Why would you buy expired 35mm film?

[Taz777]

I've seen adverts for expired 35mm film with expiry dates of 2001, 2004, etc. The price doesn't appear to be much different from fresh 35mm film from what I can tell, maybe a tiny bit cheaper.

There must be a market for it, and I'm intrigued as to the various reasons one might purchase expired film.

 

[BMbikerider]

Some people have an overwhelming desire to carry out a challenge. As far as I can tell that can be a hiding for nothing or folk with too much spare time, or knowing better than the manufacturer, or simply money to waste.

 

[neilt3]

Because the eBay seller puts " Lomography " in the title so the kids think it's " cool " .

Spend your money on fresh film , get predictable results .
If you want messed up shots , shoot with your eyes closed then scan and mess about with the colours and add flair etc in PP .

 

[CMoore]

I've seen adverts for expired 35mm film with expiry dates of 2001, 2004, etc. The price doesn't appear to be much different from fresh 35mm film from what I can tell, maybe a tiny bit cheaper.

There must be a market for it, and I'm intrigued as to the various reasons one might purchase expired film.

If you are talking about Black and White.....i have often wondered the same thing.
If it were "Expired" by one year, i would not worry too much about it.
10 Years, from somebody that i knew had it bagged up tight in a refrigerator....... i would be willing to give them 50% of what they paid for it 10 years ago.
Otherwise, film and chemicals are rather "Cheap" and are the last area that i try to save money on, via buying Old/Expired film or chemistry....... JMHO of course. Many of these Guys/Gals have A LOT more experience than i do.
Even so....... i do not think that buying only New Film will cause you much of a problem.

Then again, if you can get it REAL Cheap.......
Good Luck

 

[John51]

imo, it's the novelty value of the results analogue can give when it isn't quite right.

Before digital, the goal was get analogue as good as possible. Not just photography, sound reproduction, letterpress printing etc. Now that digital does that quite easily, analogue has a different reason to exist.

Letterpress now has a niche market for wedding invites and the like. The customers no longer want perfect printing, they want to see the impression left by the type. That used to be the sign of a poor quality printer, now it's the main reason for ordering letterpress. Digital audio can be be very clean but some prefer hearing the snap crackle and pop of a mid-fi record player and unwashed vinyl.

Best value film ime is short dated. Too new for the hipsters and too old for the analogue purists.

 

[blockend]

The price doesn't appear to be much different from fresh 35mm film from what I can tell, maybe a tiny bit cheaper.

I've bought date expired film occasionally, but only if the price is right. Half the cost of a new bulk roll might interest me, if I'm confident it has been cold stored. Monochrome and colour negative stock is good for years after the pack date if frozen from new, but can deteriorate way before expiry in the wrong conditions. In theory only gamma rays will fog properly kept negative film, and that might take decades. Slide film is different, colour shifts happen quickly.

I don't get the enthusiasm for old film for its own sake, or the prices sometimes asked. It's part of the fad for endless gear experimentation and test shots, and never getting around to taking photographs people care about. My go to black and white film is Fomapan 100, in 100ft rolls it's keenly priced in the UK if you shop around. Developed in Rodinal (or variants) it offers beautiful, high quality, traditional looking photographs and the thick film base means it scans well, unlike say, Tri-X.

 

[Taz777]

Interesting replies! I thought of ordering something like 5-10 rolls for throwaway mechanism testing on the assumption that it would only cost a couple of pounds for 10 reels. I was surprised at the prices.

 

[donkee]

Seems the hipsters believe that terrible results are "retro" and was typical of analog gear. When analog was the only way, if your photos turned out as they believe they used to you would have either had your gear serviced or purchased new gear, same with film. If it returned cruddy results you used it for testing or threw it away. When people take perfectly exposed movie film then either physically damage it or add "artifacts" (usually way overboard) to scanned film PP, I just shake my head and wonder why........

 

[EdSawyer]

It makes sense to buy expired when it's the only way to get the emulsion, for example stuff that is no longer made anymore like HIE, EIR, TP, FX, Ektar 25, etc.

 

[neilt3]

It makes sense to buy expired when it's the only way to get the emulsion, for example stuff that is no longer made anymore like HIE, EIR, TP, FX, Ektar 25, etc.

How many of them would give results anywhere close to what the fresh film did ?
Even if well stored , which is something you have no guarantee of .

 

[cooltouch]

If it were a cool old emulsion like Panatomix X or Plus X Pan, then I might consider buying some. Otherwise I wouldn't bother. You can find fresh cheap stuff if that's what you're after.

