Difficult film - Svema Micrat

[Julian Tanase]

I am on my 3rd roll of Svema Micrat film, and to be honest, I am at the end of my patience.

I have purchased some film negatives from Astrum Ukraine, end of 2022. Good deal, where money are concerned. However, have had some issues with some of the emulsions, mainly with this Micrat one. According to the guys from Astrum, this is a 32 ASA film. But no developing data could be found anywhere, hard as I looked for it. So I went and developed in Rodinal 1+50 for 12 mins, as per MDC (Svema FN32). Poor results, grossly overexposed. Mind, the camera was in excellent condition, meter as well, no issues whatsoever from that part.

Second roll was shot at 25 ASA, as a second message from Astrum guys corrected the first one, saying that the film is actually more on the 25 side than the 32 one, and that shorter times need to be used, together with a higher dilution of Rodinal. Developed in Rodinal 1+25 for 6 mins, results were the same: heavy overexposure, with only a handful of frames barely scannable. Contrast is missing or barely noticed, by the way; sharp images, though.

This is a frame from the second roll, almost the only one which is worth showing.



Today I processed the third roll, and I thought to average the data I had... so, Rodinal 1+50 for 6.5 mins, and the results were the same. Arghh.

I am wondering if this film is indeed 25-32 ASA, for this sort of overexposure would occur in only a very few situations, such as film way more sensitive than said ASA, camera faulty, developer going south, that sort of stuff. Apart from the first, (which is unknown data to me at this time), none of latter occurred, so I am wondering what the heck happens.

Any advice from the more knowledgeable fellow members here, please? Than you !

 

[Brian Moore]

Julian my first thought was to consult the Massive Development Chart but you've done that. Then I went to the Film Photography Project store to see if they sell the Micrat along with their other Svema film. My thought was that if they do then a question or two directed to Michael Raso (who runs that project) might be worthwhile. Mike is a very approachable fellow, and although I'm not sure he himself would have an answer, maybe someone among his group of contacts would. Anyway, Micrat is not shown on his site. (Still might be worth asking.) I also went to Freestyle Photographic's site. They're in Los Angeles and good folks, but they don't sell the Micrat. Then I went to Flickr and found that in one of the Svema groups there is a "sticky" thread for developing Svema film. There's not much there at the moment and, at glance, I didn't see anything related to the Micrat you're using. However, might be worth asking the question there. Below is the link. (Coincidentally the admin for this group is Michael Raso.) Perhaps you've considered this. Nevertheless I am hopeful it leads to an answer.

Svema Films

A group for the discussion and showcase of color and BW films made by Svema and Tasma. Svema films are distributed in the United States by The Film Photography Project. filmphotographyproject.com/

www.flickr.com

 

[Julian Tanase]

Brian, thank you so much for all the effort you put towards sorting this issue, really really appreciated. I will get in touch with Mr. Raso and have a chat on how/if he can shed light onto this subject of Micrat films. Hopefully, with the help of the FPP group, I'll get some insights.

Again, really helpful and I am in your debt!

 

[Brian Moore]

Brian, thank you so much for all the effort you put towards sorting this issue, really really appreciated. I will get in touch with Mr. Raso and have a chat on how/if he can shed light onto this subject of Micrat films. Hopefully, with the help of the FPP group, I'll get some insights.

Again, really helpful and I am in your debt!

It only took me a few minutes, Julian and I enjoyed the search.

 

[Julian Tanase]

Well, from what I gather so far, this film is not what the Astrum people told me it was. Its sensitivity appears to be 3 ASA, not 25/32. This would explain some of the issues, but not all, especially not the gross overexposure. Correct me if I'm wrong here, but I would have thought that shooting a 3ASA film metered at 25 would result in a very heavy underexposure, not the other way round, as the film comes out overexposed not underexposed.

Of course, it could be that Astrum Ukraine guys either mis-rolled or mis-labelled this film. For this film can be anything but what they say it is.

 

[Brian Moore]

3ASA film metered at 25 would result in a very heavy underexposure

That's what I'd expect, too.

 

[Rob MacKillop]

This thread is an example of this forum at its best.

 

[Chris Bennett]

I would develop it with Rodinal at 1:100 for 1 hour. 30 seconds agitation at the start and 10 seconds at 30 minutes. No more, no less. This semi stand development is what I use for any film which are unknown quantities or if they may be old or badly stored.

 

[Pete Askew]

For something that is apparently hight under-exposed it really exhibits very high contrast. Could it be a reprographic emulsion?

 

[Julian Tanase]

No idea, Pete. Could be, although what I believe is that they are repackaging a certain emulsion under the wrong sensitivity label.

I am going to test this film once again, only this time at different ISO values and test it strip by strip. If I am right, the right exposure will be somewhere between 250-400. Not certain about this, but I expect it.

Alternatively, yes, it could be a very very low ISO, but why it behaves like it does...I haven't the foggiest. I seen this just once before, with Azopan Dokument microfilm, where all the frames were almost black, with very little contrast. And expired, on the top of everything else.

