Out Of Date Film. How old is too old?

I had a bride whose wedding I did recently. And she called me today because she

had put disposable cameras on the tables for her guests to use. I realize that

most images would not come out due to user error (peoples feet, ceiling shots,

whatever).... but....

 

She brought them to a pharmacy to be developed and none of the images came out.

They were completely dark. The lab told her that it was because the film was

out of date. Apparently, the disposable cameras that she bought had expired in

2004!

She was unaware of this when she bought them.... and has called the store in

Virginia (out of state) to complain... (obviously these cameras should have

been removed from the shelves ages ago!)

 

I told her to bring the negatives to me and I would see if any of it was

salvageable, but I don't have high hopes.

 

I realize that film that is out of date will have weird color shifts, and what

not but will it also result in totally dark images? The cameras had built in

flash units.

 

She has only developed a few of the camera's but not all yet.... she's so

disappointed, and I feel bad for her.....

 

But I still don't understand how AGE of film would result in no images coming

out at all.....

 

Is the lab just feeding her a line of bull?

The cameras she had developed might have simply not been used. This happens with many of them set on tables at weddings.

You can look at the edges of the film and see if the lab deveolped it correctly. Outdated film of that vintage would still have a image.

what might be dead is the flash batteries and then there might not be a proper picture, but you would have something on the film.

hard to tell, I've seen some out of date and xray damaged film so dark it was hard to see the image on the film....but come to think of it i proscessed a roll of film a few days ago that expired in early 05 and looked perfect....

"...none of the images came out. They were completely dark."

 

<P>Does that mean the film frames were completely dark or the prints were completely dark? If the prints were completely dark, the negative was not exposed, all it ever saw and "recorded" was the darkness of the cassette it was in. If the negative frames were completely dark then the film was grossly overexposed or was very, very badly fogged with age.

I always tell people that putting these cameras on tables at weddings is for the most part a waste of money. I tell them to just hire a photographer. Anyways most shots on these cameras the flash is too weak to get a decent pic. People expect these little dinky flashes to cover like 20 feet away. The pics people take with these cameras show just how little people know how to use a camera and get a decent shot. I mean how many guest pictures do you want? They hardly ever shoot the bride and groom and if they do- they dont turn out or are worth keeping. Out of say 12 rolls you might get 8 good shots.

 

As for your problem- if the film is dark thats more to do with how much light the film saw then old film. Old film will usually give you color shifts, not underexposure. The only time dark film would be from age is if its been exposed to Xrays or extreme heat.

I would take the lab's diagnosis with a grain of salt. Most don't have a clue what they're doing. I recently had two rolls B&W ruined by a popoular lab in the Midwest. The negs were returned appearing grossly underexposed, absolutely useless. As if that wasn't bad enough, they turned every useless frame into a useless, near-black print and charged me for that, too. I sent everything back, but they steadfastly refused to accept responsibility. Even informing them that I had subsequently shot a roll from the same lot through the same camera (Nikon F100) and had it processed satisfactorily by a local lab didn't sway them. In your case, it's likely the cameras simply weren't used. Incidentally, I've never used a disposable. Don't they have a frame counter?

I'm going to have to take a look at the negatives myself..... I understood from what she told me, that she did get maybe one or two pics from each camera, but even those were really unusable images.... so there was something there... the cameras were used.

 

I just found the labs explanation odd..... Granted I know what can happen to out of date film, but IMHO this film wasn't so old that you wouldn't get any usable images from it.

 

 

Could be plenty of user error too.... Thanks for the ideas and thoughts...

I have used film far older and made perfectly acceptable prints. It must be some sort of other problem besides the age of the film.

 

Keith

"...I always tell people that putting these cameras on tables at weddings is for the most part a waste of money..."....yeah, Scott, I thought that also. But for my parents 50th Wedding Anniversary, of which I was only 1/3 of the decision makers, I got talked into putting them on all the tables. Kids under 10 years old took them over. (I actually didn't take any pics at all.....much too busy doing the party itself) I have to admit, that they were some of the better pics I've ever seen taken with those disposables. We were able to put together an album of them with about 50 pictures in it.......and nothing actually a bad pic......not great, but faaaaaaaaaarrrrrrr from bad.

That is a sad story. You're right, I suspect there was a problem with the the processing, or a problem with the cameras not related to the age of the film. (Maybe the batteries were dead and the flashes didn't fire.) I use a lot of expired color film, because I'm really cheap, and film that expired in 2004 really isn't very old. I've used stuff that expired in the 80's and 90's and have gotten decent images.