Graflex.org

tecspectr · Joined: 26 Dec 2007 Posts: 2 Location: SLC UT

Feeding my newly acquired Century Graphic films like HP5+++ and T-Max just doesn't seem right. Now, thinking about putting those flashbulbs I just bought on Ebay to use, it just seems ridiculous.

I'm told that in its day, the camera would have probably been loaded with Kodak Super-XX, and that the film would have typically been developed in Kodak DK50. (But is that true??)

My Best research on the matter (digitaltruth, photonet, etc..) is pointing me toward Bergger 200, which is supposed to be very close to Super-XX. Kodak still sells DK50, and it's even cheap.

Any firsthand wisdom on the subject?

Allan

Henry · Posted: Thu Jan 03, 2008 4:58 pm Post subject:

Well, since "its day" stretches from c. 1949-73, there would be a wide variety of b/w emulsions to choose from. Personally, I would have used Plus-X or Panatomic-X (don't know about availability of those in 2x3 sheet film, but Plus-X was certainly available in 120 rolls), and developed in D76 or Microdol. But the Panatomic had them all beat, IMO, even T-Max. Sadly, it's no longer made.

Les · Joined: 09 May 2001 Posts: 2682 Location: Detroit, MI

Super XX and No 5 flash bulbs were a mainstay for many years. Developers, like wines, varied depending on the taste of the lab supervisor at the newspaper. Depending on the region, the decade, and the lab tech; Henry's 777, DK50, HC110, & D76 in several variations would have been used.
_________________
"In order to invent, you need a good imagination and a lot of junk" Thomas Edison

45PSS · Posted: Thu Jan 03, 2008 11:27 pm Post subject:

Hasn't D76 been around since the early 1500's?

_________________
The best camera ever made is the one that YOU enjoy using and produces the image quality that satifies YOU.

Les · Joined: 09 May 2001 Posts: 2682 Location: Detroit, MI

Considering the way we currently define "old", then Yeah, it's been around since the 1500s.

Officially it debuted in 1923.
_________________
"In order to invent, you need a good imagination and a lot of junk" Thomas Edison

R_J · Joined: 03 Aug 2004 Posts: 137 Location: Europe

clnfrd · Posted: Thu Jan 10, 2008 2:20 am Post subject:

FWIW, I developed a lot of Plus-X and Super-XX cut film in the late 40's and early 50's, and I used Microdol for fine grain. DK60-A if I was in a hurry...and if I was in a really big hurry and grain didn;t matter, I'd toss the film in my tray of Dektol paper developer. I believe I also used D76 occasionally. Fred.

Les · Joined: 09 May 2001 Posts: 2682 Location: Detroit, MI

yeah I had forgotten about Dektol. A lot of night clubs employed ahh, persuasive girls to photograph you and your date before the first show.

Most of the time they processed the film in Dektol for about 3 minutes with constant agitation, went straight to fix for 2 minutes--just enough to clear, carefully squeegee the negative and pop it in the enlarger. Printing was tricky as exposure changed as the negative dried. Best to get the print on the first or second go.

Talk about meatball photography!
_________________
"In order to invent, you need a good imagination and a lot of junk" Thomas Edison

C. Henry · Posted: Thu Jan 10, 2008 2:43 am Post subject:

FWIW I recall pushing Kodak Tri-X to an 800 ASA rating for available light basketball action shots using FR "Electronic Flash" developer during the '55-'56 season.
No grain problems for an 8" x 10" print from a 2 1/4 x 3 1/4 negative.
I don't recall if Tri-X was available in cut film then but it was available as 120 and 620 roll film.

C. Henry

Henry · Posted: Thu Jan 10, 2008 2:50 am Post subject:

Tri-X was available until fairly recently (last five years) in 2x3 cut film, matter of fact I still have part of a box, maybe 15-20 sheets. Very tedious to use, though. 120 roll film rules!

clnfrd · Posted: Thu Jan 10, 2008 2:54 am Post subject:

I don't remember the exact times, but I did so much of it, I had it down pat. I was not at all technically correct, so to speak. I never bothered about the temperature. My darkroom was in the basement, so the temp was fairly constant. I also used and deveoped a lot of film packs...and about the only way to do that flimsy stuff was in a tray. And you are correct...run it through the Dektol...no stop bath...just a tray of water...then into the "hypo" acid fixer for a couple of minutes...back into the tray of water...squeegee...and into my Kodak Hobbyist Cold Light Enlarger with the f6.3 Ektanon lens. Made many, many enlargements with this cheap set-up. Got the shots with a Century Graphic with the cheap Century shutter & Trioptar lens and a no-name strobe that packed a punch. The strobe used a Model-T coil with vibrator and huge caps for the high voltage. Whoops. There I go again....waxing sentimental. Regards. Fred.

Henry · Posted: Thu Jan 10, 2008 3:14 am Post subject:

But Les and clnfrd, Dektol is a *paper* developer, not a film developer! So says Great Yellow Father.

C. Henry · Posted: Thu Jan 10, 2008 3:25 am Post subject:

I may be in error, but I seem to recall that "Great Yellow Father" offered "Tri-Chem Packs" that included a "Universal M-Q Developer" that had a formula very similar to Dektol!
Grain was atrocious with that stuff!!!!

C. Henry

Les · Joined: 09 May 2001 Posts: 2682 Location: Detroit, MI

clnfrd · Posted: Thu Jan 10, 2008 1:06 pm Post subject:

Tri-X WAS available in the early 50's. I used it in either cut film or film packs (2-1/4" X 3-1/4")...can't remember which. I never had a roll-film holder in those days. If I recall, the Tri-X was rated at about 360ASA at straight development but could be pushed a bunch. Shooting football games with strobe required a lot of extra development...and I also recall using a chromium intensifier at times to add density to under-exposed negs. And yes, Dektol is a paper developer, but it also develops film. The graininess didn't matter much, as a lot of the shots were for print and the photo engraving then was just a bunch of dots that pretty much cancelled out the graininess. The Kodak Tri-Chem pack was my favorite "use and throw away" method in about '49 through '52. I thought the developer was Dektol, but perhaps it was "universal". I rarely went to the trouble of mixing the stop bath. I just used water. I still use Dektol for paper (among other things) and D-76 (also among other things) for film, both mixed from powder and stored in 1-liter dark bottles that originally contained root beer. So, to summarize, if you want to do it like we did back then...the most used film for me was Super-XX and Tri-X and the developer was mostly Dektol for paper and, to my recollection, D-76 or DK-60A for film. If I shot a wedding or portrait, I would use some Plus-X film and Microdol developer.The enlarging paper I used was 8"X10" Kodabromide Glossy, usually F3, but also a lot of F4 for added contrast. Fred.