Found film, paper from 1977 - any good?

[Theo Sulphate]

In 1977 I decided to get out of southern California and move to Oregon. Packed away, and subsequently forgotten in several moves since then were two boxes of Plus-X bulk film and two boxes of 5x7 paper. The film and paper were inside a larger box with my easel, developing tank, funnels, and cups. For the last 39 years these boxes have been at room temperature, but in some years could've been at 80F for a few days per week for a few weeks per year.

One box of Plus-X is completely unopened; the other had been opened and used in 1977, but is still sealed in its can.

One box of Kodak RC is completely unopened; another box of a different brand had been opened.

I'm tempted to put just the unopened Plus-X in the refrigerator and also see what kind of results I can get with the other box of film and the paper. It's pretty old, though, so I'm wondering whether it might be any good at all.

 

[kreeger]

Film - I have found that film below ISO 400 will degrade less than above ISO 400. Chances are it's fine but the clear base will have some fog.
The only way to know is try it out and see for yourself..

 

[MattKing]

I'll bet the Plus-X will behave well.

And I wouldn't bet on the paper.

 

[Patrick Robert James]

RC paper I would just throw in the trash. It wasn't that good to begin with back in the 70s and it will surely be fogged beyond all recognition. The film I would bet would be quite useable and might still be pretty good. A little slow though, but if you use the right developer it should come out ok. I have found Rodinal to be a good developer for old film. Avoid staining developers.

 

[Toffle]

RC paper I would just throw in the trash. It wasn't that good to begin with back in the 70s and it will surely be fogged beyond all recognition.

For normal darkroom work I would agree with you, but paper this old can be very effective for lumen prints. I'm currently working my way through an ancient 250 sheet box of Ilford RC that gives stunning colourful results from otherwise unusable paper.

Cheers,
Tom

 

[Bob Carnie]

Send it to Ginette, I just saw her make a beautiful Lumen print with a 60 year old paper.

 

[paul ron]

Just shoot it. Ill bet its fine.

I had outdated 35mm bulk film I gave to my son, its expired in 1969 but still giving great results.

 

[RalphLambrecht]

In 1977 I decided to get out of southern California and move to Oregon. Packed away, and subsequently forgotten in several moves since then were two boxes of Plus-X bulk film and two boxes of 5x7 paper. The film and paper were inside a larger box with my easel, developing tank, funnels, and cups. For the last 39 years these boxes have been at room temperature, but in some years could've been at 80F for a few days per week for a few weeks per year.

One box of Plus-X is completely unopened; the other had been opened and used in 1977, but is still sealed in its can.

One box of Kodak RC is completely unopened; another box of a different brand had been opened.

I'm tempted to put just the unopened Plus-X in the refrigerator and also see what kind of results I can get with the other box of film and the paper. It's pretty old, though, so I'm wondering whether it might be any good at all.

Film and paper that old are unlikely to be perfect but the paper may be usable with exposure and contrast increases.

 

[bsdunek]

For normal darkroom work I would agree with you, but paper this old can be very effective for lumen prints. I'm currently working my way through an ancient 250 sheet box of Ilford RC that gives stunning colourful results from otherwise unusable paper.

Cheers,
Tom

Right, Tom! I'm currently working with some old Unicolor paper from the 70's. Makes the most wonderful Lumen prints ever. Never throw away old paper! As for the Plus-X, which used to be my favorite film, I'd say, try some and see what happens. I have a stash of Ilford FP4 (not +) that my brother gave me. It lived in Hawaii for many years in a broken refrigerator. I am getting good results - no fogging. I'm surprised but pleased.

 

[Helios 1984]

Post your results whenever you can

 

[removed account4]

just another in the chorus about the paper, it is usable, you just need to decide your use
regarding the film, some say add 1 fstop / 10 years to deal with speed loss..
you can also develop it in something like dektol or ansco 130. i'd process the film short and sweet
maybe 1:4 for 4 mins or 1:5 for 5 mins .. ( you can adjust it if you want ( 1:dilution for dilution minutes )
... i have heard of using stock dektol, "stand developed" for 3 mins )
no idea what your results might be, i just know i only use expired materials and use dektol and ansco 130 religiously and got good results

"your actual milaeage may vary"
john

good luck !

 

[Thomas Bertilsson]

I have used old FP4 that expired in 1980-something, and it came out largely like new film.
I also remember having some Plus-X that expired in 1977 that were completely fogged and useless, even when exposed at EI 12 and processed in low fog developers like HC-110.
And then yet again I had 100 rolls of old TMax 100 from some of the first batches of it ever sold, and it gave really wonderful results that was a little more grainy than brand new film, but since I like 400 speed film best that was actually welcome.

If you like tight control and don't like the game of 'chance', then buy new film and sell this to someone who likes to experiment. Chances are it will be fine, but chances are also it will not.

The paper could definitely be used for photograms, as mentioned earlier. Early Kodak RC paper is sometimes also very good for lith printing yielding interesting colors. For regular printing I very much doubt it will amount to anything other than frustration, unless you really welcome low contrast and gray highlights. You can play with bleach to remedy some of that if you don't mind experimenting, but for someone requiring more precise control it will with 99.9% certainty not be a good experience.

As John says above, it depends on your desired outcome, and how critical you are of 'acceptable print quality'. All of us here are on some kind of range on a scale of acceptable results. What one person calls 'perfectly fine', or 'never had a problem', could be awful to someone else.

 

[Theo Sulphate]

Thank you, everyone, for your responses.

I've decided to do a bit of everything mentioned. I'll try the Plus-X on a short roll, develop it, and experiment with how to best print it. I'll use the paper with good-density negatives as well.

If it looks like the paper might be more suited for lumen prints, I'll likely send it off as a gift.

 

[LAG]

...One box of Plus-X is completely unopened; the other had been opened and used in 1977, but is still sealed in its can.

One box of Kodak RC is completely unopened; another box of a different brand had been opened. ...

Excuse me Theo Sulphate

I would use film and paper, though performing "opened & unopened" same test previously, to analyse if the "good condition" needs to be treated differently.

 

[LAG]

...If it looks like the paper might be more suited for lumen prints, I'll likely send it off as a gift...

I am looking forward to taking part in the prize...