Allowable time for keeping undeveloped film after exposure

[StoneNYC]

Dear All,

Good photographic practise dictates that you should process all films as soon after exposing as possible to obtain optimum results, in addition they should also not be left 'in camera'.

In saying that.......modern monochrome films have outstanding LIS ( Latent Image Stability ) but ALL films ( and papers as well ) without exception, are subject to latent image regression.

As I have stated, ILFORD PAN F + is an outstanding film with unique attributes and a fine film for portraiture and where minimal grain and excellent sharpness are required, but its LIS is a compromise performance area whereby we DO recommend PAN F+ is processed within 3 months of exposure and our Technical Information sheets available on our website state that, as well as masses of other product related information for PAN F+.

LIS is also not directly related to the film speed emulsion or type, so where a photographic norm would be the faster the emulsion the more 'sensitive' it is may indeed be correct that does not corelate directly, in all cases, to its LIS characteristics.

A couple of other things LIS is not linear, it does not mean that LIS starts immediately and continues at the same rate.

Keeping film cold or frozen, can assist in lessening the affect of LIS but it cannot STOP the process. Heat and / or humidity can also accelerate the process, but not in all cases.

To put it in perspective, meaningful change in the density and characteristics of a modern monochrome negative due to LIS would not be readily noticable to 95% of photographers in 99% of cases...

As you will see in many aspects of photography and in hundreds of posts on APUG

Good technical results for the photographic negative and print can be ensured and enhanced by good practise.

Simon ILFORD Photo / HARMAN technology Limited :

Simon ILFORD Photo / HARMAN technology Limited :

Thanks Simon, the original OP was concerned about D3200, can you comment on that for him/her?

 

[Simon R Galley]

Stored correctly post exposure.....probably years not months.

Simon. ILFORD Photo / HARMAN technology Limited

 

[RalphLambrecht]

Stored correctly post exposure.....probably years not months.

Simon. ILFORD Photo / HARMAN technology Limited

Yes,and numerous eye-whitness accounts of several decades exist:still process as soon as you can for best and consistent resultswhistling:

 

[chip j]

Check out photostudio 13 in Stutgart. For 35mm and 120 black and white, they charge 3.63 per roll. I've had prints made by them, and their work is quite good!

My goodness! I used photostudio 13 back in 1967, when I was in the US Army in Germany. Glad they're still there.

 

[Colin DeWolfe]

How do you know that? It seems odd. 50 is a slow film and should be less prone to degradation. I routinely let 400 speed Tri-X and T-Max sit in my basement darkroom for weeks and weeks before processing and they all seem quite fine.

Of course, I've never done the sort of experiment needed to determine degradation. In that sort of experiment, you'd take two rolls of 50 and expose them identically. Process one immediately and then the other some period later. Compare the negatives.

This is from experience. Too many failures to mention. Example: I once left a few rolls from a trip to Prague... Also shot some TMX and expired APX 100. Processed them a year or so later. Almost no image on the PAN F, and what was there was mottled. The Kodak and TMAX were fine. Did a trip to Antarctica last year. It took about a month from exposure until I got to a place I could develop them. Everything came out fine except the PAN F. This had me worried I was doing something with development. I went out and shot a roll and processed it that day. Fine. Perfect negatives. In April I went to Tibet and Chine for 2 weeks. Shot a roll at the beginning. Weak and mottled. The roll I shot at the end of the trip came out fine, and they were both in the same tank at the same time. I've seen it enough to be leery of it.

I love the film when it works, nice texture and grain. But Given the choice between my dwindling supply of APX 25, or Pan F, I know which I'll be choosing.

 

[StoneNYC]

This is from experience. Too many failures to mention. Example: I once left a few rolls from a trip to Prague... Also shot some TMX and expired APX 100. Processed them a year or so later. Almost no image on the PAN F, and what was there was mottled. The Kodak and TMAX were fine. Did a trip to Antarctica last year. It took about a month from exposure until I got to a place I could develop them. Everything came out fine except the PAN F. This had me worried I was doing something with development. I went out and shot a roll and processed it that day. Fine. Perfect negatives. In April I went to Tibet and Chine for 2 weeks. Shot a roll at the beginning. Weak and mottled. The roll I shot at the end of the trip came out fine, and they were both in the same tank at the same time. I've seen it enough to be leery of it.

I love the film when it works, nice texture and grain. But Given the choice between my dwindling supply of APX 25, or Pan F, I know which I'll be choosing.

That's quite extreme... I've gone over 3 months easy before developing it with no issues. I DO refrigerate it though...

I know it's prone to latent image failure but 1-2 weeks doesn't make any sense at all. Are you sure you didn't forget to change the setting on your camera after using a roll of Tmax400? And shot the roll at 400? That seems more likely... 2 weeks is way too short a time to have such drastic differences in exposures...

Well anyway just saying it seems extreme that's all.