 

[Nodda Duma]

Because Tech Pan, Panatomic X, etc are no longer made.

 

[OrientPoint]

Some emulsions, Tech Pan being a great example, are seemingly ageless if stored properly. I have rolls of Tech Pan expired 1991 that look absolutely brand new. No base fog, no grain. (They've been stored in a freezer though). There are a few films that look nice as they degrade. I love expired Neopan 400 for that reason, even though it doesn't look like fresh would have.

On the other hand, why someone would buy 20 year old Tri-X, I'm not sure.

 

[Johnkpap]

I have alot of expired film in a big upright freezer, some is getting int the 15 year mark, all of my film was bought in date, from photo lab and camera shops that were closing down 15 tears ago...... ihe prices were low as there was alor around.....Eg kodak gold 100 at 50c per roll and ilford FP4 30m rolls at $10 A ROLL PLUS LOTS MORE......My freezer is at -20C, I shot a roll of Fuji NPH 400 year 2003 last week and it came out fine, I also used some FP4 2001 same thing works fine no fog

I have a big enough film stock to last for many more years. I only use fresh film on important events as they are not repeatable. Normal hobby stuff I use frozen stock

D76 in powder form also lasts forever, powder fixer is the same does not Expire also, I also have a large stock of B&W paper and that is fine also........

I compared the results from fuji NPH taken in 2003 with the same frozen NPH film processed last week by my local lab .....I can;t see any difference

As long as you know the history of your film stock in a freezer you wont have any issues, I keep a record book on mine so I know where it came from.

Johnkpap

 

[StepheKoontz]

I buy it when it is a special type of film no longer being made. I recently bought some frozen stored Konica IR 120 film. I also have a bunch of film someone gave me a long time ago that has been cold stored so it's free. I still would buy new stock for something important.

On B&W paper, I would highly recommend avoiding KODAK RC paper of any type. I had a bunch that sat at cool room temp, (never over 74 deg F) that was total garbage when I tried to use it. Ilford RC paper from the same time looks fine.

 

[DWThomas]

I've been nibbling my way through a 100 foot bulk roll of Panatomic-X, expiry date: December 1988. (Prolly from the last batch made.) I don't know its storage method, I suspect "on a shelf." In terms of speed and fog it works quite respectably, although there is occasionally an unexplained emulsion blemish. The price was right -- it was a gift from a friend of a friend. I certainly wouldn't shoot any once in a lifetime stuff with it, but I've been occasionally using it for Argus Day (which FWIW is this Monday, Argust 19th, this year). Somehow I get warm fuzzies using film from the late 1980s in the C-3 "brick" I bought in the late 1950s. And I did occasionally use Pan-X "back in the day."

But rest assured when this roll is gone, I will not be prowling online markets for more. I'd rather invest in current product. I fall far enough behind using new stuff during years like this particular one!

 

[Mainecoonmaniac]

I've bought film a year or more beyond the sell by date from a reputable photographic store and it's fine. I avoid expired film if I don't know how the film is stored. Older film can get slower overtime, color shift if it's negative or transparency film and more base fog. Processed color film that have color shift can be balanced through post processing on a computer. If you can, buy a roll, shoot it to see if you're getting the results you want. If you like the results, buy the same lot/batch number. Some expired film don't get discounted because it's a film no longer made, but a lot of people like it. I worked for a commercial photographer that had a freezer full of old film that's no longer made because it worked for his commercial catalog work. Old film is not necessarily bad.

 

[runswithsizzers]

Because I forgot to check when paying at the cash register.

The last 3 times I bought film at my local camera shop I was sold expired film. Fortunately, I did think to check the dates before leaving the parking lot, and I was able to exchange them for in-date boxes. But I'm pretty sure the expired boxes went right back on the shelf. Which is room temperature, by the way. Caveat emptor.

Am I being too picky to think I should get in-date film when paying full retail?

 

[Kodachromeguy]

It makes sense to buy expired when it's the only way to get the emulsion, for example stuff that is no longer made anymore like HIE, EIR, TP, FX, Ektar 25, etc.