Once I get back from holidays, I'll run the test and get back with results.

 

[Murray Leshner]

So the name Micrat might not be worth theorizing about, regarding its purpose, based on the dubious reliability of other info provided, and it probably not being what they imagined it to be.

But I did ponder whether it could be a microfilm/microfiche type of film. I can't remember the typical ISO of such films, but remember a film called Bluefire Police that I think came in 35mm. It was supposedly repurposed from microfilm with an at-one-time patented developer ratio that 'tamed' the high contrast nature of the film. It supposedly had nearly non-existent grain.

There was talk of 120 rolls that dragged on & on & I don't think ever materialized. I thought a non-perforated variety of 35mm existed, which seems inconvenient for most 35mm cameras. If it did exist it might have been because the redistributor couldn't/didn't figure out how to punch it. I talked a sales rep into considering selling a roll of 5" Agfa Copex to a forum group for experiments on continue developer, with the hopes of a group buy. He decided to donate a roll & I was the recipient. I hadn't figured out a way to slit film in the dark and keep all fingers so I sent it to another member. He made some assumption errors about actual 4x5 film size and how hard it was to cut with scissors! He shipped it back to me along with some clumsily cut "4x5"-ish sheets in film box. I had given him a recommended recipe but it was not needed. He 'winged' his own and was not happy with the results, admitting he just took a guess at something.

Anyway, I downloaded a patent for the developer sold for Bluefire and some similar patents. One that really struck me as interesting was a scientific explanation of an idea behind substituting developer components in multi-component recipes aiming for super-additivity. It discussed substituting components and correcting the ratio of the combination. For example, if you didn't have, or want to use, Metol along with phenidone and another material, you could rebalance the proportions. It has been decades since chemistry classes for me, but I interpreted it as something skin to mole fractions or concentration theory. I had scrawled some numbers for a recipe on the back of one page, seeking to avoid Metol. I think I was scheming phenidone, vitamin C and acetaminophen/paracetamol (or whatever it's called in Europe) with recalculated proportions based on this 'activity' coefficient.

I think the patents are in a box labeled 'photo stuff' in my basement. I knew where it was when I was sorting printed downloads. I had three large cartons for photo, music and electronics. Hard to lose things that large, or so I thought.

If I can materialize it, I will share. Otherwise, you may dismiss it as more hallucinations.

Murray Leshner

 

[Julian Tanase]

Murray, probably you are onto something here, as I personally believe this is some sort of technical or special purpose film. Not of the quality of the Kodak's Tech Pan of old, but along those lines if I am not wrong.

I plan to shoot another roll and have it processed in low contrast Rollei RLC. We'll see what we'll see, I guess.

Thank you !

 

[Murray Leshner]

I will learn from your efforts. I am easily distracted so I rely on the discoveries others complete!

 

[Geoff Chaplin]

No idea but I suggest trying Rodinal 200:1, 2hr stand dev., 20 inversions at the start 16-20deg. Blame me if it all goes wrong.

 

[Julian Tanase]

Never did this dilution ...my thinnest one was Rodinal 1/100, 60 mins, stand.

Good results with 1/200?

 

[Murray Leshner]

OK, I may still be onto something, or way off something.

I didn't find my box with the developer patents & my scribbled ratio notes, nor have I found the H&W Control Developer patent, but I found a Phototrio post that discusses some alternative films including Agfa Copex and the alleged formula for H&W Control Developer, described as a phenidone-based low contrast developer.

H&W Control developer recipe?

I've seen several old references for a film/ developer combination for H&W Control. I think the film was microfilm. It was to have excellent resolution/ edges in the film. Any information, reference, archive? Thanks, Steve

www.photo.net

I also saw a Reddit post about someone's Grandpa patenting that developer, with a photo of his 'scary darkroom chemical cabinet'. I didn't pursue that,bas I have lost patience with the Reddit experience.

Murray

 

[Geoff Chaplin]

Never did this dilution ...my thinnest one was Rodinal 1/100, 60 mins, stand.

Good results with 1/200?

200 and 400:1 both worked well. I normally do 100:1 but given the problems you had with high dilution my guess is a very weak one might be better.

 

[Julian Tanase]

Geoff, I believe I will try one of these dilutions. I do have one such film already in my Voigtlander Vito CLR, loaded some time ago. Haven't been willing to continue shooting it, for lack of passion regarding this emulsion. But now is a good opportunity, I guess

Thank you !

 

[Geoff Chaplin]

Geoff, I believe I will try one of these dilutions. I do have one such film already in my Voigtlander Vito CLR, loaded some time ago. Haven't been willing to continue shooting it, for lack of passion regarding this emulsion. But now is a good opportunity, I guess

Thank you !

Let me know (politely if its crap) how it works out!

 

[Julian Tanase]

That I'll do, Geoff, of course. Thank you !