Storing exposed film - is refrigeration necessary?

[logan2z]

That's a great idea. I forgot about it.

It is if you trust the USPS

Most mail order developing labs strongly recommend not using USPS to ship your film but to use FedEx or UPS instead. I've sent all my film by FedEx and include a prepaid FedEx shipping label for the return shipment.

 

[Tim Stapp]

Given the recent problems with the backing paper on 120 films, I'd just put in a plastic bag, squeeze out all air and wait. Refrigeration/freezing is only asking for backing paper issues.

 

[Slixtiesix]

I once kept an FP4+ for two years before developing it. The results were fine! Kept at room temperature all the time. I would not worry unless you used a film known for latent image issues.

 

[Agulliver]

I am sure we all have anecdotes about film left a long time between shooting and development. A couple of years ago I decided to move our sofa to clean behind it....found a roll of Phototec 100 that I had shot over a decade previously....developed it in ID11 stock and it was perfect. The film was even around 8 years expired when I shot it. I believe that's the older Fomapan 100 formulation.

Before I really ramped up my B&W film usage.....say early 2000s to 2010, I would often take weeks/months to finish a film or stockpile a few films before buying some developer.

 

[thicktheo]

Resurrecting this thread because I ran into some development issues I have never encountered before...

I developed one HP5+ and one Tri-X today, both pushed to 1600 (according to the shooter's notes). They were loaded in two different tanks and stayed in there for 5-7 years, in room temperature. I took them out of their tanks and put them together with 3 more films: two FP4+, shot 3-4 years earlier but kept in the fridge, and a Pan-F which was freshly shot.

As usual, I didn't care much about specific times, so I put them all together in HC-110(B) for 9mins at 22c on a rotary machine. This is my normal technique for almost any B/W film, and I always get good results, properly exposed negs, contrasty and all that. I know this is not the correct procedure, but it works for me in all situations: MF/LF portraits, 35mm street photography, anything.

This time, the three "new" films came out good enough, but the HP5+ came out thin, and the Tri-X came out even thinner. On the Tri-X front, we're talking "barely visible film markings on the sides" thin. All things suggest that my development was alright (although not the "proper" procedure ), but something was wrong with these two films. I have never encountered this in the many years I've been developing. I know that people develop "found films" all the time, and they get pretty decent results.

So, any idea what might have happened in these two old films?

 

[MattKing]

They have been unrolled and exposed to warm air for 5 - 7 years. They don't even have the protection of a cassette or backing paper. I'm not the least bit surprised that they have deteriorated - I'm surprised there is any image at all!