derek_kennedy Posted February 20, 2009 Share Posted February 20, 2009 <p>At the local photography store and as a joke I asked him if he had any 100 ft rools of film and in stead of laughing at me like has been lately - he said yes. Two cans of 100ft Tri-X Pan, expired in 97, but purchased by the store in 1995 but frozen since it was purchased.</p><p>It <em>should</em> still be good eh? He only charged me $15 instead of the $50 originally asked for.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
frank.schifano Posted February 20, 2009 Share Posted February 20, 2009 <p>For $15 it's worth a shot. FWIW, someone once gave me a couple of rolls of Tri-X that were about 10 years past date. I have no idea how the film was stored. Considering the source, I'm pretty sure it was squirreled away in the back of the socks and underware drawer and not kept cold. There was quite a bit of fog, and naturally some loss of speed. Not terrible if you can live with that.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
derek_kennedy Posted February 20, 2009 Author Share Posted February 20, 2009 <p>I cant quite use it yet as I still have lots of film in my bulk loader but yeah for 15$ what the heck.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mike_walmsley Posted February 20, 2009 Share Posted February 20, 2009 <p>You should have no trouble with outdated Tri-X Pan that was stored in a freezer Derek. At $15 a roll, you got yourself a bargain. <br> When you go to bulk load your cassettes, try and do all of them at once or within a day or two, then keep the films in the freezer or the refrigerator at least. I bought some Kodak pro packs of Tri-X (2 boxes of 50 rolls - 36 exp) that had an expiry date around 1997 or 1998. I keep them cool until I need to use them, and I have had no trouble with them. I often use D-76 (1:1) or sometimes HC-110 to process it. One thing to remember if you keep it frozen, give the rolls time to adjust to room temperature before attempting to load your camera and shoot it.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jim_appleyard Posted February 20, 2009 Share Posted February 20, 2009 <p>Sounds like a pretty safe bet. When you're loading your cassettes, do what Mike says, but spool off one of 12 exp. or so. Shoot this one as a test roll and bracket your exposures. then you'll have a good idea of what to do with the rest of the 100'.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
derek_kennedy Posted February 20, 2009 Author Share Posted February 20, 2009 <p>Thanks Mike - and he has a second 100ft roll for me at the same price if I wanted it. I didnt take it as I wasnt sure if they were any good yet.</p> <p>You make a few great points such as doing several cassettes at once and keeping them frozen, I will do that. I too will be using D76 as I have plenty now that I just got a shipment of chemicals today.</p> <p>Jim: Another good point. I did the same thing with a older roll of T-Max 100 - I just loaded a 12 exposure for the first roll as a test. No point in shooting a roll of 36 just to find out the film wasnt any good.</p> <p>Thanks again everyone.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leicaglow Posted February 21, 2009 Share Posted February 21, 2009 <p>Derek, I don't know if it's any help, but last month I processed some 99 expiration date Tri-X kept at 55 degrees in a dark refrigerator its entire life, and it was pretty fogged. Don't know how frozen would have been.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
derek_kennedy Posted February 21, 2009 Author Share Posted February 21, 2009 <p>Thanks Michael - I was hoping it was still good but maybe not. I was only going to load a 12 exp roll for the first roll as a test and see what happened. The store indicated it was kept in their freezer the whole time so <em>maybe</em> it will still be good?</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike Gammill Posted February 21, 2009 Share Posted February 21, 2009 <p>Derek- also keep in mind if you compare your results to fresh Tri-X that some changes were made to Tri-X a few years back. Some like the changes, others liked it the way it was. My own experience has been that the new Tri-X does have finer grain. I also like the look of it better. If you're curious, check the archives to read about other members' opinions on the subject since my opinion is just one of many. If you prefer the look of older Tri-X and your film comes out okay, then you got a good bargain. Good luck with your test.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
derek_kennedy Posted February 21, 2009 Author Share Posted February 21, 2009 <p>Thanks Mike - I will check out the archives as I wasnt aware they changed the film.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
clay2 Posted February 21, 2009 Share Posted February 21, 2009 <p>I sort of did it the other way around. Exposed a fresh load Tri-X from bulk<br> loader, but lost cassette in freezer for about 15 years. Developed and<br> printed, latent image came up fine, prints a tad foggy and grainy, but<br> useable. Good luck with yours.<br> /Clay</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
derek_kennedy Posted February 21, 2009 Author Share Posted February 21, 2009 <p>Thanks Clay. As mentioned, for $15 - whats to loose?</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
david_lyga Posted February 22, 2009 Share Posted February 22, 2009 <p>Three years ago I bought two 100 ft rolls of Tri-X with an expiration date of 1958 for $1 dollar a roll. There was fog but, surprisingly, printable. The stop loss is about 3 stops. Not bad.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
derek_kennedy Posted February 22, 2009 Author Share Posted February 22, 2009 <p>If printable/scanable - then I just might still get good use out of the film. Esp if scanable, I can run the images through photoshop. I'll keep the 3 stop loss in mind - thanks David.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
david_lyga Posted February 22, 2009 Share Posted February 22, 2009 <p>The name of the game is to avoid having to develop it to an extent whereby base fog increases appreciably. You can partially avoid this by giving more exposure (which imparts density quicker than base density). In effect, it is a race between getting ample pictorial density BEFORE the base has a chance to make inroads. Try 3 to 4 stops and do not develop more than normal Tri-X. Try clip tests in a small amount of dev. - David Lyga.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gt1 Posted February 24, 2009 Share Posted February 24, 2009 <p>This was shot a couple of weeks ago with 25 year old Tri X Pan, the results were definitely scanable, I haven't been back to the darkroom yet, though:</p> <p><img src="http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3134/3219673038_f8c7181b24.jpg" alt="" /></p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
derek_kennedy Posted February 24, 2009 Author Share Posted February 24, 2009 <p>Thanks Greg - your results give me hope to be sure.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mypersonalfavorites Posted March 27, 2009 Share Posted March 27, 2009 <p>I just printed a roll of Tri-X pan Exp. 1987. Dev. in Infosol 3@ 1-14 . A bit foggy but for the price I paid it is printable. I got a 100 ' of it so I am content</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
derek_kennedy Posted March 27, 2009 Author Share Posted March 27, 2009 <p>Thanks Dennis.</p> <p>I too paid little for the 100' roll. WIth your results and Gregs, I'm feeling more confident that I should be ok.</p> <p>If its too fogged, well: I only paid $15! Who koiws, with a little fogging maybe the film will look like it was much much older - might be a pleasant result. I'm still waiting for the snow to melt before I thaw it enough to make a couple test rolls.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lan_line Posted November 2, 2009 Share Posted November 2, 2009 <p>I have a large stock of outdated film, much of it from the 1970s. This is TRI-X shot at 400, developed D76 1:1 per box. This film expired in 06/1978<br> <img src="http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3217/3158406180_77ede6ca40.jpg" alt="" width="500" height="487" /></p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
derek_kennedy Posted November 2, 2009 Author Share Posted November 2, 2009 <p>Looks good Lanny - my stock also turned out great, so I got 200 feet for next to nothing.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now