I agree with Ed, especially if you are familiar with a particular film from the pa st. I am still using Panatomic-X in 120 size and bought a few more rolls from a fellow who stored them in a freezer. I like this film:

https://www.photrio.com/forum/threa...-the-texas-leica-and-panatomic-x-film.168335/

https://worldofdecay.blogspot.com/2017/05/panatomic-x-best-black-and-white-film.html

 

[MattKing]

I recently finished selling a few hundred rolls of the te Fuji slide film. I sold most of it here on Photrio, and I was able to do so because the film had excellent, freezer stored provenance, I had tested a small amount of the film and obtained good results, and my price was significantly lower than what it would cost to buy new film. As far as I know, all of the purchasers have been happy with what they received.
In partial answer to the OP's question, I would suggest that the decision whether to buy past "develop before" date film should be greatly influenced by factors like the relative availability of current versions, and the quality and quantity of the information available respecting how the film has been stored.
Take a look at my closed sale thread to see the information I provided for that film. I tried to write that thread in a way that would answer the questions people might have about past "develop before" date film.
By the way, you will note that I try to avoid describing film as expired. Unlike the parrot in the famous Monty Python skit, film doesn't really expire, it just fades into poor for use.

 

[Colin Corneau]

Maybe some people like base fog and the edge-of-your-seat thrill of not knowing how any of your shots will turn out....to each their own.

 

[abruzzi]

In addition to the no-longer-being-made reason (HIE), I do frequently buy short-dated or even slightly expired film for the cost. Recently B&H has had 35mm/36exp rolls of Velvia and Provia slightly expired for $5-$7 a roll. Compared to its usual selling price, that’s a huge discount, and all the rolls worked perfectly.

 

[Paul Howell]

I buy short date or film that is out of date a year or 2 without issues. I avoid film that is out of date longer than 2 years, just not worth the risk of getting a lot of fog. I have a few APS rolls, 18 years out of date, had forgotten we had them, been in the house, cool temps around 70 to 75 year round, was fogged. There are sellers that claim that their out of date film has been refrigerated or frozen, does not stop background radiation from fogging.

 

[BAC1967]

I shoot a lot of expired film because I got it really cheap and I don't plan to use it for making darkroom prints. I'm quite happy with the results I get when I scan and make adjustments. I have a few bulk loaders that I purchased at estate sales and rummage sales that were loaded with Panatomic-X and Tri-X. I get good results out of them though I have to shoot them at slower speeds. Slow films like Panatomic-X seem to hold up pretty well over time. This was shot on Panatomic-X, rated at ISO 25 and developed in beer.

Abandoned Oregon Farm House by Bryan Chernick, on Flickr

Another reason for me is the challenge, plus you can get an interesting aged look to it. I recently posted this in the media section here, it was shot on Kodak NC film that expired in 1939, 80 years out of date. I had other cameras in tow when I was shooting this stuff so I wasn't going to miss out on anything if it didn't work. Most importantly I had fun doing it.

Crater Lake Lodge by Bryan Chernick, on Flickr

Another reason to shoot expired film is to do test shots. I have a box of 4X5 Kodak Super-XX that I used when I was learning how to shoot 4X5. If I'm going to make contact prints I would use fresh film for sure. I don't understand why people pay top dollar for expired film. My bulk loader with the Panatomic-X cost me $5, I couldn't tell you how many rolls I have shot from that over the past few years. Plus it works well with my beer developer.

 

[Luckless]

I guess I'm another one who doesn't really get the 'love' some people have for old and expired film. I can understand rolling the dice on old stock if you get it for stupidly cheap. If someone gave me a flat of 10 year old film for free I wouldn't toss it, but I also wouldn't use it on any project I deemed image-capture critical. But if I'm not saving a decent chunk of the price tag, then I'm not sure why I would want to put up with the annoyance of lowered reliability and consistency.

I buy fresh film in small batches of what I expect to use in a few months from a local retailer.

Part of it is because I don't want to "Pay twice" with buying the film and then paying for and to run a freezer to store it in, but it also means I have a totally legit reason to go in and browse the used camera gear... ["Oh hey, look at the awesome deal I spotted on this 'rare' camera while I was in getting more film that I totally legit needed to buy..." seems to go better with the girlfriend than "Oh hey, look at what I bought from a store that I had no real purpose to go to today..."]

But I'm also possibly lucky that I'm not picky enough about my film and paper yet to feel the need for some old out of production stock. Others don't seem as agreeable to that point of view, and I feel sorry for them. It has to really suck to have fallen in love with some specific consumable material that didn't hold up in the market well enough to continue production.

At least with old out of production hardware like cameras and lenses, you can keep fixing them up and cobbling things together to keep them running if you have to. But there is no fixing used film or paper... Well, there is, and you probably should fix it, but it won't help take another photo or make another print on it...