• Welcome to Photrio!
    Registration is fast and free. Join today to unlock search, see fewer ads, and access all forum features.
    Click here to sign up

Curious - how long can exposed film be left undeveloped?

Donald Qualls said:
The fog, however, affects the effective speed; it limits how far down in the shadows you can see details. That's the real cause (IMO) of the speed loss we see in very old unexposed film, too -- just takes more light to get above the base + fog.
Click to expand...

I have Tri-X ortho from around 1970 that has very little fog but is now around iso25. My experience is faster films slow down faster even if the base fog doesn't come up that high.
 
Don Heisz said:
Tri-X ortho from around 1970 that has very little fog but is now around iso25.
Click to expand...

Hmm. Good to know, I've got an unopened box of that (4x5). Still likely to be fun...
 
MattKing said:
Outside of Pan F+, I would say that unless you were thinking about interplanetary travel, I wouldn't be overly concerned about the time frames involved.
Damage due to storage and handling issues are of much greater concern.
Click to expand...

Now you're making me think about cosmic rays....
 
MattKing said:
...unless you were thinking about interplanetary travel, I wouldn't be overly concerned about the time frames involved.
Click to expand...

Hmm, but if you were traveling near the speed of light and took your film with you, it would age much slower relative to film on earth.

I knew that the special theory of relativity would finally come in handy one day
 
Huss said:
Now you're making me think about cosmic rays....
Click to expand...

I'm sure that where you hang out, there are lots of places to get tinfoil hats
 
logan2z said:
Hmm, but if you were traveling near the speed of light and took your film with you, it would age much slower relative to film on earth.

I knew that the special theory of relativity would finally come in handy one day
Click to expand...

I always enjoy adding Michelson-Morley into a discussion, just to see what happens.
 
MattKing said:
I always enjoy adding Michelson-Morley into a discussion, just to see what happens.
Click to expand...

My experience is that they don't seem to care what direction the wind blows, but they always interfere.
 

Great shot. Well worth having even if it looks like this. Reminds me of similar pix I have of myself back in the mid-70's.
 
Apart from PanF+, underexposed film (for pushing) should be developed within days too, for best results.
 
Here's an example of Kodak Verichrome type 127 with the process-before date of November 1946. Developed in April 2022 in HC-110 dilution B at 7 degrees Celsius for 10 minutes. I did a strip test and aimed for lower density but the negatives are still pretty dense due to fog.

I would not recommend storing unprocessed film for more than 50 years.
 

Attachments

  • Verichrome-Nov-1946.jpeg
    69.5 KB · Views: 116
I shot some rolls of Efke 25 over a month ago and another 1 over 1 week ago. I haven't gotten around to getting them developed yet. Last week, I just mixed up a new batch of Xtol, so maybe Sunday I'll get to it. I don't imagine the Efke rolls will be bad in any way.
 

You'll be find, Scott. My experience is with the sheet film version. I developed some that were (embarrassed to say) "several" months old after exposure, and they were fine.
 
Juan Valdenebro said:
Apart from PanF+, underexposed film (for pushing) should be developed within days too, for best results.
Click to expand...

What is it about underexposed film that means it should be developed within days and how far does this extend into the realms of underexposure i.e. in terms of stops?

Thanks

pentaxuser
 
It's about the darkest tones (on paper): those receive -on negative- an amount of photons that's just a small fraction of the amount films are designed for, so those parts of the latent image have a tendency to fade quickly, in a few days...
Years ago I saw a test on it: a pushed roll shouldn't be done through several weeks.
Of course the zones of the negative where more light hit, won't suffer to the same degree.
 
pentaxuser said:
What is it about underexposed film that means it should be developed within days and how far does this extend into the realms of underexposure i.e. in terms of stops?
Click to expand...

Here's a test of latent image stability (by @Stephen Benskin ) in which film was developed ranging from 30 seconds up to 31 days after exposure, and the ISO of the film measured for each. Developing after a few hours produced an ISO of 78, but after 31 days the ISO had dropped to 65.
A surprise was that developing only 30 seconds after exposure yielded an ISO of 94, so it seems that much loss of latent image occurs soon after exposure, and then there's a slow loss after that.
 
Thanks for the link, albada.

Juan can you recall the test you saw and provide the link and was there any mention in the test you saw as to how the extent of underexposure affected the shadows ?

Thanks

pentaxuser
 
It is really quite straightforward. An under-exposed negative has less of a latent image, and that latent image has less information in the shadows. So when the delay results in the latent image starting to fade or become subsumed in fog, the shadow detail becomes less and less accessible. Less shadow detail = less speed.
 
pentaxuser said:
Thanks for the link, albada.

Juan can you recall the test you saw and provide the link and was there any mention in the test you saw as to how the extent of underexposure affected the shadows ?

Thanks

pentaxuser
Click to expand...

No idea where I read that...
But testing it isn't difficult.
Anyway, caring about PanF+ and pushing is good enough.
 
I recently happened onto an exposed roll of FP4 (not FP4+) in my dad's attic with a bunch of his other film stocks. He hasn't shot film since he switched to digital in the early 2000s, although he's still an active photographer and we go out shooting together regularly. I was just plundering the several pro-packs of TMX 100 he had stashed away, as it was his go-to when shooting his RB67.

The exposed roll had an old note on it from his sister asking him to develop it for her.

I put it through some Rodinal and hung it up to dry. When we did some quick scans, a few things became clear:
  1. The film had been shot through my dad's old Yashica Mat 124 (which I have now and still shoot a few times a year). It's the only 6x6 he ever owned.
  2. The exposure happened in '84 or '85, thereabouts. 7-8 years before I was born.
  3. Image quality was great. Not perfect, but very usable. I suppose there was a little fog, but shadow details were there and highlights were not blocked up.
  4. It had some lovely photos of family members who have since passed away, including my dad's parents.
I've heard that latent images degrade with time, but this FP4 had few problems after nearly 40 years. It was definitely stored in the fridge or freezer for the majority of that time, but at least the last several years were in an attic (although admittedly a climate-controlled one that never gets terribly hot). It makes me smile to think that every childhood memory I can dredge up, this roll of film was probably sitting in the freezer in the garage, waiting for its day in the soup.
 

It depends indeed. Speed and contrast will suffer over time. It depends on the film and also on storing conditions; the cooler the better. It also depends on the quality expect to get out of the negative; for the best quality develop as soon as possible; for low quality surveillance image, a few years may be acceptable.
 

lol, noted!
Great 'found' image. I assume you did not take it originally...
 
I think this thread is giving Pan F unnecessary bad press, as many people under develop this film by following inaccurate charts and then blame it on the film. Pan F is a wonderful film and I have had no problem with this film when developed in D76 at 1:1 for 14 minutes at 20C.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register