Developing Expired Film

[fhovie]

I had always thought my darkroom was fairly well calibrated. I know my chemistries and I know what times should get me the density ranges I am looking for. I noticed a trend recently of what I thought was weak development. I thought maybe my chems were going bad and I started using a lot of VC paper at grade 4. So I got out the densitometer and started checking. My highlight densities are all where they should be at about 1.3. The base fog on the other hand was more like .4 and .5. So the top densities did not drift down but base fog is creeping up and the result is I am struggling for contrast.

I generally use a fair amount of film and I usually buy expired film (a few years expired) My normal roll film combo is TRI-X and Pyrocat-PC Glycol. I also do a lot of pushing of roll film also using TRI-X and PC-TEA at ASA1600. This combo has always been calibrated for a lot of base fog and I get a lot of contrast and density anyway. I generally use grade 1 filters to get a good print which. The base fog is high but there is lots of density to "print through"

These remarks are that my darkroom calibrated did not include a consideration for rising base fog from aging stocks of expired film. Now I know that film that I suspect will have high base fog will likely need 20% at least more time to increase the whole range to print through. Even at that, my highlight densities should be at 1.75 and base fog at .5 giving me my working range of 1.25. I do not believe that at this range, there will be a significant difference in the overall look of the print and I should be at my target DR for Grade 2. My original calibration was for a DR of 1.25 with a base fog of .15 and highlight densities of 1.4. I had not read anyone making observations or comments regarding this and was wondering if anyone else ran into this? Or am I the only cheapskate who uses mostly $2 a roll TRI-X.

 

[Jim Noel]

My experience with expired Tri-X ended several years ago, in fact my experience with all Tri-X ended not long after when I chose to switch films.
As I remember, Tri-X more than about 12 months out of date began to build base density rather quickly. Anything 2 years old or more was almost useless without the addition of benzotriazol. I kept this in various percentage solutions to be added to the developer.
Another solution was to use a reducer following development to reduce the base fog. This, in my mind, is more dangerous to use on a prized image.
Now all of my film is kept frozen until loaded in the holders, and I don't use Kodak films. It is not unusual to use a film 2+ years old w/o problems.

 

[PHOTOTONE]

You might try Kodak HC-110 developer. It is my developer of choice for LF, and it is known for being very clean working and minimizing age fog. Many people who develop "found" film in old cameras use this developer.

 

[Iwagoshi]

You might try Kodak HC-110 developer. It is my developer of choice for LF, and it is known for being very clean working and minimizing age fog. Many people who develop "found" film in old cameras use this developer.

PHOTOTONE; While cleaning out my photo-closet I "found" a half a brick of 1993 TMY400. What HC-110 formula do you recommend? Stronger or weaker? I'm using "B" at the moment.

Thanks,
Terry

 

[tac]

For the past year or so, I have been shooting 120 Ilford pan-f and fp4+ from '95, stored on a bookshelf. After some testing, I came up with a formula which gives beautiful results; I halve the asa, and process at 1.3x normal, with the addition of 0.3ml of a 1% benzotriazole solution in isopropyl alcohol, per 15oz developer (d76 1:1).