Effective use of expired film.

[Homebrewmess]

Hi everyone,

I come to you today because my film enlarger came with a tonne of Ilford FP4 125 from 198X (the label is cut off before the exact year), I have been bulk loading it and reusing cassettes almost the entire time I have been shooting film. I often get decent photos from it but they aren't stellar no matter what I do, especially when compared to brand new FP4. I often lose my mid-tones a lot by the end of development. I am currently playing with development times at the moment and am taking note of my results. But I feel like maybe its not just the development end of things that is making me lose my detail. So I was wondering if anyone had any advice for how to get more out of this film. beyond some special film I buy for specific uses I try to save money by using this stuff. does anyone have any advice on how to get better performance out of these negatives? (I will try to get examples of my negs up soon)

 

[MattKing]

Is it the current version - FP4+ - or is it the previous film, FP4?
And yes, please share backlit digital photos of the negatives themselves - something like the ones shown in this resource: https://www.photrio.com/forum/resou...nsparencies-for-troubleshooting-purposes.461/
It would help if you could share with us the exposure information and development information that corresponds with the negatives you share.
Finally, here is a resource that might help you assess the negatives you have: https://www.ephotozine.com/article/assessing-negatives-4682

 

[Homebrewmess]

Is it the current version - FP4+ - or is it the previous film, FP4?
And yes, please share backlit digital photos of the negatives themselves - something like the ones shown in this resource: https://www.photrio.com/forum/resou...nsparencies-for-troubleshooting-purposes.461/
It would help if you could share with us the exposure information and development information that corresponds with the negatives you share.
Finally, here is a resource that might help you assess the negatives you have: https://www.ephotozine.com/article/assessing-negatives-4682

Its the previous fp4, for a shoot to properly understand what I was working with I got some modern FP4+ to shoot the same pictures with the same lighting and settings. It was the first time I really paid attention to that stuff. And right now when that would actually be important, I am embarrassed to admit this but I misplaced said card I took my notes on. I will continue to search for it in hopes I kept it, and didn't absentmindedly banish it to the recycling.

Anywho forgive the makeshift Backlight set up, here are the negs. they have some splotching because I hadn't quite mastered loading my reels yet. They aren't perfect copies because there was time in-between and whatnot but I hope it helps. They were developed at the same time in the same tank as well

 

[Wolfram Malukker]

Your film is fogged-overexpose by some amount, and you'll have to deal with that extra density in your scans/prints. You could try a restrainer in development but I would try overexposing first.

Instead of shooting it at 125ISO, I'd start at 80ISO, and may try 64ISO.

 

[Craig]

There is a lot of base fog there, that may not be salvageable.

 

[koraks]

Your film is fogged-overexpose by some amount, and you'll have to deal with that extra density in your scans/prints.

It's not just that, though. The fog will also compress anything happening in the toe of the curve, which is now of course shifted upward by several stops. What remains is a very non-linear film with a low dynamic range.

@Homebrewmess that film is toast; you're wasting your time with it IMO.

 

[Bill Burk]

Your film is fogged-overexpose by some amount, and you'll have to deal with that extra density in your scans/prints. You could try a restrainer in development but I would try overexposing first.

Instead of shooting it at 125ISO, I'd start at 80ISO, and may try 64ISO.

It’s fog for sure, may even need more exposure than that, 25 might work. Develop longer. Expect wildly grainy results. @koraks is not wrong. But if you want wild results you’ll get it.

 

[Agulliver]

That is an unfortunately high level of fog, especially for FP4+ which is usually very robust.

I have to say I'd relegate this film to testing cameras. Or for teaching people how to load cameras and developing reels. It's not likely to give consistent images.

 

[Pioneer]

Thanks for reminding me. I have some film like that. Heavy fog and really inconsistent results. Mine needed lots of sun and lots of time in the developer. I used to just let it sit in the developer for an hour or so.

It has been awhile since I played with it. I might roll up a roll or two if I can find it again. I used to shoot a roll when I was bored. Sometimes something interesting popped up. Most of the time I didn't expect much of anything. That is usually what I ended up with. NEVER use it for anything important!! It is play film.

 

[retina_restoration]

It's not just that, though. The fog will also compress anything happening in the toe of the curve, which is now of course shifted upward by several stops. What remains is a very non-linear film with a low dynamic range.

@Homebrewmess that film is toast; you're wasting your time with it IMO.

I agree. That film is far too compromised to be worth investing your time and energy in.

 

[Homebrewmess]

It's not just that, though. The fog will also compress anything happening in the toe of the curve, which is now of course shifted upward by several stops. What remains is a very non-linear film with a low dynamic range.

@Homebrewmess that film is toast; you're wasting your time with it IMO.

I was worried this was the case, its a part of why I was asking. Not to be a downer but finances are tight so I wanted to get the most out of that film if I could. But its pretty unanimous that its cooked, When I have the time i'll shoot a cassette of like 12 at 25 and show the results, that might help with the verdict.

I imagine that its hard to improve as a photography when your film is old and foggy like this, and its probably a better use of chemical to get new film. so I understand it being a waste

 

[MattKing]

Just for fun and a bit of useful comparison, develop a roll of film that hasn't been through the camera, using a developer and a time appropriate for FP4 - not FP4+ (assuming that there are differences). Then share the results here.
There are a few here on Photrio who probably have those FP4 developer and development time combinations at hand - @Ian Grant comes to mind .
If nothing else, you have lots of film on hand to practice your reel loading with!

