Really Outdated Film - What to Expect

[mark_farrell]

<p>After not using my MF camera for a long time, I put a roll of 1981 Tri-X 400 that I had through it, sort of as a test roll to check out the camera. I processed it in D-76 1:1, stop bath, fix, and wash. A scan of the film revealed what appears to be alot of grain compared to other negatives I have. Also it doesn't seem to have the density as other negatives I have. Not sure if my developing skills are a bit rusty, but was careful regarding temperatures and times. What sort of degradation would almost 20 year old non-refrigerated film have? </p>

[larrydressler]

<p>Exactly what you got. Reduced speed and grain.</p>

[JDMvW]

<p>I have some E-4 Kodak color infrared, from 1978, but other than that I used up a bunch of Tri-X from 1990 and it worked fine with little evidence of grain and speed changes. Some newer Plus-X on the other hand was all over the place on the same roll--processed at the same time as some other film that worked beautifully, so I know it wasn't the processing.</p>

<p>Sometimes, as Gene M has shown, film can almost be immortal. So much depends on the particular history of a given cassette or roll that it's hard to predict what will happen. That is, after all, one of the "lomography™" aspects of shooting with it.</p>

[chris_waller]

<p>After 20 years it will have lost 1.5-2 stops of speed and gained a lot of fog. Rate it at 125 ASA and see how that looks.</p>

[harry_pluta5]

<p>I agree with Chris. I have been shooting some 1991 Tri-X and I lowered it one stop and added 10ml of Edwal Orthizite (sp?) to it. The Edwal removes the fog nicely and the one stop of speed adds the denisty back.</p>

<p>Love the old Tri-X!</p>