dried-out Polaroid PN55

[Christopher Nisperos]

I don't know if this is posted in the correct category, but here goes..

A friend just emailed me with a question I can't answer: Is there anything that can be done to "re-humidify" dried-out chemicals in old PN55 film?

Thanks,

Christopher

 

[Photo Engineer]

No Chris. Once the pod dries up, you can only use it for scrap. By that time, the emulsion is probably bad anyhow.

PE

 

[Christopher Nisperos]

No Chris. Once the pod dries up, you can only use it for scrap. By that time, the emulsion is probably bad anyhow.

PE

Thanks a million, Ron. I'll tell my soon-to-be-disappointed friend. Happy Thanksgiving, by the way.

Best,

Chris

 

[canuhead]

So trying to process in trad chemistry won't make a lick of difference either ?

 

[keithwms]

Snip the pod off and try developing it as you would panatomic x.

 

[Photo Engineer]

Thanks Chris for the wishes and I wish my answere could be otherwise.

Canu; The film portion is designed for image transfer and is backed by black carbon. The only one that can be used is the product that makes a B&W negative when peeled apart. In that case the negative can be developed and fixed just like normal film, but the results will be iffy. The one backed with carbon is totally opaque.

You can try to prepare a goo yourself, but again a really messy and iffy process. You have to expose, soak and laminate quickly to get any sort of image transfer.

The peel apart negative product is designed for high pH processing in the presence of silver nuclei allowing for the image to be transferred, that means the results will not be very good with normal developers. Also, the film and pod keeping are kinda in sync. This means that if the pod is bad, the film is likely bad as well.

PE

 

[tinyfailures]

I wouldn't bet on it but I know you can freeze PN55 and let it come back to room temperature so if your friend thinks it's a lost cause, why not just try leaving it in a humidified room for a few days? Or more simply, leave it in the bathroom and shower a few times. I wouldn't trust it for critical applications but it's worth a try. I suspect a portion of PN55 I acquired from ebay has this problem (or was press smeared) and I am going to try rehydrating it.

 

[Photo Engineer]

Tiny;

The pod has dried out due to age, and the developer has oxidized. The alkali has been chewed up by carbon dioxide in the air, so the final result will be very iffy, as I said above.

Freezing and thawing can burst the pod, as freezing causes the pot contents to swell. Polaroid recommends against it. It often depends on the temperature at which it is frozen. There is a big difference between being at 30F and -10 F. In fact, some of the pods will not freeze at 30F due to freezing point depression.

So, the entire thing is something that will have to be tested. From my POV, it is scrap, but I do wish all who want to try good luck.

PE

 

[tinyfailures]

I didn't realize there was a chemical conversion in development chemicals. I did understand that anything to cause this dehydration likely seriously damaged the film itself. Nevertheless, when I am free from final crit deadlines, I will see what I can do to revive this dead film/paper... probably just soaking the developer portion of the sheet and drying it before exposure.

 

[papagene]

...

... The peel apart negative product is designed for high pH processing in the presence of silver nuclei allowing for the image to be transferred, that means the results will not be very good with normal developers. Also, the film and pod keeping are kinda in sync. This means that if the pod is bad, the film is likely bad as well.

PE

Drats!!!!!

gene

 

[David A. Goldfarb]

I know there are people who develop the film side in normal B&W chemicals. There's no reason not to test it. If it works, it would be like having a film not unlike Panatomic-X in Readyloads.

 

[PHOTOTONE]

If I were going to try this, after removing the receiver sheet and misc. paper masks, I would cut away the pod, then do a water presoak of the negative for a couple of minutes before going into the developer. Polaroid Type 55 negative (parts) won't fit into standard film hangers, etc., so tray processing is the only way.

But if it were me (my opinion) I would just move on. Put my creativity and effort into conventional films. There are plenty of GOOD films left that can give wonderful results, and they fit common processing equipment.

 

[Photo Engineer]

The film is film. You do not have to soak it at all before exposure as one person seems to have suggested. It may just have gone bad, but otherwise it is just like old film..

The pod is the item that fails. It is the critical point here.

It contains Potassium Hydroxide, Carboxy Methyl Cellulose (Citrucel laxative analog to thicken and spread the goo), a developing agent, a restrainer and a silver halide solvent or nuclei to assist in the transfer depending on the film type. This mixture is subject to total decomposition if the pod seal is breached enough to allow it to dry down.

As I said, the kind of polaroid product that peels apart to give a print and a negative is the best to try here. Just shoot normally, develop by inspection and fix and wash hoping that you get good results. The type that just produces a print will never ever give a usable negative due to the heavy carbon backing.

PE

 

[JBrunner]

The film the OP is asking about is the positive/negative film, so he can have a go at seeing if the negative part is ok. If he's looking for instant results, he's SOL with the dried pods, but could look to the Fujiroid 4x5 pack film and holder. The holders are getting a premium right now, and if you want B&W you have to scare it up on the internet if you are outside of Japan.

 

[PHOTOTONE]

The film is film. You do not have to soak it at all before exposure as one person seems to have suggested.
PE

No, no no, I never said "soak before exposure" I recommended a water soak after exposure before the film goes into the developer, a standard procedure for sheet film, which I have found enhances the even-ness of developing with old out-of-date film.

 

[Photo Engineer]

I didn't realize there was a chemical conversion in development chemicals. I did understand that anything to cause this dehydration likely seriously damaged the film itself. Nevertheless, when I am free from final crit deadlines, I will see what I can do to revive this dead film/paper... probably just soaking the developer portion of the sheet and drying it before exposure.

This is the post I was referring to, not yours PHOTOTONE.

And yes, I understand that Polaroid PN55 gives both a Positive and a Negative. I've used it enough. I wanted to generalize this for all who read the thread. I also wanted to prevent those who bolted out of the gate to try anything with the products that just give prints. They won't work.

Also, my answer was mainly based on the generic shelf life of instant products overall, and the sometimes difficult proposition of using a regular process on the materials due to the way they are designed.

PE

 

[tinyfailures]

What would you use to develop the negative by inspection? Considering it's about ASA 25, would you choose a paper developer like D-72 1:1?

 

[David A. Goldfarb]

Why a paper developer? You could probably use recommendations for Panatomic-X and come pretty close. Fine grain films often do well in Rodinal. I'd try that.

 

[tinyfailures]

Is Rodinal the same as Pyrocat?

 

[David A. Goldfarb]

No, but if you have pyrocat on hand, you could try it, and it might be good.