Testing a new camera with expired film? Probably a bad idea.

[Web-Betty]

Hello, I'm new here and I'll apologize in advance if I've placed this thread in the wrong forum. Since I'm not sure exactly what the problem is (which is why I'm posting), exposure seemed like it might fit.

I purchased a Canon EOS-3 from eBay and put in an expired roll of film. (No, I have no idea how expired, and I don't have the negatives at the moment to tell what film it was. An oversight, to be sure.) I received the negs and scans back from the lab and am not sure what to make of the results. I'm quick to blame them on the expired film, but based on some of the threads I've read on the forum, that may not be the case.

They are all very grainy and seem underexposed? Wanting to test the camera quickly, I resisted the urge to go manual and shot full auto. These were pretty great lighting conditions so being underexposed seems odd. I'll be thrilled in you tell me that this is likely due to expired film.

Thank you for any insight into this issue. I currently have another roll of film going and am eager to see what these results will be.

 

[Patrick Robert James]

The camera seems fine. The film, not so much.... Film loses sensitivity as it ages, color film will exhibit color shifts, and you are seeing a perfect example of this. as a result, you get "underexposed" images as well as weird color.

I don't know why people use outdated color film, especially since processing costs a lot more than the film itself. For a couple dollars more your images would have been perfect. Now you know.

 

[jimjm]

These do look severely underexposed, but there is an equal chance of it being caused by expired film, or camera exposure error. I've used Fuji print film that was almost 15 years past expiration, and it turned out great. Depending on the type of film, and how it was stored, some films will degrade faster than others.
Only way to know for sure is to use fresh film and try both auto and manual exposure. Also, if your examples above are from prints or scans, you may not be seeing an accurate representation of the film's exposure error. Labs will often tweak the scan or print to get the best results possible, but you'd need to look at the negatives themselves to see how bad it really is.
I usually shoot a roll of slide film for my first tests. You'll be able to see immediately if they're underexposed (too dark) or overexposed (washed-out. If they're still off, then it's either the camera meter and/or autoexposure control. I assume you're using fresh batteries, have the ISO set correctly and are using a compatible Canon lens that stops-down correctly?

 

[Web-Betty]

I don't know why people use outdated color film, especially since processing costs a lot more than the film itself. For a couple dollars more your images would have been perfect. Now you know.

Yep, hence the thread title.

I have fresh film in, the battery is full, and I'm ready to do a 'real' test.

 

[klownshed]

If you are going to shoot expired film you should treat it as less sensitive than box speed and add a stop for every 6 or 7 years expired (or random number of years of your choosing).

Why do people shoot expired film?

Probably because sometimes some people manage to get some really interesting images from expired film and others think they can get the same results. The colour shifts are part of the appeal. It's not for everybody, obviously, but each to their own.

Lomography is often lambasted, but like with any genre is very effective when done well. But just as shooting B&W film in a Leica won't turn you into HCB, shooting expired film isn't a magic bullet.

In the hands of a good photographer with a good eye it can be very effective. But a boring photo is a boring photo whether perfectly exposed on fresh film or colour shifted and grainy.

As a means of saving money on a fresh roll, however, not such a good idea.

 

[jimjm]

Yep, hence the thread title.

I have fresh film in, the battery is full, and I'm ready to do a 'real' test.

Good luck, and also welcome to APUG!

 

[removed account4]

hi web-betty
one more voice in the choir....
when testing equipment its best to use fresh film, and if you are processing yourself, fresh
chemicals that are a "known quantity" that way there are no funky variables to contend with
expired materials can be a lot of fun ... i am one who is all for using expired "stuff" but that is only after
i know my equipment is in working order a rule of thumb, at least for expired b/w film is add an f-stop or so for
every 10 years expired because as patrick mentioned as film gets old it is less sensitive to light.

good luck
+
have fun !
john

ps welcome to apug!

