I enjoy working with interesting and odd films, and while we’re blessed with a tonne of modern options that are sharp and fine-grained, that wasn’t always the case. You often traded sharpness for increased grain to allow for faster films. And there are still some older stocks that represent that trade-off. I hadn’t even heard of Kodak Recording Film 2475 until a follower on Instagram messaged me about the film stock, wondering if I had ever shot the stock. I had not, and they graciously offered to send me some rolls. I expected to receive some bulk-loaded film but received factory-loaded cassettes instead. After finding a datasheet online, I learned that 2475 is a surveillance film designed to be exposed between ASA-1000 and ASA-4000, with an ideal speed of ASA-3200. However, the sheet also discussed that flash could be used for light photography when flash was either unavailable or not allowed. The sheet included developer times for Kodak DK-50 and Kodak HC-110. With this information in hand, I planned to expose the film between ASA-500 and ASA-1600, primarily due to the age of the film, and then use the average subject HC-110 Dil. B times, I calculated the D-76 and Diafine times and went with a stand-developed roll in Rodinal—special thanks to Michael Taylor for sending these rolls along for review.
A Note to Readers: This is a review of expired film, it should not be taken as what the film would have truly looked like when it was fresh. In fact, this is perhaps the hardest time I’ve had with expired black & white film. It tested my patience to no end and nearly broke it. Please read ahead with caution.
Film Specs
Manufacturer: Eastman-Kodak
Name: Recording Film 2745
Type: Panchromatic B&W Film
Film Base: Estar AH
Film Speed: ASA-1000, Latitude ASA-500 – ASA-4000
Formats Available: 135 (35mm)
Roll 01 – Kodak D-76
For the first roll through the tank, I went with an EI of ASA-1000 and calculated the development time to be nine minutes in the stock dilution. Of course, the entire roll was fogged up when I pulled the negatives out of the tank, but some latent images could be seen through the fog. The results were okay; these were the best of all three rolls from which I got images. The grain was not too bad, and the contrast was hard but decent. Plenty of grain ensured a sharp image, but the soft edges have more to do with the scanning process than how the film would have performed if factory fresh.
Roll 02 – Kodak HC-110
In this case, I went with the information straight from the datasheet, using Dilution B (1+31) and a time of nine minutes, and set the exposure to ASA-1000. Typically, I would go with a more dilute mix of HC-110, but I wanted to include at least one official time in this review. While I had high hopes for these, I was ultimately disappointed. These had the worst grain and yielded only a handful of decent images. The contrast was middle-ground in these, and the grain had that golf ball size, so the images were sharp. However, again, having that problem with the scanning did not get the best results. This roll could have been the best of the three if I had exposed this roll at a lower speed. But indoors, with the heavy expiration, it wasn’t the best.
Roll 03 – Rodinal
The results for the fourth and final roll are interesting, and I was not expecting to get anything from the roll period. Combining a course grain film with Rodinal may seem like a recipe for disaster, but I did a couple of things that I thought would help out; the first was exposing the roll at ASA-500, the second was using the stand-developing method with a one-hour time and a 1+100 dilution. Constant agitation for the first minute, then five gentle inversions at thirty minutes. When I pulled the negatives from the tank, I saw nothing but fog, which was enough fog to make Cape Breton Island jealous. But on holding them up to the light, I could see some latent images, so it wasn’t a total loss. What surprised me was how easily they scanned. Silverfast picked up the images, and with a bit of work, I got decent results. And these were weird; you have a lot of course golf-ball grain, which I expected. But then there is a strange contrast to them that gives off an abstract, ethereal vibe. This could work, but over-expose by another stop or two for far better results to cut through that fog. But in the end, I cannot recommend this combination due to the age of the film. Stick to stronger developers with a short development time.
Lowdown
Sadly, the roll I shot at ASA-1600 and developed in Diafine proved the worst. I should have shot it at a lower EI, so I could not pull any usable images due to age and insufficient development I did note that despite having that Estar-AH base, the film cupped like mad. And that cupping proved far more challenging to get rid of than I expected, which proved difficult with the stock negative holders for my Epson V700. While the Coolscan V ED would have helped, the base fog made it worthless. I ended up cutting and sleeving the negatives, then sandwiching them between two pieces of glass and putting them directly on the scanner. The scanning process proved difficult because of the base fog, but it was a bit of work to pull out some images using Silverfast and Photoshop, but it wasn’t easy. I also had to turn off any added sharping as it only exacerbated the course grain. Using a strong and fast developer to mitigate that base fog is the trick. Kodak 2475 is not a film for the faint of heart. You won’t get the clean results you’re used to with modern high-speed emulsions like Kodak Tmax P3200 and Ilford Delta 3200. As all the literature mentions, 2475 is not a fine-grained film; it has grain the size of golf balls and does not shy away from that fact. It certainly gives a unique look, and it is not one that I would actively pursue in my photography, mainly because of the availability of modern fast emulsions. If you do come across some rolls and want a taste of what grain used to be, by all means, pick some up. But know that even if the rolls are ‘freezer fresh’, they will still have a lot of base fog; you can always help reduce that by adding benzotriazole into your developer. A 2% solution is best, mixing 1g of benzotriazole with 50 mL of water at 60C. Once combined, add to a dropper bottle and six drops of the solution for every 500mL of developer. While I did expose this film at faster speeds, I would recommend exposing these rolls well below the listed box speed, most people shoot the rolls expired in the 1980s closer to ASA-100 and ASA-50, and with a bit of post processing getting those blacks back to where you expect from a surveillance film.
Further Reading
Don’t just take my word on Kodak 2475, you can check out the reviews by other awesome camera reviewers!
Raymond Parker Photography – Remembering Recording Film 2475