Tri-X and TMAX 100 - 100 ' Rolls Expired 2000 - Would you use it?

[emile_imberman3]

<p>Hi,<br>

Looking for an opinion. I want to get back to shooting and Processing Film, after 10 or so years. I have a 100' Roll of Tri-X 400 and 100' Roll of T-MAX 100. Both never opened, still in the packaging. They both expired about 10 Years ago and have not been kept refrigerated. They have been in a cabinet drawer, in my spare bedroom. My questions are.<br>

1. Should I use the film after all this time?<br>

2. If yes, do I rate it differently than the standard ASA?<br>

3. What would you recommend as a Developer (liquid), and would I extend the developing time by 10%.<br>

I don't have any issues with tossing the film out and buying replacement rolls, but why not use it if it is possible. Thanks in advance for any advice. I am excited about setting up my Darkroom again.<br>

Emile</p>

[edward_zimmermann]

<ol>

<li>Use the film? Of course I'd use it. I'd do a little test first.. shoot a few 12 frame rolls and do some tests.. </li>

<li>Rate it differently? Probably not.. that's the point of the test roll.. run some tests.. </li>

<li>Developer? Whatever you like with Tri-X 400..</li>

</ol>

<p>While its true that with age the base fog can increase, contrast and speed decrease.... by how much... there is no clear cut ...</p>

[frank.schifano]

<p>Tri-X 400 will almost certainly show some increased base fog. No getting around it. Even if cold stored, there would be some. Whether or not it's acceptable is up to you. Usually you can work around it. Certainly the film is good fodder for getting your chops back into shape after a 10 year layoff. TMX may be a little better in the fog department, and the same advice applies. If you're bound and determined to use a liquid developer, then go for some HC-110. It's pretty good at restraining base fog at the cost of a little bit of shadow density. Not a big deal. Bracket 1 stop above and below box speed at 1/2 stop intervals and see which gives the best results.</p>

[peterbcarter]

<blockquote>

<p>If you're bound and determined to use a liquid developer, then go for some HC-110. It's pretty good at restraining base fog at the cost of a little bit of shadow density.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>True and I would suggest some selenium toner to get the density back. I use it for most of my normal film work flow for a contrast boost and mild sharpening. It would fit the bill here. The HC110 does TriX & TMX nicely.</p>

[emile_imberman3]

<p>Thanks very much for your reponses. Good advice. Just as an aside, I am not locked in to a Liquid Developer. I used to use D76 back when I was active in the Darkroom. If you think D76 or Xtol or ?? works better, please let me know. I can handle powder. Thanks.<br>

Emile</p>

[peterbcarter]

<p>There is nothing wrong with D76, as been a time tested developer.</p>

<p>XTol will increase the speed, shadow detail and sharpness of the film. Your film has lost speed because of the age. I use it as a one-shot and has a very pleasing tone.</p>

 

[mark_farrell]

<p>I did some non-refrigerated Tri-X in D-76 several weeks ago to test out a camera that was dated 1981. It developed not too badly for its age.</p>

[JDMvW]

<p>I finished up shooting some 20 and 30-year old film including a lot of old Tri-X. In the end, after testing it, I just used the standard exposure and standard development in D-76 -- I've heard some unsubstantiated rumors that there are <em>other</em> developers, ;)<br>

Just the other night, I picked up some Ilford 400 that expired in 2003 or so. Don't expect any difficulties with it at all, but that's why you do a test or two first. I probably wouldn't shoot the first alien contact on it if I had any choice, but it's fine for casual shooting. As Gene M has shown, even great antiquity with rather severe aging of the film can still produce aesthetic effects. It's more fun, but not qualitatively different, than Lomography™.</p>

[frank.schifano]

<p>Well, since you mention that you have no problem with powdered developers, let me recommend that you give XTOL a try. If you like D-76, you'll like XTOL. It will give you a little more speed, a bit finer grain, and excellent sharpness. There are still a few people out there who absolutely won't use it because early on the developer had some reliability problems. Pay no attention. These could be the very same people who don't store the developer properly, you don't know. About the only thing bad (if you can even make that assertion) about it is that it doesn't change color if it does go bad. Me? I've never had the problem, and I've been using it for at least 10 years now. You'd think that if I were going to get a bad batch, I'd have been bitten by now.</p>

[emile_imberman3]

<p>OK, Thanks for the info on XTOL. I think I'll give it a shot. You know what, while looking for my Developing Tanks I also found a packet of D-76 and a New unopened T-Max Developer. All this stored in a box in the spare closet. This stuff is also about 10 years old. Question, if I mix up the D-76, will it let me know by turning brown if it's no longer good? I guess I can give it a try and run a test. This is greast - something to look forward to.<br>

Emile</p>

[peterbcarter]

<p>As long as you don't feel any hard lumps in the D-76, it should be good. Moisture would be the only thing that would kill it.</p>

<p>The Tmax dev is anybodies guess. Shoot a roll and try a one-shot. That would be the only way to know.</p>

[lex_jenkins]

<p>Yup, I'd use it. And have used film that was more than 10 years old. Usually I'll downrate it to half the box speed and soup in HC-110 or Microphen, tho' ID-11 has worked too.</p>

<p>Avoid Rodinal, Ilfosol-S (haven't tried the new Ilfosol) and Diafine for expired film stocks - in my comparison tests on expired Tri-X the base fog was badly exaggerated. However adding a bit of borax to Rodinal helps with the fog.</p>

[cj8281]

<p>My last batch of D76 that I am currently using was purchased in 1991. Works fine.</p>

 

[mike_king3]

<p>My normal practice is to rate Tri-X at EI200. TMAX100 @ EI100. Test test test. Developers? HC110 good, TMAX Developer better for TMAX, don't bother with TMAX RS unless you shoot a lot of film or want to process sheet film.</p>

[rothelle]

<p>I would use them. I would also do just a simple test before running out shooting them all. But I still have film b&w, color and slides from 1999/2000 that I use and I process like I just bought today and work well for me.</p>

[jay_de_fehr]

<p>I just opened a 100' can of GAF Versapan that must be at least 20 years old. I was very surprised at it's condition; very low base fog and very near box speed (ISO 80). I was even more surprised at its extremely fine grain. It's beautiful film, and I'm ashamed to admit I considered tossing it without even testing it. </p>

[emile_imberman3]

<p>Good info. You'r correct, I will run a test first. I'll post it here when I get results. Thanks.<br>

Emile</p>

[craig_shearman1]

<p>B&W film and unmixed B&W chemical powders are very forgiving. I would load up a roll of the Tri-X and shoot in a known exposure situation like outside at mid day with bright sunlight -- f/16 at 1/500th. Shoot a series of exposures -- maybe two frames under by one stop, one on the mark, two over. Maybe go three stops if you want. Develop in the D-76 and see which gives you the best exposure.</p>