 

[AnselMortensen]

I concur with Pioneer's response above...
Experiment with it, play around with it, don't expect much... it's probably well past the usable point, but ya never know.

 

[koraks]

I imagine that its hard to improve as a photography when your film is old and foggy like this, and its probably a better use of chemical to get new film. so I understand it being a waste

Yes, that's a good summary I think,
You could of course use the film, but the results will remain hit & miss and disappointing much of the time. You will likely find more satisfaction in any reasonably fresh budget-friendly film.

 

[Ian Grant]

There are a few here on Photrio who probably have those FP4 developer and development time combinations at hand - @Ian Grant comes to mind .
If nothing else, you have lots of film on hand to practice your reel loading with!

When I started serious photography in 1968 FP4 had just been release, I was rather strapped for cash, still at school, and while I shot FP4 & HP5, I often bought bulk rolls of ex-Government/Military FP3 40/- (£2) 100ft.

I shot only FP4 after leaving school, until around 1987, I've shot or rather bought 2 rolls of 35mm since then. I said bought as it was for another photographer to shoot me, shooting LF, for a magazine article.

In real terms dev times for FP3, FP4, and FP4+, are the same, for professional use most shoot/shot FP4 at 100 or 80 EI developed in ID-11.

With film with a high base fog, increase exposure and maybe 20% extra development. It's worked for me with some HP5

Ian

 

[retina_restoration]

With film with a high base fog, increase exposure and maybe 20% extra development. It's worked for me with some HP5

Ian

And consider adding some benzotriazole to the developer to restrain the fog. You'll have to increase development time by 20% or more to compensate.
Although I have no personal experience with the technique, I know some have had success with hours long development in a refrigerator, to suppress the fog. The technique has undoubtedly been documented somewhere online.

 

[Cholentpot]

Get a 250 exposure back and a motordrive. Make a movie.

Get a lomokino. Make a grainy movie.

 

[Agulliver]

If the cost of the chemicals isn't a worry, then consider experimenting with it. Or if you have access to a Lomokino then the idea above is potentially fun. But that level of fog really isn't going to lend itself to negatives that are even consistently OK. It's a shame because I've shot FP4 that was something like 40 years expired and it was better than the stuff you have. But as always with expired film, storage conditions vary.

 

[loccdor]

I almost never get good results from expired film from the 80s or earlier. One exception I have heard but not tried myself is Verichrome Pan.

If you want to save money, I'd stick to slow B&W films from 2000 or later - or use fresh Kentmere/Fomapan. You're in Alberta, Flic Film sells rebranded Foma.

 

[Sirius Glass]

Welcome to Photrio!

 

[brbo]

Effective use of expired film is selling it on eBay.

 

[Pioneer]

Effective use of expired film is selling it on eBay.

Oh No! Don't do that, I might buy it!!

 

[Don_ih]

Often, the outside of bulk rolls is worse than the inside - so pull off a few layers and check what you get a bit deeper in.

Also, avoid metol-based developers (like D76). For some reason, they tend to boost base fog. Developers that use phenidone and benzotriazole tend to build less fog.

Use it and learn what to expect. If you know that, you can use the film to your advantage. Fogged film may be better for higher contrast scenes, for instance (just like high contrast film is best for low-contrast scenes).

 

[benderscameracorner]

Best use of expired film - other than testing newly acquired cameras - is to just shove it in a point and shoot, accept the results won't be perfect and fire away like it's a phone camera to capture the kind of events/things you wouldn't normally "waste" film on.

For some unholy reason I've never been without rolls upon rolls of expired Tri-X in my life for the past three years. Every time I finally shoot it all, more just magics its way back into my fridge.... I was given a couple of dozen rolls (along with a heap of much more interesting stuff) with a camera purchase, then I found another half dozen rolls with my grandfather's gear after he passed, and most recently a $15 bargain buy bulk loader came loaded with, you guessed it, more freakin' Tri-X. I'm still trying to get through all of that!

Anyway, other than the asbeforementioned rolls for testing out cameras... short rolls off a bulk loader are great for this... obviously finer exposure assessments can be tough with long expired film, but they will reveal if shutter curtains are dragging or failing to fire at all at certain speeds... I just throw mine in a mid 1990s Minolta P&S (Riva Zoom 70, lovely and compact, and very quick to use) and record events like skiing, trail running and our Search and Rescue training sessions where bringing a "good" film camera normally makes no practical sense.

The results are crunchy, grainy, contrasty AF and usually require a heavier-than-usual hand in Lightroom but they have character and definitely feel different and "more special" than what you'd usually get running consumer grade colour film in a point and shoot. My non-film-photographer friends absolutely love them. I even flick on the date stamp for extra nostalgia/stupidity

 

[Wolfram Malukker]

That film isn't too far gone.

This is 1991 Plus X Pan, shot at 80ISO, and developed for the standard developing time in D76. Next to it are some fresh FP4+ unexposed leaders to show how it compares to the cleared base of FP4+...that's just the film I had handy to compare to.

Now, here are my favorite images from that roll of film:

So, just because it has a lot of base fog, doesn't mean you can't get good images.

Overexpose. Start at 80, if that doesn't get you where you want, go to 64 or 40. If you can't get an image that you like by the time you get down to 25, then I'd consider junking it.