1993 hp5 plus

[Rogier]

Any idea what to expect from this Ilford HP5 that is almost 10 years old and has NOT been stored in the freezer?

 

[sienarot]

Probably just some loss of contrast?

 

[coelacanth]

Here you go. Expired in 1991, unknown storage history, PUSHED to 1600. 😀

 

[Rogier]

Probably just some loss of contrast?

Hmm that would be an improvement from my point off view 🙂

 

[BobYIL]

I have one tin-can 30m roll of HP4 (not even HP4+) from 1971! Surfaced out while moving my house 😀, 41 years outside of a fridge. But I will not throw it away before testing.

As for your case: Go ahead, increase the development time about 15-20%, at the most you get little more contrast.

 

[k__43]

I used even older HP5 (the stuff with 72 frames per roll) .. worked, lots of basefog but not as bad as expected, still quite even development

 

[Pherdinand]

you mean almost 20 years old, right? 😀
(closes Calc)

 

[Ronald_H]

It is probably still ok for all but the most critical of work. I would advise you to expose it as ISO100 and maybe increase development a little. You'll soon find a sweet spot where it will be ok.

I have to develop a roll of APX400, expired in 2003. Will post some results when it is done.

 

[taylan]

Also it might be lots of spots on the film. I faced lots of time with this problem at old films.

 

[k__43]

It is probably still ok for all but the most critical of work. I would advise you to expose it as ISO100 and maybe increase development a little. You'll soon find a sweet spot where it will be ok.

I have to develop a roll of APX400, expired in 2003. Will post some results when it is done.

I can't advice you to overexpose and over develop, especially not when you plan to scan it .. the neg is already quite dense thru the base fog.

I used a lot (about 30 rolls) of APX400 of similar vintage (I believe even older). I found I got the best results when shooting at 400 (rather even underexpose a bit) and stand develop in Rodinal 1+100 for one hour. Don't trust the claim Rodinal (1+25/1+50) and APX400 only get you ISO 320 .. that is true for the newer version maybe but not for the old Agfapan.

 

[Moriturii]

I got some Tri-X, produced in 1984, expired 1986. I got it as a 100ft bulk roll, unopened package. It's ISO is about 100 I think. @ E.I. 200, developed in D76 1+1, I get little to no shadow details.

 

[wkkato]

I would also overexpose a bit to push your exposure above the increased base fog that comes with old age and also push development a bit to compensate for the loss of sensitivity over the years. There's a lot of latitude in BW film that you can use. The only problem comes with scanning the resulting dense negatives.

Warren

It is probably still ok for all but the most critical of work. I would advise you to expose it as ISO100 and maybe increase development a little. You'll soon find a sweet spot where it will be ok.

I have to develop a roll of APX400, expired in 2003. Will post some results when it is done.