 

[Sirius Glass]

The shutter works. The light settings seem appropriate. Now that you know that the camera works, get some fresh film and see what the camera can really do.

 

[Web-Betty]

Thanks to everyone for the welcome and the info. There's a fresh roll in now and I'm planning on shooting away this weekend. (Hopefully my guys take me somewhere fun for Mother's Day!)

 

[Cholentpot]

I test with old film. I overexpose, I use the film to test for lightleaks and sharpness, not for meter accuracy.

 

[Sirius Glass]

I test with old film. I overexpose, I use the film to test for lightleaks and sharpness, not for meter accuracy.

That is an interesting idea that I have not tried.

 

[Cholentpot]

That is an interesting idea that I have not tried.

I also test for lens compatibility and vignetting. I have a lengthen of 12 shot that I measure and spool out against in a dark bag and put in a cassette. Mind you this is for C-41 for the most part. For B&W expired works for me as well as fresh for the most part once I get the EI down.

 

[Chan Tran]

I test with old film. I overexpose, I use the film to test for lightleaks and sharpness, not for meter accuracy.

But that you test the film and not the camera or its meter. I think it's better to test the camera with good film and then after you know your camera is good then you can test expired film.

 

[Cholentpot]

But that you test the film and not the camera or its meter. I think it's better to test the camera with good film and then after you know your camera is good then you can test expired film.

?

I'm not following here.

I'm not testing the meter. The meter and all the fixin' gets testing with fresh film. Besides I don't rely all that much on the meter. Light leaks, shutter slap, frame spacing, etc... are far more important than the meter. I can use a camera without a meter. I can't use a camera with a busted shutter or jammed rewind.

And no, I'm not wasting $15-20 of fresh film and development on a camera I paid .99 for in a Goodwill. That camera gets some Gold 200 from the 90's, stand developed in an overused C-41 kit that's older than most of the food in my pantry.

 

[jimjm]

?

I'm not following here.

I'm not testing the meter. The meter and all the fixin' gets testing with fresh film. Besides I don't rely all that much on the meter. Light leaks, shutter slap, frame spacing, etc... are far more important than the meter. I can use a camera without a meter. I can't use a camera with a busted shutter or jammed rewind.

And no, I'm not wasting $15-20 of fresh film and development on a camera I paid .99 for in a Goodwill. That camera gets some Gold 200 from the 90's, stand developed in an overused C-41 kit that's older than most of the food in my pantry.

Yeah, but we're talking about best recommended practice for the OP's needs here, not your personal preferences.
An EOS3 is not a $.99 camera, and it's valuable for the OP to know if the camera is exposing correctly. Especially being that it's an eBay purchase. It's not uncommon for used camera meters to be incorrect, and for shutters to be inaccurate. I have several cameras that have these problems, and until I get them adjusted (if at all) I compensate accordingly. We can't assume that the OP knows how calculate exposure without a meter.
If I'm using a relatively modern camera like an EOS3 set on auto with fresh film, I would expect more than 75% of my shots to be exposed correctly, given no extreme lighting situations. If my exposures are consistently under/overexposed, then I'm going to suspect a problem with the autoexposure control and/or the meter.

 

[Cholentpot]

Yeah, but we're talking about best recommended practice for the OP's needs here, not your personal preferences.
An EOS3 is not a $.99 camera, and it's valuable for the OP to know if the camera is exposing correctly. Especially being that it's an eBay purchase. It's not uncommon for used camera meters to be incorrect, and for shutters to be inaccurate. I have several cameras that have these problems, and until I get them adjusted (if at all) I compensate accordingly. We can't assume that the OP knows how calculate exposure without a meter.
If I'm using a relatively modern camera like an EOS3 set on auto with fresh film, I would expect more than 75% of my shots to be exposed correctly, given no extreme lighting situations. If my exposures are consistently under/overexposed, then I'm going to suspect a problem with the autoexposure control and/or the meter.

In that case, fresh film it is...