Instructions on how to hoard film

[Helinophoto]

BradS I tend to agree that most things can be taken totally out of proportion.

However, it seems that you are willing to fully ignore facts about physics and chemistry.
As temperature drop, atoms move slower, chemical reactions slow down and/or stop completely, depending on the temperature.

As we are dealing with chemicals here, it's very simple and logical to deduct that freezing something makes it last longer than cooling it.
- This is the reason why we keep beef and other foods deep-frozen and that frozen meat, in fact, can last several years when frozen.

The same applies to photographic materials and chemicals.

I suspect the reason why film is normally kept refrigerated in stores, is that they are supposed to be sold, maybe used quite quickly after purchase and that it is both more economical and practical for stores to have a fridge, rather than a freezer-system.

All frozen things become more brittle, frozen stuff takes longer to reach ambient temperatures and until they do, they are susceptible to accumulate condensation.
Naturally, there is then, an increased risk of ruining your materials, if you don't make sure to thaw it correctly and shielded from condensation, if I produced film, I would never recommend freezing, due to these increased risks. A recommendation would open up for complaints from customers, having their film ruined because of condensation-issues.

Also, films are normally meant to be used within the expiration-period, and one, as we know, don't have to cool the film at all for the film to be totally ok within this time-frame.

There is no question, based on articles and discussions I've found on the net, that freezing is better then cooling, if you are taking about storage way past the expiration date, but many films are very stable and can work fine, even if stored in ambient temperatures for years (as you mention).
Some of your films were fogged, but do you think they would have been, if they had been frozen from the get-go?

Here are Kodak warm-up times for Ektar, for some reason, they start at -18C in their table, but still recommends a long-term storage temperature at between 2 and 13 degrees (fridge)
http://www.kodak.com/global/en/professional/support/techPubs/e4046/e4046.pdf

 

[rbultman]

The below is from this link: http://www.kodak.com/global/en/service/tib/tib5202.shtml


[TH="colspan: 2"]Short Term (less than 6 months)[/TH] [TH="colspan: 2"]Long Term(more than 6 months)[/TH] [TH="width: 200"][/TH] [TH="width: 150"]Temp[/TH] [TH="width: 100"]% Relative Humidity[/TH] [TH="width: 130"]Temp[/TH] [TH="width: 100"]% Relative Humidity[/TH] [TD="width: 200"]Raw Stock (in original sealed cans)[/TD] [TD="width: 150"]13°C (55°F)[/TD] [TD="width: 100"]below 60%[/TD] [TD="width: 130"]-18 to -23°C (0 to -10°F)[/TD] [TD="width: 100"]below 60%[/TD] [TD="width: 200"]Exposed Unprocessed (sealed in cans)[/TD] [TD="width: 150"]-18 to -23°C (0 to -10°F)[/TD] [TD="width: 100"]below 60%[/TD] [TD="colspan: 2"]Not Recommended (see text below)[/TD] In short, freeze it if you are not going to use it for a while. Let it thaw before you use it.

I work as an engineer for a company that designs and manufactures household appliances and wrote firmware for refrigerators for 5 or so years. The temperature set point range for the fresh food (refrigerator) side is 33-45F with a recommended temprature of 37F. Even film stored in the fresh food side is below the recommended 55F above. The freezer has a set point range of -6F to 6F with a recommended temperature of 0F.

The hottest point in the freezer in units that self defrost is the top, occurs during defrost only, and can reach air temperatures of 70F. Note that although the air temperature may approach 70F, the temperature of everything else in the freezer will remain on the low side. A defrost cycle lasts about 15-30 minutes. If you care about freezer burn, do not use a self-defrosting freezer or place your film in styrofoam coolers inside of the freezer which will unsulated the contents from defrost effects.

Final note: Refrigerators are dehumidifiers. That is why your fresh vegatbles should be stored in the sealed pan in your fresh food side in order to retain their moisture. The humidity only increases when you open the door and allow moisture-laden air in.

Regards,
Rob

 

[benp3692]

it also recommends against storing exposed, unprocessed film in freezing temperatures for longer than 6 months. I did not know this. Interesting!

 

[miha]

This applies to their motion picture films? Kodak says: Storage: 55F recommended but not required. (from a box of Ektar 100)

 

[BradS]

.....However, it seems that you are willing to fully ignore facts about physics and chemistry.

please be careful with your assumptions. this one if completely false.

As temperature drop, atoms move slower, chemical reactions slow down and/or stop completely, depending on the temperature.

As we are dealing with chemicals here, it's very simple and logical to deduct that freezing something makes it last longer than cooling it.
- This is the reason why we keep beef and other foods deep-frozen and that frozen meat, in fact, can last several years when frozen.

The same applies to photographic materials and chemicals.

