Old bulk film becoming gradually worse?

[cerber0s]

I have the 12 year old Forte film that I use for expeimentation and while the first few rolls I shot with it came out with problems created by me, the ones I shoot now come out really unsharp, muddy and grainy while the new film on rolls come out just fine. Is it possible that the old expired bulk film becomes gradually worse the closer to the end I get?

 

[BAC1967]

How was it stored over the past 12 years, that could have a lot to do with it. I'm using a bulk roll of Kodak Panatomic-X that expired in 1963 that's only about one stop slow, otherwise it looks great. Some films last longer than others, especially slow films.

 

[cerber0s]

How was it stored over the past 12 years, that could have a lot to do with it. I'm using a bulk roll of Kodak Panatomic-X that expired in 1963 that's only about one stop slow, otherwise it looks great. Some films last longer than others, especially slow films.

It's been in an attic. Cold in winter and hot during the summers. What puzzles me is that it seems to get worse and worse the closer to the center of the roll I get.

 

[Donald Qualls]

Was it on a core or a spool? If a core, there could be random substances working out of the core over the past twelve years; they'd have more effect on the film that was closer to the core.

 

[BAC1967]

It's been in an attic. Cold in winter and hot during the summers. What puzzles me is that it seems to get worse and worse the closer to the center of the roll I get.

That’s a really bad place to store film. I put my bulk loaders in a ziplock bag and store it in the refrigerator.

 

[Sirius Glass]

It is about storage. The attic and car trunks are about the worst place to keep film and refrigerators or if unopened the freezer are the best.

 

[MattKing]

I have the 12 year old Forte film that I use for expeimentation and while the first few rolls I shot with it came out with problems created by me, the ones I shoot now come out really unsharp, muddy and grainy while the new film on rolls come out just fine. Is it possible that the old expired bulk film becomes gradually worse the closer to the end I get?

More accurately, the film is showing more deterioration the closer you get to the core.
When you are dealing with very poor storage of very old film, there really is no way to predict the effects, or to expect it to be consistent throughout the (bulk) roll.

 

[ic-racer]

When I clean my freezer and refrigerator, I usually put old film in the garbage as I would with old meat and vegetables.

 

[Sirius Glass]

When I clean my freezer and refrigerator, I usually put old film in the garbage as I would with old meat and vegetables.

Why?? At Kodak learned that most black & white and color films can easily be stored sealed in a freezer for ten years without problems. Just send you frozen film discards.

 

[cerber0s]

Thank you guys!

When I put the film up there I thought I'd never use it again but didn't want to throw it.

 

[MattKing]

Thank you guys!

When I put the film up there I thought I'd never use it again but didn't want to throw it.

Just don't do that with food.

 

[Donald Qualls]

Just don't do that with food.

Works okay with whiskey, though...

 

[Pentode]

What puzzles me is that it seems to get worse and worse the closer to the center of the roll I get.

Only seldom have I experienced a bulk roll showing different aging effects at different parts of the roll and, in those few cases, I experienced the opposite of what you are ie: the roll had deteriorated more on the outside of the roll and less as I got closer to the core.

As Matt states below, I think you're just experiencing more deterioration due to age and it's becoming more apparent as you get closer to the core. If you still had the outer wraps of film, they'd probably be showing the same effects.

More accurately, the film is showing more deterioration the closer you get to the core.
When you are dealing with very poor storage of very old film, there really is no way to predict the effects, or to expect it to be consistent throughout the (bulk) roll.

 

[BAC1967]

Only seldom have I experienced a bulk roll showing different aging effects at different parts of the roll and, in those few cases, I experienced the opposite of what you are ie: the roll had deteriorated more on the outside of the roll and less as I got closer to the core.

I have seen this on very old 120 film a few times, the first few frames are the worst. I just figured that's because that end of the roll is a little more exposed to the environment than the rest.

 

[cerber0s]

Just don't do that with food.

That has happened, although not in the attic I usually look at- smell and taste the food before discarding it. I ate bacon today that expired a week ago. Still alive!

 

[cerber0s]

Only seldom have I experienced a bulk roll showing different aging effects at different parts of the roll and, in those few cases, I experienced the opposite of what you are ie: the roll had deteriorated more on the outside of the roll and less as I got closer to the core.

As Matt states below, I think you're just experiencing more deterioration due to age and it's becoming more apparent as you get closer to the core. If you still had the outer wraps of film, they'd probably be showing the same effects.

That's what I would have expected, that the film gets better the closer to the center but it seems to be the opposite and it's happening fast. There's a lot of difference between the rolls shot a week ago and those shot yesterday.

 

[Pentode]

That's what I would have expected, that the film gets better the closer to the center but it seems to be the opposite and it's happening fast. There's a lot of difference between the rolls shot a week ago and those shot yesterday.

