I need some feedback

I've been working with some FP4 that expired nine years ago to see if it is still usable. There is some base fog visible compared with negs from new film.
Attached is a detail of a scan of a straight print of a neg of a film test on 2006 FP4 developed in Rodinal for 20 min with initial agitation and again at 10 min. The print was done @ grade 1.5 for 14 sec. I am trying to find out if this film can still be used. The dark patch at the middle of the print metered at zone 3 while the murky woods at bottom right metered at zone 4. Although they were murky to the eye, I don't like the way they print.
Any advice is helpful
charlie

trying tto attach file

Maybe this time

In my experience, older slightly fogged films need to be shot at lower ISO and print with a bit more contrast than fresh films.

Dear Texas Rancher.....

Its very difficult to tell from any type of a scan.... and it is 9 years out of date so manufactured in 2002... but it honestly kind of looks OK to me... I am not a follower or proponent of the ZONE system, and without meaning to be controversial I don't like stand develop and I never got on 'personally' with RODINAL, which I know is a very good developer. But printing grade 1.5 ( with a bit of base fog ) seems like it would be a little 'flat' to me, but I like 'punchy' prints anyway my suggestion is test at Grade 2.5 and grade 3 and see if that helps.

Simon ILFORD Photo / HARMAN technology Limited :

Of course it depends upon what you mean by 'while the murky woods at bottom right metered at zone 4. Although they were murky to the eye, I don't like the way they print'.

Firstly, just because you placed the shadows on Zone IV does not mean that you need to print them that way.

It does not have anything to do with the age of the film but rather how you have chosen to print it.

For my taste, I find the whole print too light and lacking in depth and contrast.

Personally, I would print it more like this:



But whether that is more to your taste is another question.

If you like this version, I added a little contrast, made it overall darker (dodging the central shadow on the tree a little) and then darkened all the edges by 10%.

Best of luck finding your own solution.

David.
www.dsallen.de

Unless you are looking for some specific effect not possible with fresh materials it's not worth the time and money to fool around with expired films and papers.

hi texasrancher

expired films can sometimes be finicky
use a more energetic developer and less development time
( when i say more energetic i mean like dektol or ansco130 ... )
use them 1: 6for about 6 mins.
the less time in the developer the less time you will have fog developing,
you will get a little more contrast and the grain won't be too bad ( unlike what a lot of
people suggest with dektol and ansco130 it won't make large grain ) ...
if you like the effect ( or affect to some ) expired film offers by all means use it
don't use it for anything important until after you
figure out "what it is like " unless of course you are unhappy with your test results ...

good luck
john

ParkerSmithPhoto said:

Unless you are looking for some specific effect not possible with fresh materials it's not worth the time and money to fool around with expired films and papers.

Click to expand...

I agree with this. At least if consistent results are desired. I recently wanted to trade some Fuji Reala 120 color film that was perfect. I wanted Kodak Tri-X in return. Only one person I know wanted to trade, and he ended up giving me a few rolls of fresh film, and a slew of old expired film. He's a good friend of mine, but a lot more 'fly by the seat of his pants' than I am.
I tried using some of the film, but it drove me nuts trying to figure out exposure and dev time, so I ended up selling it.
I've gotten paid pretty handsomely for it over on FeeBay. So now I can purchase fresh film again. Peace of mind at last.

The trouble is that film changes with time. Fresh film has a set of characteristics. Old film changes by adding base fog, contrast is lowered, and grain is accentuated. It's like a completely different film all of a sudden. So it must almost be treated as such, with testing and trying to tailor it to how we like to print. That's work I try to avoid as much as I possibly can, because to me that is a waste of time.

But, if somebody really likes to experiment, or want some level of randomness in their results, expired film might be the coolest thing ever. And I am grateful to those people because they end up using all that old film that otherwise would be discarded. Good for them, especially if they're having fun with it.

Getting it in focus would help.

cliveh said:

Getting it in focus would help.

Click to expand...

it depends on what the person who made the photographs wanted to do.
front for back focusing allows the lens DOF to work in different ways ...
but the film will work the same no matter how the OP focused his camera

thanks for all the input

Hola everybody,
This has been such a learning experience. All I expected was advice as to whether I should 86 this film. I have 30 rolls of FP4 120 and my tests along with your help, tell me to just go ahead and shoot it.
charlie

You have little to lose.. Good luck.

TexasRancher said:

Hola everybody,
This has been such a learning experience. All I expected was advice as to whether I should 86 this film. I have 30 rolls of FP4 120 and my tests along with your help, tell me to just go ahead and shoot it.
charlie

Click to expand...

I shoot expired film all the time. Most of my Tri-X is at least 30+ years old. Once you test and establish what to do with it, you can get some decent and repeatable results. Shoot it.