I don't eat beef. but, I get what you are saying and mostly agree. My take is that freezing film is applicable in very specific, and limited situations, adds risk unnecessarily, can have unpleasant side effects and requires additional precautions. In short, it is completely un-necessary for the vast majority of us. And, as you have also recognized, storing anything in the freezer, whether it be film, beef or strawberries is not without additional risks.


Let me close by observing that I stopped using expired film (as much as possible) about seven years ago. The reason has nothing to do with physics or chemistry but economics and psychology. For me, the bigger problem with using well expired film is the loss of confidence in the film stock. I found that every time I used some film stock that was well beyond date, there was significant additional uncertainty and therefore risk. I would always be worried...was this roll going to be ok or would it have issues related to storage. I've concluded that using film much past date is not worth it for me. Its not worth it for me from an economic point of view as it doesn't really save much money in the grand scheme and it is not worth it from a psychological stand point either as it adds risks and mental anguish.

So, again, I think the freezer is completely unnecessary for most of us. The freezer adds risk and materials fare no better in the freezer than in the fridge over the short term (say upto about two years past date). The fridge is fine, and probably better for the vast majority of film users. Extremism of all kinds might best be avoided.

Everybody will do what they want of course and that is cool.

 

[RattyMouse]

Fujifilm recommends storing Astia film under 0 degrees C for long term storage.

http://www.fujifilm.com/products/professional_films/pdf/astia_100f_datasheet.pdf

 

[Thomas Bertilsson]

I obviously disagree that buying patterns have any effect whatsoever on the viability of a product. My 100 or 200 rolls is NOTHING in the grand scheme of total sales. Because we don't all buy our hoards on the one day every three years, the demand as perceived by the manufacturers evens out to exactly the same level as it would have if we all bought smaller lots. What matters is the total quantity of film consumed. Want to support film? Shoot MORE of it, no matter when you buy it.

Maybe shoot more fairly-fresh film, not secondhand crap that's 15 years old and wonky. If you take the logic to its extreme though, we might as well advocate to abandon Kodak and Fuji ASAP because we don't trust them to be here in 5 years and to throw all our purchasing behind Ilford, who surely will. I guarantee that that approach means we won't have a Kodak or Fuji in a lot less than 5 years. Moralising about what people buy is bad enough but moralising about when they buy it is paranoid and intrusive.

If you want to get picky about second-order effects like demand patterns, then larger/less-frequent buyers are good for the system because they reduce market frictions by moving larger lots with less shipping/handling/inventory-update labour. Don't waste your shopkeeper's time, buy minimum quantities of 40 rolls! No?

I'm talking about the behavior of MANY photographers, which becomes significant, but it starts on the level of an individual.
The best way to stimulate supply is to create demand. How do you do that when you are purchasing a product that is no longer made?
I'm not trying to tell people what to do. Only trying to stimulate thought about behavior. So I sometimes ask disruptive questions.
One person's actions may seem insignificant, but we shouldn't stop voting in elections for that reason, should we? Our vote counts, right?

I always buy 50 rolls or more at a time. It's better economics for me due to minimized shipping cost per unit.

I can understand why people stock pile things, especially if it's something they can no longer purchase. My own logic may not apply to others, but there is no difference in how interesting my photographs are based on whether I shoot HP5+, Tri-X, or Neopan 400. There are only very minute differences, which in the grand scheme of things mean extremely little to the end result. But that's just me.

Summary: Buy what you like, but sometimes also think about the big picture and how we best serve ourselves now and in the future.

 

[BradS]

Please allow me to have a little fun with the beef analogy. This is absolutely not meant to be personal and hopefully, it can be used to illustrate a point about drawing conclusions from false assumptions and about the dangers of extrapolating the model beyond the observed data.

proposition 1: for long term storage of beef, the freezer is better
proposition 2: it is best to cook beef before eating it.

Most people have plenty of evidence supporting the truth of these two propositions. I think that only a fool would argue contrary to either of them.

assumption: what's good for beef is good for film.

The assumption is obviously false. Nobody would propose heating film to 140 degrees F prior to use and nobody (well, very few) would propose eating beef that had been removed from the freezer and simply allowed to come up to to room temperature.

We need to be careful when drawing conclusions from false assumptions.


We can go further with the beef analogy. Let's do a thought experiment. I'll host a barbecue at the beach. I'll supply the beer and wine, a world renown chef and the beef. Now, imagine a small herd of beef cattle raised on a small family farm in South Eastern Minnesota. They've grazed on grass in open pastures their whole life. Image that we're able to slaughter one of those animals and some how instantaneously transport the finest cuts of beef to out little beach party. We also have some beef that was purchased at the local supermarket four days ago and stored in the fridge. Finally, we have some choice cuts of beef from those same cattle in SE Minnesota that have been stored for two years in a chest freezer in the farmer's basement. A master chef cooks all three samples of beef identically. Can you taste the difference? Which one is 'best'?