I would be very surprised if the deterioration of your film could get noticeably worse in a week's time (although I'm not about to rule out the possibility!). How much film is left on that roll? Is it possible to spool all that's left onto cassettes - keeping track of the order in which they were spooled - and then shoot the first and last cassette and process them together? That would be the only way to know for sure that the roll has deteriorated unevenly.

 

[cerber0s]

I would be very surprised if the deterioration of your film could get noticeably worse in a week's time (although I'm not about to rule out the possibility!). How much film is left on that roll? Is it possible to spool all that's left onto cassettes - keeping track of the order in which they were spooled - and then shoot the first and last cassette and process them together? That would be the only way to know for sure that the roll has deteriorated unevenly.

There's around 15 meters left, so half of it. Yeah, I have enough cassettes to spool all of it but only one reel for the Patersson tank so I can't process two films at once.

I will try to over expose the next roll to see what happens. Thebfirst ones, the ones that turned out best, were shot indoors with me winging the exposure on B.

 

[MattKing]

There's around 15 meters left, so half of it. Yeah, I have enough cassettes to spool all of it but only one reel for the Patersson tank so I can't process two films at once.

I will try to over expose the next roll to see what happens. Thebfirst ones, the ones that turned out best, were shot indoors with me winging the exposure on B.

Make up two 12 exposure rolls, with a plan to develop them together on the same reel.
Load the first on to the reel and then use your finger to push it farther along - all the way to the centre of the reel. Then load the second roll and stop as soon as it clears the ball bearings. You can then develop them together.
It would be a good idea to practice the pushing the film toward the centre in the light - exposed and film should be fine.
There is at least a possibility that your first rolls received much more exposure, and the over-exposure is both necessary and capable of masking certain defects.

 

[cerber0s]

Make up two 12 exposure rolls, with a plan to develop them together on the same reel.
Load the first on to the reel and then use your finger to push it farther along - all the way to the centre of the reel. Then load the second roll and stop as soon as it clears the ball bearings. You can then develop them together.
It would be a good idea to practice the pushing the film toward the centre in the light - exposed and film should be fine.
There is at least a possibility that your first rolls received much more exposure, and the over-exposure is both necessary and capable of masking certain defects.

That was such a great idea so I did it. I exposed each from -3 to +5 and the frames that were exposed at +/0 are 16 frames apart (could have planned that better). Film is drying now!

 

[MattKing]

Glad that helped.
It works better if you avoid continuous rotary agitation during the development stage - use inversion agitation there.
Particularly when in the developer, film can really slide around a lot when the reels are rotating, and in the worse case can end up overlapping.
But if you like short rolls, and don't have big or multiple tanks, this works.
FWIW, I regularly develop two 120 rolls on the same reel, using just this method.
And as long as I use little or no continuous rotary agitation in the development stage, it works fine.
It seems film in the developer is really slippery.

 

[Bill Burk]

Anxious to hear how it went.

 

[cerber0s]

Glad that helped.
It works better if you avoid continuous rotary agitation during the development stage - use inversion agitation there.
Particularly when in the developer, film can really slide around a lot when the reels are rotating, and in the worse case can end up overlapping.
But if you like short rolls, and don't have big or multiple tanks, this works.
FWIW, I regularly develop two 120 rolls on the same reel, using just this method.
And as long as I use little or no continuous rotary agitation in the development stage, it works fine.
It seems film in the developer is really slippery.

Anxious to hear how it went.

Here they are, shot at night with overhead spotlights to have a controlled and uniform light (no changing daylight). The first one is frame no1, the second one (with the bottle) was snapped 16 frames after frame 1 and the last one was just for fun with a flash, 23 frames after frame one. Then I added one more that was shot on the same location with the exact same light but obviously a different scene. I used the the same film though, approximately 70 frames before frame 1.

I can't see any significant difference between the first three while the last one is much sharper with smoother grain. One - three were obviously developed together while the last one was developed separately. The first three were developed for 4 minutes 30 seconds in Kodak TMax at 21 degrees while the last one was developed in D76 for 5 minutes at 20 degrees.
In this case I'd say the developer probably accounts for the difference.

 

[Pentode]

I have to confess you lost me a little on the whole frame count thing....

It sounds to me like there was not a considerable difference between the film from the outside of the spool and that from the inside. Did I get that right?

 

[cerber0s]

I have to confess you lost me a little on the whole frame count thing....

It sounds to me like there was not a considerable difference between the film from the outside of the spool and that from the inside. Did I get that right?

Yeah, onlyv16 frames between the ones with identical exposure. 23 frames between the first one and the one with flash. I can't really see any difference either way though.