Would TMax that has expired since 2000 worth any?

[zanxion72]

I am being offered with many Tmax 400 rolls that have expired since 2000 for a mere nothing. Would it be worth shooting it? What could one expect from a supposedly well stored but long expired film like that?

 

[illumiquest]

Free? Take it. It'll be fine.

 

[zanxion72]

Will there be any noticeable defects after developing it? Should I trust it at least for printing after exposing it?

 

[dorff]

The obvious thing to do is to shoot one or two test rolls. I would rate EI at 400, 320, 250 and 200, maybe even lower, and then develop normally. I have shot long-expired other black and white films, and some of them had lost some speed, others barely. If you tweak development to compensate for lost sensitivity, you are likely to end up with lots of fog and lost shadow details. It is better to adjust EI.

 

[zanxion72]

So, as a rule of thumb, it is better to down rate a film to compensate for the loss of sensitivity due to age than prolonging the development. Am I correct?

 

[Tom Kershaw]

I've used 400 ISO films even a couple of years out of date and have seen excess fog and speed reduction.

Tom

 

[Xmas]

I've used 400 ISO films even a couple of years out of date and have seen excess fog and speed reduction.

Tom

It depends on the storage temperatures if it has been frequently at 40C you will only get pea soup (fog) even with 50 and 100 ISO, few years out of date.

If it has been at 10C or less eg in a basement you may treat a test casettes at box ISO in a soft working developer.

Im still using 400 ISO from 2002 and 2005 expiry & not fridged and it is like 2015 film even in Microphen, you need to try your film for a test.

 

[Terry Christian]

Unless it was stored badly, it should be just fine. Err on the side of overexposure.

 

[removed account4]

even 3200tmz might be fine
http://nanianphoto.com/blog/?p=58

 

[Thomas Bertilsson]

I am being offered with many Tmax 400 rolls that have expired since 2000 for a mere nothing. Would it be worth shooting it? What could one expect from a supposedly well stored but long expired film like that?

Usually you can expect the following:
1. More base fog.
2. Coarser grain.

Both of those really are not a problem, and if the film was properly frozen all that time, you should be getting some images, but as others have suggested test it first.

A couple of years back I went through a batch of about 100 rolls of TMax 100 that expired in 1996. It was practically as good as new. ISO 400 films don't always store as well as ISO 100 ones, but you never know until you test. Bracket in 1/3 stops from 100 to 400 and develop normal. If the film is usable, judge from there where your shadow details are sufficient, shoot another roll and fine tune your developing time to get the right contrast in your negatives.

 

[Axle]

I'd say it'll be fine, I've been shooting Plus-X that expired in 1998 without trouble and panatomic-x that expired in 1975 (at box speed).

Develop it in something like Xtol to help even things out.

 

[dorff]

So, as a rule of thumb, it is better to down rate a film to compensate for the loss of sensitivity due to age than prolonging the development. Am I correct?

Yes. If you prolong development, you are only going to give more development to the fog that will be there too. So it does nothing to help you increase the signal-to-noise ratio. Giving more exposure, on the other hand, will give you more image density meaning you can develop less (or normally, at least) to limit fog and still get a good tonal range above fog in the negative. The same logic applies even to new film; it is only more pronouncedly so when dealing with expired film. You have to find the sweet spot yourself in terms of development, exposure and image quality. That is why you will see many photographers rating films at EI's different to box speed. It suits their taste, in terms of tones they want the negative to capture.

 

[Xmas]

The loss of sensitivity and the fog level are independent but additive when you want any detail in a shadow.

The fog level is very apparent, loss of sensitivity more difficult to detect.

If the fog is not uniform it will show on the print, I get less fog in rebates cause I use stand.

But if the film has not been kept at 40C it may be perfectly usable.

Just did a test on 2000 HP5+ cine which has been stored badly 10-30C and maybe I have fog but it is vestigial... Rodinal 1+100 @21C for 60 mins so I wont bother with restrainer or derate.

The fridge is full of C41 colour...

Xtol has (may have) lower fog than DK76 with your film, if you are lucky box speed cut dev time 10% and grade 2.5 paper time...

 

[Gerald C Koch]

First develop a properly exposed roll as Kodak recommends. Then you will be able to see what changes in exposure and development may be required. Using some esoteric developer will not provide useful information. The fewer variables the better.

 

[Xmas]

Yes Gerald is correct Rodinal at 1+100 for 60 mins is my normal technique. use your normal developer... you will be unlucky to get fog.

 

[Brian C. Miller]

The obvious thing to do is to shoot one or two test rolls.

+1! You don't know until you try it out. Personally, by and large, I've found film has a tendency to stay good. I have Tri-X expired in the late 1980's, and frozen, that's still quite decent. And I just developed a roll of HIE that I hadn't kept frozen, and it turned out decent. Yes, there's some base fog, but it prints through just fine. The HIE roll had been in the back of the fridge for many years, and then it sat outside of the fridge for a while. I have a brick of it frozen, so I'll see how that turns out. I can also try some Orthazite with it.