Storing beef in the freezer does preserve it for a longer period than storage in the fridge...however, as we all know, that long term storage comes with undesirable effects. If there were some way to preserve the beef for as long that did not come with the additional bad effects...would that be preferable?

For film, the fridge is just such an alternative.

 

[Thomas Bertilsson]

I like beef carpaccio.

Please allow me to have a little fun with the beef analogy. This is absolutely not meant to be personal and hopefully, it can be used to illustrate a point about drawing conclusions from false assumptions and about the dangers of extrapolating the model beyond the observed data.

proposition 1: for long term storage of beef, the freezer is better
proposition 2: it is best to cook beef before eating it.

Most people have plenty of evidence supporting the truth of these two propositions. I think that only a fool would argue contrary to either of them.

assumption: what's good for beef is good for film.

The assumption is obviously false. Nobody would propose heating film to 140 degrees F prior to use and nobody (well, very few) would propose eating beef that had been removed from the freezer and simply allowed to come up to to room temperature.

We need to be careful when drawing conclusions from false assumptions.


We can go further with the beef analogy. Let's do a thought experiment. I'll host a barbecue at the beach. I'll supply the beer and wine, a world renown chef and the beef. Now, imagine a small herd of beef cattle raised on a small family farm in South Eastern Minnesota. They've grazed on grass in open pastures their whole life. Image that we're able to slaughter one of those animals and some how instantaneously transport the finest cuts of beef to out little beach party. We also have some beef that was purchased at the local supermarket four days ago and stored in the fridge. Finally, we have some choice cuts of beef from those same cattle in SE Minnesota that have been stored for two years in a chest freezer in the farmer's basement. A master chef cooks all three samples of beef identically. Can you taste the difference? Which one is 'best'?

Storing beef in the freezer does preserve it for a longer period than storage in the fridge...however, as we all know, that long term storage comes with undesirable effects. If there were some way to preserve the beef for as long that did not come with the additional bad effects...would that be preferable?

For film, the fridge is just such an alternative.

 

[BradS]

I like beef carpaccio.

Tears...in...eyes...laughing.


Thanks Thomas, I think you made my day.

 

[Old-N-Feeble]

Don't forget steak tartare.

 

[Helinophoto]

I'm talking about the behavior of MANY photographers, which becomes significant, but it starts on the level of an individual.
The best way to stimulate supply is to create demand. How do you do that when you are purchasing a product that is no longer made?

Well according to my particular inventory, 266 of the 381 films I have in 120, are currently still in production, so even if I do hoard, I still buy fresh and dunk out (shoot) the oldest from my stash, in many ways, it seems that I have more of a buffer than a set-size storage.

I would believe that many others do it the exact same way, without being over-confident in that opinion. ^^

 

[removed account4]

beat of luck with all your hoarding!

whether it is frozen, fridge, or ambient stored ( my method of choice )
the most important thing to do is shooting, and enjoying the film.
unfortunately too much emphasis is put on the storage and bragging
about films.
so if you have 10000000 rolls of neopan enjoy it
cause, thats the point.

 

[Xmas]

The peel apart films shouldn't be frozen because the pods freeze and break when they expand....

The idea is that you shouldn't buy someone else's film and should always buy new is kind of silly, and what I mean by this is that there's a certain amount of film out there, it's already been produced, and yes a couple people will end up hoarding it forever and then eventually it will just be thrown out in the trash when it's no good and they die, but mostly people will eventually end up using it, so there's no point in saying that you shouldn't hoard some film and then use it up and then hoard some more, because no matter what the film it needs to be used, so it's going to be used anyway, so whether you hoard old film it's expired, or you order brand-new film that was just made, or you buy it roll for role, you're still consuming film at the same rate it doesn't matter at all...

The problem for me is Fotokemia went bust cause all you fan boys were buying Kodak and Fuji.

When Kodak and Fuji stop making film Fotokemia won't restart.

If Forma and Ilford stop for same reason as Fotokemia how long will your stache last?

 

[StoneNYC]

The problem for me is Fotokemia went bust cause all you fan boys were buying Kodak and Fuji.

When Kodak and Fuji stop making film Fotokemia won't restart.

If Forma and Ilford stop for same reason as Fotokemia how long will your stache last?

Fotokemia was EFKE right?

EFKE went bust because they had such inconsistent results in their films, the EFKEitis etc and people knew it and it cost them dearly, sure when a batch was good it was BEAUTIFUL, but when it was bad it ruined the shoot you were doing and the time you couldn't get back, so people dropped it in favor of a CONSISTENT film company. They also stretched themselves to thin by not cutting lines that weren't making money and focussing on their core films and formats.

