[APML] Old and new RG film (how to tell the difference by Pat Freeman)

[Alan Voetsch <critter12952@yahoo.com>]

I found this post by Pat Freeman early this month (so
it won't be in the archives yet). If you click on the
link he provides, it will tell you how to tell the
difference between old and new. Thanks Pat.

Alan

--- Patrick Freeman <pfreeman@woh.rr.com> wrote:
> From: "Patrick Freeman" <pfreeman@woh.rr.com>
> To: <astro-photo@seds.org>
> Subject: RE: [APML] Kodak ROYAL 400
> Date: Tue, 3 Sep 2002 07:07:07 -0400
> 
> I had the opportunity to make some side-by-side test
> exposures with the
> "old" Royal Gold Select Series 400 and the "new"
> Royal Gold 400 over the
> holiday weekend.  The results were stark and
> graphic.  The "new" stuff
> is, unhypered anyway, useless now.  I put the
> results on my website,
> here's the link:
> 
>
http://www.geocities.com/freeman_patrick/royal_gold_400_comparison.htm
> 
>  
> 
> I also provide some additional details on how to
> distinguish between the
> two films when purchasing.
> 
>  
> 
> --- Pat Freeman
> 
>  
> 
>  
> 
>  
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-astro-photo@seds.org
> [mailto:owner-astro-photo@seds.org] On
> Behalf Of Leo S.
> Sent: Wednesday, August 21, 2002 17:07 PM
> To: astro-photo@seds.org
> Subject: Re: [APML] Kodak ROYAL 400
> 
>  
> 
> At 12:42 21/08/02 -0700, you wrote:
> 
> 
> 
> The Kodak data sheet lists Royal Gold, Select
> Series, and refer to it
> always
> as Royal Gold.  The way to tell for sure is after
> development, look at
> the
> edge of the film.  The designation for RG 400 reads:
> "RC400-3 KODAK" and
> also: "ROYAL 400-3".  Since the marking calls itself
> Royal 400, you
> might
> have some of the good old stuff.  Trust Kodak to
> make it confusing.
> 
> 
> Ok thanks for the info Don,ill shoot a roll,the next
> chance i get.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I haven't tested the new RG 400 yet, so I don't know
> how valuable the
> old
> film is.  
> 
> 
> I know if it is the old(good stuff) ill be kicking
> myself if i don't put
> it into "suspended animation" now ...i found a
> couple of rolls of K-25
> which had been sitting in the same fairly dark/cool
> place where the
> Royal 400 was a few weeks back and froze them... i
> just hope not too
> late!!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
>  In fact, hypering
> it made it lose sensitivity for long astrophotos.
> 
> 
> Exactly why i want it... with all this talk of films
> which perform well
> unhypered being ditched in favour of improved
> emulsions at the moment!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> My recommendation for long term storage of unexposed
> film is the
> refrigerator rather than the freezer.  That is the
> way most professional
> film is stored.  I don't think freezing hurts it,
> since there should be
> no
> water in it to freeze.  I do freeze my film after
> hypering it, but that
> is
> usually for short term use.
> 
> 
> I've always thought freezing was the best way...
> well that's what i have
> been led to believe anyway. Moisture shouldn't be an
> issue as films are
> packaged in their canisters in a moisture free
> environment,and providing
> they have not been opened and resealed,no moisture
> should be present to
> harm the film.
> 
> Storing at lower temperature in a freezer should
> also slow down any
> chemical changes in the emulsion more than if in a
> fridge at a higher
> temperature i would have thought also?
> 
> Are there any other issues which i am unaware of
> perhaps?
> 
> Leo
> 
> 


__________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
New DSL Internet Access from SBC & Yahoo!
http://sbc.yahoo.com

--  APML Archives at <http://astro.umsystem.edu/apml/>  ---
             Unsubscribe at <majordomo@seds.org>