What exactly have I got here?

[Toyo]

Today I was given a bag containing photographic emulsions - various.
There are some glass plates wrapped in decaying black paper as well as these three boxes of ...........
The boxes are unopened but in a sad state.
The two larger are Kodak Super XX and the smaller is unknown Kodak ????.
The larger are of full plate size and the smaller half plate.
What is in the boxes - film? glass plates?
Any help appreciated
T

[xkaes]

Parakeet cage liners

[Toyo]

OK, I have examined one of the other boxes that was opened and it did indeed contain Super XX on glass plates.
The plates were stuck together inside their decaying paper wrappers so there might be little hope for the those in the unopened boxes as they seem to be from the same vintage.
Thanks to all
Tom

[mdarnton]

Boxes say "Plates", so I'm guessing . . . . . plates?

[Jim Jones]

Perhaps the only practical use for these is to strip off the present emulsion and apply new emulsion. Some people still do this, much like it was done 150 years ago.

[Mark Sampson]

Kodak changed its graphic design on the boxes in 1972, and that style was current from c.1940. Not that it makes any difference; the plates inside must be completely fogged by time (even if you had a camera and holders to take them), and the boxes are too crusty for a collector of Kodak ephemera (of which there are a few). Oh well.

[LabRat]

Yea, probably fogged by now, and the disintegrating box probably means that also the inner wrapping inside is also crumbling, so probably not clean, and box might have had moisture damage, so maybe inside too... I have unpacked several old gel filters (from the 50's???) that were very stuck to the packing liner...

Back when flexible backed films were introduced in the 19th century, Eastman had a tough time convincing all pro photographers that it was OK to use the new film rather than what was considered superior glass plates, and as I understand, many still used these well into the 20th century, my guess for a portrait or commercial photographer as it was different to retouch (and old habits die hard, sometimes)... Astrophotographers continued to use them as they would not buckle during very long exposures, and images were on a stable backing...

If you notice many early film holders, they would be made to hold a plate, but also have an adapter sheath to hold film so they could hold "traditional" plates, so inexpensive to try out the new films, but one could switch back... (Little did they know at the time what would happen to all of those nitrate backed films in the future...) :-0

But if you do have any plate holders, why not give it a try at a very low EI, and see if the base fog is not too great... (You might be able to enlarge on them to make a positive, too...) Develop a plate in a tray with emulsion up... Might be able to scan if an image can be seen... Might have a "primitive" look (if any)... Maybe you can "doodle" on them with retouching leads if any image, or strip emulsion with hot water and bleach, re-coat with plain gelatin, then doodle or make an emulsion as a project...

Steve K

[goamules]

I hear the "probably fogged by now" refrain a lot. And I contrast it with the posts of people who find old cameras with undeveloped film, who then develop passable pictures. I'd shoot a couple and see.

[Toyo]

Many thanks everyone for the responses - they are valued.
I was speaking to a friend last night and he thinks he can source a camera that takes glass plates this size.
We are looking towards having some fun with these old plates anyway.
Tom

[Pere Casals]

Many thanks everyone for the responses - they are valued.
I was speaking to a friend last night and he thinks he can source a camera that takes glass plates this size.
We are looking towards having some fun with these old plates anyway.
Tom

Let me suggest another way, use it as it was print paper to obtain positive slides.