minutes @68
HC-110 B 9 minutes @68

FWIW, DK-50 about 5 1/2 minutes
These are the "average contrast" times.

Photo Engineer · Dec 7, 2008

This film does not keep well even frozen. It was the first high speed B&W film Kodak made and is quite grainy.

PE

mongo141 · Dec 7, 2008

OK, My thanks to all. I will give HC110B at 9 min @ 20 c a try. In any case I am out nothing but some time and a small amount of HC110 and I have lots of the stuff. Dave

Larry Bullis · Dec 7, 2008

Photo Engineer said:
This film does not keep well even frozen. It was the first high speed B&W film Kodak made and is quite grainy.

PE

I used it with no success a few times, then finally learned how to use it to get what I wanted, and no sooner had I done so, it disappeared.

I wish they'd still make something like that. The new "3200" films are great, but those old ones were very juicy.

df cardwell · Dec 7, 2008

Bowz -- that is SO cool

Photo Engineer · Dec 7, 2008

I had a brick of it here in the freezer that I gave away last year. I was not happy with the results. I like your result very much. I used D-76 and HC110B on mine.

PE

Larry Bullis · Dec 7, 2008

Thanks, guys.

The film was processed in pyro-acetone (I also processed it in Windisch pyrocatechin, sometimes with a sodium carbonate standing bath following the developer when the brightness range was astronomical)... Of course, the pyro-acetone reduced the filmspeed to something like 400, but since I rarely use tri x at anything like 400, a 400 film is still high speed for me. It is very tough to get decent shadow detail in the moonlight anyway, and - I may be wrong - but it seems to me that the peculiar characteristics of this film worked exceptionally well to preserve much more than I really deserved to get. In this instance the reciprocity failure compensation was beastly; it allowed for the transit of the moon, which fortuitously followed the structure of the old trestle.

mabman · Dec 7, 2008

By coincidence I picked up a roll of this yesterday locally with an expiry date of 1983. For the price, I figured why not experiment.

I realize I'll have to shoot it fairly slow, but I'm wondering about the potential fog. It looks like no one stocks benzotriazole locally, however I can get Farmer's Reducer, plain sodium sulfite, and I also have some HC-110.

I've had great success recently with Rodinal 1+200 stand dev for all my films, so I was thinking about using that, and I was thinking adding maybe 1 or 2 ml of HC-110 might help to counter the fog (to a total of 600ml of liquid). Is that a waste of time in such a low concentration? Would I be better off just using HC-110 in 1+100 instead? Should I just develop normally and use the Farmer's Reducer? Would the sodium sulfite help at all? Bueller?

Thomas Bertilsson · Dec 7, 2008

HC-110 seems to be a good choice for expired films, by many accounts here lately. One person that has good data on how to develop expired film is Mark Antony. He is a member here on APUG and has a lot of knowledge on processing expired films. His blog has information on how a roll of 30+ year old exposed roll of Ilford HP4 (not HP5) was processed in Rodinal. There should be more if you dig.

- Thomas

df cardwell · Dec 7, 2008

Save your time with Royal X, it was ill tempered and cranky.

Larry Bullis · Dec 7, 2008

Even fresh I remember a fair-to-inordinate amount of fog. I'd hold on for a week and order a bit of Benzotriazole.

Or follow Mr. Cardwell's advice. What are you going to get from it? Dead end at this point. But I do understand that motivation to find out what it does. I have a roll (just one) in the reefer. Don't know why I haven't pitched it.

mabman · Dec 7, 2008

*sigh* So many interesting films predate my interest in photography...

Brother, can you spare some Verichrome Pan ?

Larry Bullis · Dec 7, 2008

mabman said:
*sigh* So many interesting films predate my interest in photography...

Brother, can you spare some Verichrome Pan ?

I believe that I may have a roll or two, in some long obsolete size. If I can find 'm you can have 'm! I seriously need to get rid of stuff.

Working in a big Seattle commercial studio ~ 1970 most of the photographers there preferred Verichrome Pan to the "professional" films. They liked the way it looked.

wogster · Dec 7, 2008

Thomas Bertilsson said:
HC-110 seems to be a good choice for expired films, by many accounts here lately. One person that has good data on how to develop expired film is Mark Antony. He is a member here on APUG and has a lot of knowledge on processing expired films. His blog has information on how a roll of 30+ year old exposed roll of Ilford HP4 (not HP5) was processed in Rodinal. There should be more if you dig.

