Grey haired films....

[Seabee]

I bought a box of old film today... did not cost much and the seller said it had all been in the freezer since 1990.

Its a toss up... you don't want to be a cheapo... but at EUR1 a roll of 36 exp you have to give it a try.

Which film ages more gracefully? The fast or the slow?

Assuming they were NOT frozen all these years... which will probably give me a smile... which will bring a tear... and which will make me wish I had never seen the box?

30 rolls of Ilford HP5 Plus 400 (Exp 92), 10 rolls of Fuji Neopan 1600 (Exp 91) 10 rolls of Kodak Tmax400 (exp 91) 3 rolls of Kodak Tmax P3200 (exp 91) and 2 rolls of Ilford FP4 125 ( Exp 93)

I would be interested to hear opinions.

Thanks
Chris

 

[Barry S]

Fast film will fog first, so the 3200 speed stuff will probably be as bad as it gets. I find that most old black and white film is usable, even if not stored under ideal conditions. Slower, grainier, and a healthy dose of base fog--if it's really old, but usable. If your film was frozen it should be great except maybe for the high speed stuff.

 

[arealitystudios]

In my experience it is really hard to predict. There are so many things that could have (or could not have) happened to the film that your only choice is to try it. My advice, just use a very forgiving developer like D-76 and you will probably get something usable.

Keep in mind too, even if the film is slightly fogged or something like that, it isn't always a bad thing. On of my favoite shots I've ever done was a portrait with a four years expired roll of HP5 that was never kept in cold storage. The shot is rather grainy and very slightly fogged but I just tell people that was on purpose and everyone thinks I'm brilliant.

 

[Martin Aislabie]

I agree with Barry-S

Martin

 

[Seabee]

Hi,

here are some results...

(there was a url link here which no longer exists)