Shooting and processing expired TMax and Tri-X

Discussion in 'Film and Processing' started by a_p|20, Dec 18, 2017.

  1. Hey,

    I shot some Kodak Tmax 400 (TMY) at 400 ISO yesterday. The film has been in my camera for quite some time. If I have to guess from around 2010 (the film expired on 09/2010). I didn't compensate for possible loss of sensitivity by overexposing because I figured it was B&W and not that prone. Should I ask the lab that is going to process the film to process it differently? I read somewhere about having half of the roll processed one way (normal) and the other half as they see fit(?). Any more advice on this approach?

    I have another roll of TMY, a roll of Tmax P3200(expired on 03/2009) and some Tri-x(expired on 03/2010). Similar to the testroll these haven't always been in the fridge though (possibly a couple of summers in a hotter than average room (=bedroom under the roof)). Any recommendations for shooting and processing these?

    Thanks in advance,
  2. I have shot TMX, TMY and TX that was a good 10-20 years older than that. I generally shoot it at box speed and use standard processing time, although if I have multiple rolls from the same lot I'll use the first roll as my basis and then overexpose or overdevelop(neither by a dramatic amount) depending on my experience with the first.

    These are films that generally keep well even if stored at room temperature-I have cold stored stuff that's essentially inidistingishible from new stock(aside from the fact that TX became less grainy around 2007). My Plus-X is faring equally as well.

    If I do notice a problem, it's in the form of increased base fog that does lower overall contrast and make the negatives a bit more difficult to print.

    As for the P3200-that is nominally an ISO 1000/31º film, and unless your lab hand processes it will be dramatically under-exposed at EI 3200 even putting the age aside. It's been a while since I've shot it, and I seem to recall that it's DX coded to 3200, so if your camera reads DX codes you will need to adjust it if your lab does a standard B&W routine. As an example, the lab I use for E-6 and C-41 machine processes all their B&W in straight D76 for 109s at 26.5ºC (this is the equivalent of the 6.5 minutes at 20ºC I normally use at home). Per the data sheet for P3200, this will not even give you EI 400. To get to EI 3200, the time needs to 149s in a continuous roller transport processor.

    Aside from that, at EI 3200 the effects of fogging from background radiation will become quite significant regardless of the storage temperature, and if stored at RT the fogging will be even more pronounced than if cold stored. I have a few rolls I need to play with, and although I'm going to shoot one at EI 3200, I'm guessing most will end up around EI 800.
  3. In general with black and white film, a little more exposure is good, unless you are in an extreme contrast situation.

    I expect TMX, TMY, and TX to be fine after 10 or so years.

    I sometimes use VP that is 30 or 40 years old. Since that is often enough with simpler cameras, I don't worry so much about the exposure, but usually try for more instead of less.

    As for TMZ, as noted above, it fogs from cosmic rays, even frozen.

    You could use it at EI 400, and develop appropriately, but why do that when you have TX and TMY?

    Use it at 1000 or 3200, and expect big grain and fogging.

    The fogging comes out as white spots in the dark areas, and not a uniform gray, that you might expect.

    Use it for the effect, not for the usual use.
  4. TMZ002AA032.jpg TMZ002AA016.jpg

    TMZ at EI 3200, for outdoor scenery
  5. 470024_3579665332592_508498299_o.jpg

    This is Tri-X developed 30 years after exposure.

    Well, worse, it is downloaded from Facebook, resampled by FB to a lower resolution. That might add some to the grainy look.
    Didier Lamy likes this.
  6. I use and process a fair amount of expired film; if you do the processing yourself, I would highly recommend using Kodak HC-110 as it has above-average anti-fog properties (without using additives) compared to other developers.
  7. I've found references to bezotriazole as an anti-fog agent/restrainer. Are there any other common ones?

    (I'm asking because I'd like to experiment and that's something I don't have on hand or any precursors for easy synthesis. It's probably amenable to a "click" reaction but I don't like working with azides as a general rule even though I did some in graduate school).
  8. Kodak calls it "anti-fog 1" and is otherwise available in the usual places that you find photographic chemicals.

    (Though not as easy to find now as some years ago.)

    For those who don't know, sodium azide is used to inflate air bags in cars.
  9. Thanks-I was hoping I could find something at work, or at least something that I could synthesize from stuff on hand in a few hours.

    Sodium azide is also extremely toxic.

    The lead salt is even more sensitive as a contact explosive. The explosive tipped ammunition(no longer made, although I have some in my cartridge collection) that was used in the Reagan assination attempt had lead azide jammed in the hollowpoint cavity of the bullet.

    The toxicity+instability of azides is why I don't like handling them. I actually synthesized some azido compounds early on in my graduate career, but we were using organic azides that are a lot less dangerous. Interestingly enough, we were "clicking" them as thalidomide analogues and the hope was that they'd show potential as cancer treatment(thalidomide has made a resurgence in that role in the last ~10 years after-for good reason-being mostly relegated to a sidebar in textbooks).
  10. Hey guys,

    Sorry for my late reply. Thanks for all the info. I will probably shoot the TMZ@1000 or 3200 and have it processed..I don't know if my lab uses different times for different types of fim but I doubt it..I will ask.
  11. The two developers I have are Diafine and HC-110. I believe that TMZ is about 1000 in Diafine, but I haven't tried that yet.

Share This Page