Ektar 25

[Kirks518]

Lots of threads/questions regarding Ektar 100, but I have a roll of unused Ektar 25 print film, expired somewhere in the late 80's/early 90's. I'm the original purchaser of the film, and for the most part, it has been keep in a refrigerator. What would be the suggested ways to shoot this? I also have a roll that I shot but never had developed. As I don't develop color at home, how should I ask for it be processed?

 

[dehk]

If it has been in a refrigerator, it's most likely it's 'ok', especially for a slower speed film.
If you're that worried you can +1 or +2 on exposing, It wouldn't hurt since it's C41, and develop normal.

 

[DREW WILEY]

Ektar 25 is long discontinued. Ektar 100 is quite different - also high resolution, but otherwise a much more versatile film with cleaner color,
provided you understand how it differs from traditional color neg films, and that you have to more careful to accurately expose it to begin with. Hard to say if your old film is still good or not. Just develop it and find out.

 

[StoneNYC]

The stuff that was already shot will most likely be slightly Solarized looking in the blacks(kinda green), unless it was refrigerated once shot. But it's slow so who knows. The un-shot roll, I would probably shoot it at EI12 but no slower, it's so slow to begin with it will probably have kept better than other films.

Both should be processed as normal.

 

[Photo Engineer]

Ektar 25 was not known for good keeping, even refrigerated, and so your results will be a coin toss. It may be good or bad. The bad often showed up as extremely bad grain and a smeared look to the image as well as the problems associated with general bad keeping such as fog.

PE

 

[Zedwardson]

Ektar 25 was not known for good keeping, even refrigerated, and so your results will be a coin toss. It may be good or bad. The bad often showed up as extremely bad grain and a smeared look to the image as well as the problems associated with general bad keeping such as fog.

PE

PE,

Did the Royal Gold line that replaced Ektar designed for a better shelf life? I know I used to shoot a lot of expired Royal Gold in 200 speed and I had a lot of nice results.

 

[Photo Engineer]

Yes, the Royal Gold (and any replacement for Ektar 25) was better for keeping. The poor keeping was due to a chemical feature that was present in the Ektar 25 that gave good grain and sharpness.

It was not until Ektar 100 that they solved the problems associated with those of the Ektar 25. Of course, this is a gross oversimplification but it is true that follow on products were better.

PE

 

[wblynch]

I'm sure glad Kodak produced Ektar 100 before all the 'bad things' happened.

We will probably never see such a film ever again. I feel lucky we got it.

 

[Zedwardson]

Yes, the Royal Gold (and any replacement for Ektar 25) was better for keeping. The poor keeping was due to a chemical feature that was present in the Ektar 25 that gave good grain and sharpness.

It was not until Ektar 100 that they solved the problems associated with those of the Ektar 25. Of course, this is a gross oversimplification but it is true that follow on products were better.

PE

Thanks PE,

I am a son of a chemical plant manager, but I know that if you where to go into detail I would have gotten lost really quickly.

 

[Vilk]

ah, a blast from the past! i loved it for those deep winter skies when i lived in italy in the late 80s

best of luck with the survivor. come back and post the results!

 

[Roger Cole]

I'm sure glad Kodak produced Ektar 100 before all the 'bad things' happened.

We will probably never see such a film ever again. I feel lucky we got it.

+1. It's a great film.

 

[DREW WILEY]

There's an old print in the lunchroom here printed from Ektar 25. Man, the 100 stuff is sooooooooooooooooooooo much better.

 

[Kirks518]

Thanks for that info. It'll be a while before I decide to throw it into a body, and then use it. When I do, I'll let you all know how it went.

 

[Roger Cole]

I've got a couple of rolls of 25 frozen too. I'm thinking of just throwing it out. Even if it were like-new the new stuff is better, there's no guarantee how it will work given the problems with storage that PE mentioned, and I'm just not one to shoot old film just because it may look unpredictably bad or odd.

 

[Zedwardson]

Roger, in that case you can send it to me, if push comes to shove I will develop it in black and white or such. Old film can be a lot of fun...

 

[Roger Cole]

I'll check and see - I know I have one roll, maybe two.

 

[StoneNYC]

I'll check and see - I know I have one roll, maybe two.

Oh oh! Me too! But I'll do it in color!

 

[Photo Engineer]

Just FYI, there was a long thread on Ektar 25 keeping on PN. Examples were posted. I just remembered this and IDK how long ago nor what key words to use. But, it is there for your edification.

I participated in that thread so my name should be associated with it.

PE

 

[benjiboy]

I think kodak claim that the new Ektar 100 has as fine a grain structure as the old Ektar 25

 

[Photo Engineer]

Better!

 

[Richard Man]

Is this a contest to get free unpredictable film? XD If so, I will develop it in E-6!!

 

[Alan Klein]

Ah. Ektar 25. No grain, practically.
https://www.flickr.com/photos/alanklein2000/tags/ektar/

 

[Roger Cole]

Roger, in that case you can send it to me, if push comes to shove I will develop it in black and white or such. Old film can be a lot of fun...

Oh oh! Me too! But I'll do it in color!

I just checked. I have two 24ex rolls. There may be another or two in the freezer compartment of my little dorm fridge; I didn't look there. The ones I know about are sealed, expiration 1/1995, and cold stored since new, some in refrigeration (and currently in the dorm sized film fridge) and sometimes frozen.

I'll send one roll to each of you if you PM me your address. (US only - I know Stone is in the US, dunno about Zedwardson.)