It's sad but it had little to do with "fanboys" and more to do with bad production runs and poor business decisions.

IMO...

 

[Bill Burk]

assumption: what's good for beef is good for film.

I agree. (My radio name is Beefalo Bill and short for that is "Beef" so yeah, what's good for me is good for film.)

I only hoard one "lifetime" supply of film. I like to work from someone else's lifetime supply, for obvious reason.

 

[Xmas]

Fotokemia was EFKE right?

EFKE went bust because they had such inconsistent results in their films, the EFKEitis etc and people knew it and it cost them dearly, sure when a batch was good it was BEAUTIFUL, but when it was bad it ruined the shoot you were doing and the time you couldn't get back, so people dropped it in favor of a CONSISTENT film company. They also stretched themselves to thin by not cutting lines that weren't making money and focussing on their core films and formats.

It's sad but it had little to do with "fanboys" and more to do with bad production runs and poor business decisions.

IMO...

Efke was one of the names they used yes
And I used their film in volume and every film was good.
Maybe it is like Cosina lenses had about 40 if them all good but web experts tell me many bad examples.
So pony up how many bad films did you have?

 

[Bill Burk]

I only hoard one "lifetime" supply of film. I like to work from someone else's lifetime supply, for obvious reason.

I think the joke sounds better...

I only hoard one "lifetime" supply of film, the trick is to make sure it's somebody else's lifetime.

 

[StoneNYC]

Efke was one of the names they used yes
And I used their film in volume and every film was good.
Maybe it is like Cosina lenses had about 40 if them all good but web experts tell me many bad examples.
So pony up how many bad films did you have?

I've only shot the 127 films of 100R the last batch freestyle had, all has terrible EFKEitis, a rice shaped black grain in the images. This wouldn't really be seen in a 4x4 print but probably start to show at 8x8, a 12x12 or larger would certainly be unpleasant and obvious.

I JUST got some IR820 I'll let you know, I'm less worried about that as it's 4x5 and 8x10 and IR so I'll take anything I can get that's true IR.

 

[Truzi]

The problem with the beef analogy is no one has told us whether frozen and fresh film taste any different.

 

[Old-N-Feeble]

The problem with the beef analogy is no one has told us whether frozen and fresh film taste any different.

The taste is the same but the frozen is... oh, so much more refreshing in the summer.

 

[georg16nik]

Sort of a tongue in cheek question but I'm wondering how do you all hoard film? (for those that do).

For example, Neopan 400 has been discontinued and will soon disappear. If you wanted this film, and still could get it for a reasonable price, how much would you buy? $100? $1000? $10,000 worth?

I have about 80 boxes in the freezer but can still buy more at $4/box, perhaps a bit less. I am thinking about buying more this weekend but am wondering when to stop buying.

Thoughts?

Hoard as much as you can, store @ −18°C to −20°C and 40% to 60% relative humidity.
Storage area shall be protected against harmful gases such as hydrogen sulphide, sulphur dioxide, formaldehyde, oxidizing gases, industrial emissions and mercury vapour.
Some stones or stone aggregates in concrete can emit sufficient radiation (average up to 0,516 × 10−4 C/kg/yr) to fog sensitive films after long storage.
Short roll film temperature acclimatization goes 2 hours for 40°C difference between storage and surround temperatures, 3 to 5 hours for single 35 mm rolls.

Good luck!

 

[StoneNYC]

The problem with the beef analogy is no one has told us whether frozen and fresh film taste any different.

Doesn't it taste like gelatin? So we should ask Bill Cosby right?

 

[Truzi]

Doesn't it taste like gelatin? So we should ask Bill Cosby right?

Hmm, there is some overlap... he had advertised for Kodak as well.
Perhaps Kraft Foods could buy or license the emulsion patents from Kodak. They could even put recipes for film on boxes of Jell-O.

 

[Xmas]

I've only shot the 127 films of 100R the last batch freestyle had, all has terrible EFKEitis, a rice shaped black grain in the images. This wouldn't really be seen in a 4x4 print but probably start to show at 8x8, a 12x12 or larger would certainly be unpleasant and obvious.

I JUST got some IR820 I'll let you know, I'm less worried about that as it's 4x5 and 8x10 and IR so I'll take anything I can get that's true IR.

Thanks but

as EFKE don't pre harden any of their film like Kodak do suggest you should

- not prewash
- hold all solutions to within 3 degrees F ( including wash) of prior solution
- use plain water stop

I also use plain hypo fix ( no acid)

I always process like that

All my Efke was 35mm and ok...

The only strange thing I had was the cassettes were not crimped like Kodaks again this was normal 60 years ago so I was not troubled. You need to not drop them...