- Thomas

My wife has a roll of exposed but unprocessed film, from the funeral of Winston Churchill (January 1965). I wouldn't dare try processing it now, it hasn't been stored properly. As an undeveloped roll, it has pictures of Winston Churchill's funeral, therefore it has value. if I process it and the latent images have faded below the fog, it's a worthless piece of plastic. Any idea what Mr. Antony's blog address is?

Thomas Bertilsson · Dec 8, 2008

Paul, here it is:

http://photo-utopia.blogspot.com/

Sounds like you need to proceed carefully. But the longer you wait, the worse your chances are!

- Thomas

Mark Antony · Dec 8, 2008

Hi there all
Here is the page on the Royal-x-pan
http://photo-utopia.blogspot.com/2008/02/kodak-royal-x-pan.html

I was given the film un-exposed, it was also a reject roll given to a Kodak employee. The reason I used Rodinal was that I didn't expect anything to come out, didn't have any HC110 and couldn't be bothered to mix up ID11/D76 for just one film.
I was amazed that anything came off the film at all, and although the base fog was high and resulting contrast quite low you'll see I was able to get printable images.
Paul if you want me to develop that roll, I'll try- just contact me through my blog or PM here, it seems too interesting to be 'lost' probably D76 or HC100 dil B will be best.
I'll try to develop anything....
Mark

Steve Smith · Dec 8, 2008

wogster said:
My wife has a roll of exposed but unprocessed film, from the funeral of Winston Churchill (January 1965). I wouldn't dare try processing it now, it hasn't been stored properly. As an undeveloped roll, it has pictures of Winston Churchill's funeral, therefore it has value. if I process it and the latent images have faded below the fog, it's a worthless piece of plastic.

Surely it's a worthless piece of plastic until you process it isn't it?

Steve.

analogsnob · Dec 8, 2008

Way back in the day I used a lot of Royal x. I got a normal and a usable N-1 by DK-50 with a B bath of 1% kodalk. Normal was 6 ish minits at 68 degrees plus 3 minits kodalk with slow constant agitation in the kodalk.

df cardwell · Dec 8, 2008

A moment to smile, and think of all that DK50 I have in the store room.

Claire Senft · Dec 8, 2008

Back in the 70's I shot some in 35mm. God, what an awful film. R.I.P.

wogster · Dec 8, 2008

Mark Antony said:
Hi there all
Here is the page on the Royal-x-pan
http://photo-utopia.blogspot.com/2008/02/kodak-royal-x-pan.html

I was given the film un-exposed, it was also a reject roll given to a Kodak employee. The reason I used Rodinal was that I didn't expect anything to come out, didn't have any HC110 and couldn't be bothered to mix up ID11/D76 for just one film.
I was amazed that anything came off the film at all, and although the base fog was high and resulting contrast quite low you'll see I was able to get printable images.
Paul if you want me to develop that roll, I'll try- just contact me through my blog or PM here, it seems too interesting to be 'lost' probably D76 or HC100 dil B will be best.
I'll try to develop anything....
Mark

I need to find the roll, and see if I can figure out what it was shot on, and whether my developer tank will adjust to that size, then I'll get back here and see if we can figure out a development time. I just wonder if the base fog will be higher then the latent images at this point. After all the roll was shot 43 years ago!

Mark Antony · Dec 9, 2008

Paul
You'll be surprised depending on the film it may look as it was shot yesterday, I have developed Tri-x and Adox from the 50's early 60's and they look surprisingly good.
The oldest film I have processed was some Agfa Ultraspeed from 1941, sure base fog was high but I can print (or scan)
Here look:
1941 Agfa Ultraspeed
The above film was loose in the tin, and a fast film for its day.
Some more:
Last of the 1940's film

I have developed newer stuff like 1958 Adox and 1960's Kodak and Ilford too which are on my blog.
Find that film-process!!
Mark

Kodak Royal X Pan 120

Attachments

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency