Although Polaroid produced (or re-marketed) a large number of 135 films (35 mm) that used the C-41 process, at first glance, this film does not seem an example. The edge codes in the Polaroid C-41 135 film listed here were HD2 100, HD2 200 and HD2 400 for ASA 100, 200 and 400 films, respectively.
This film shows an edge code of OF1 200-2 and an emulsion number of 400B.
The barcode on the bottom of the strip translates into binary 0110001-01011-010011100 or 49-11-156 decimal (the 21-digit barcodes in the film were three numbers using binary numbers 7-5-9 digits) The first six and the last four additional positions are start and end markers that are always the same. As of 2008, 49-11 was the code for Agfacolor Optima 200-2 Professional. However, the same number may have been used for another type of Agfa film before or after it was used for this particular film. A large amount of Polaroid 135 film was renamed as a product of Agfa.
This seems to be a & # 39; Polaroid OneFilm & # 39 ;.
Polaroid OneFilm was manufactured between 1989 and 1991. According to The Big Film Database, it was created by 3M for Polaroid. According to the database & # 39; Dexter & # 39 ;, it was done by Agfa-Gevaert. Both sources list your 6-digit DX code as 007953.
I remember ignoring him completely at that time, and apparently many others did too. There is not much information about it online. But there are some funny commercials on youTube!
OneFilm was also offered in the 110 and 126 format, as well as in the 135 (35 mm) format. Both 110 and 126 were popular "instamatic" formats with many cameras that had little or no user control. The focus was fixed and a moderately narrow aperture was used with such cameras designed for outdoor use with 100 or 200 speed film. A speed of 400 is recommended for indoor use, possibly with optional chemical bulbs.
The idea of a "universal printed film" was popular at the time. This article, titled Universal print film? and subtitled: Ektar 25, Super HG 400, Gold 200, Reala 100, Maxi 24 + 3 XRC 100. You are driving me crazy! Where is my Polaroid OneFilm? ran in the June 1989 edition of Popular photography.
He has fun willingly to delve into the idea of marketing a 200-color color negative film as "… suitable for man, the beast or the camera."
Going to the local supermarket to buy a roll of film, the hapless housewife faces a wall of movie boards full of blisters with no one in sight to lend a comprehensive hand and advice to "buy that".
The family man goes to Clador, K-mart or J.C. Penny where everything in the house is not edible. There he throws himself at the mercy of the person behind the movie counter, who may or may not know on which side his film is covered. Green Fuji, Agfa orange, Konica blue, Scotch black and Kodak yellow boxes: it is enough for a partner to throw away his camera and take a drawing pencil.
But now there is a ray of hope for all those stranded in the darkness of movie choice. Polaroid, which seeks to serve strangers, confuses and the store unable to catch up with all the brands, types and speeds of the films, proudly presents the answer to everyone's dreams: a "universal" color printing material "single emulsion.
The article compared the performance of Polaroid OneFilm with other popular 200-speed movies at that time. The full article, including the jump "continues on page 64" on page 28, can be read at the link above.
Despite the film's substrate color, Polaroid OneFilm was a fairly pedestrian example of a 200-speed color negative film that the C-41 process required for its development. It was a "true" 200-speed movie where most consumer-oriented movies at that time were a little faster than their rating to somehow protect the casual photographer from underexposure. The main distinguishing feature of OneFilm was in the way it was marketed to capture "no idea" images in a way that probably caused many photography enthusiasts to roll their eyes. On second thought, there is no probably About it When I saw some of those silly commercials, I was between the blank eyes back then.
Why is the color mask of this negative film 135 dark green instead of orange? Can anything be done to fix it?
From the above linked Popular photography Article:
According to Polaroid, optimal results are obtained by printing OneFilm
in the 3M / Scotch filter channel, although standard,
Let-the-lab-pick's blind tests – & # 39; em that we performed also gave good results
If your scanner has a default value for 3M / Scotch film, you can try to start from there. Since Agfa manufactured at least OneFilm, it would not hurt to try any Agfa color profile you may have available.
If one approaches the white balance a little more to the center, it becomes clear that the image was taken with a very mixed illumination or that the exposed film had a significant color change between the moment it was exposed and when it was sent by developing .
It is not so far-fetched that the film has also been influenced by exposure to lost X-rays, since the content of the example image shows things that one can find in a dental office. There are also all kinds of different light sources in dental offices. From fluorescent or incandescent overhead lighting (or a mixture of both) to bright light, dental examination and operational lights, there is a wide variety of light sources in most dental offices.
Another initial assumption when investigating this, based on the color of the backing of the film, was that it was one of three types of Polaroid instant slide film that was offered in 135 (35 mm) format in the 1980s and 1990s:
- PolaChrome instant color slide film
- PolaChrome HC instant color slide film
- PolaBlue Monochromatic Instant Sliding Film
Most likely, it would have been the first, PolaChrome. Since any remaining stock is very old, color changes due to the age / storage conditions of both the film and the development package are almost guaranteed. If the film was poorly processed using, for example, C-41, then it is not known how the colors have changed.
Each film comes with a development package that can be inserted into a small machine of & # 39; self-processing & # 39; with crank and developed by the user immediately after shooting.
This instructional video covers the slide film system & # 39; instant & # 39; fairly good.
Although it would be a very remote possibility, I wonder if any PolaChrome was encoded / marked and accidentally packaged as OneFilm. The laboratory that developed it would have had no way of knowing that it should not process it with C-41. Cross processing tends to produce magenta ← → green changes, as well as yellow ← → blue changes. Combined with very mixed lighting, possible exposure to X-rays and environmental conditions that vary greatly over a long period between exposure and development, there is no real way to predict how everything would change.