Can I use some 50 to 60 y/o developers on modern b&w films?

iphoenix

iphoenix

Well-known
Local time
9:40 PM
Joined
Nov 25, 2012
Messages
255
Location
Melbourne, Australia
View My Gallery
Because of limited access to film processors, it's time for me to start developing my own films.

I have a sealed tin of powdered Kodak D76, another of Microdol-X, and a cardboard package (unused, still loose, but slightly bulging) of Ilford PFP (PQ Developer) - all 3 from the mid '60s. I also have some Hypo from the same time.

I'd like to use Ilford FP4 or HP4 films, which in my younger years, I processed with Microphen.

Are the current FP4 and HP4 films the same as the ones of the mid '60s and would these old developers be usable, compatible, and give good results with the currently available films?
 
I'm pretty new to processing and B&W in general, but I've been use D-76 on HP5 with good results. I shoot HP5 for medium and recently got in a curated show with that developer/film combo. Kodak's website is good for processing times...

Godspeed
 
It will probably take a chemist from among RFF members to be able to tell if these old powders are still good, but my personal take on this would be: why risk your photos you might care about, in order to save 5 usd?
D76 is still a benchmark and quite cheap, particularly if you use it 1+1. Another good alternative to start with for Ilford films would be HC 110 or the Ilford equivalent which I think is called HC. It is a dense liquid, a non solving developer, which you can use more concentrated for less acutance and less grain (HP5+) or more diluted for more acutance at slight expense of grain (FP4+). You could also benefit from going through this thread:http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=130848
 
Don't risk good film with old developer. If you really can't resist it then shoot a test roll, but don't expect miracles. There are so many good developers available, even in this contracted market, that there is little need to compromise on quality. Pick a good general purpose dev like D76/ID11 or a long lasting liquid one like HC-110 and don't look back. My personal choice for HP5+ is HC-110. It lasts forever in concentrated form and is totally conistent in results, as long as you do your bit right. Good luck and welcome to film developing.
 
Up to three years ago I used to live on tins of D76 I laid down in the late 1980s (before they began to switch to plastic bags). I never had a issue with them (apart from wishing that I had bought more than one box full back when they still were available). If the tins weren't stored in blazing heat, aren't visibly corroded or punctured and the contents aren't discoloured or fused into a lump, I'd trust tinned D76 for a century or more.

Bagged or liquid developers are another matter - test these on some less important films first, once they are past their nominal shelf life...
 
Yes, those tins (cans) if they are not rusted away, is one of the best packing of photochemicals. Even much better then a nowadays PE (plastic) packing. Microdol-X and D-76 you can use without any hesitation. Unless they were stored in a very bad condition, see above remarks.
 
Mix it and see if it's brown looking. I had quite a few of the older foil / paper packets of Microdol x that I opened and everyone were bad. I had several cans of D76 from the 60's and all were bad as well. I recently opens a 5 year old can of LPD that I had misplaced and it was totally oxidized.

These old cans still contain oxygen so yes they will oxidize and will be no good after a few years.

I'd toss them if over 4 or 5 years old.
 
Unequivocally no on this idea.

Unless you are on your last dollar, this presents only risk for film processing. In the worst case, you could convert an expensive roll of film into blank celluloid for the sake of saving the same amount of money on buying new developer. In most intermediate cases, you will be getting a result that although acceptable will not likely be representative of what you will get in the future with fresh developer. D-76 is not exactly some irreproducible developer from the past.

The situation is different with paper developers - since you can easily make another print and adjust your development. It's not so easy with film, where you can't adjust on the fly.

Dante
 
The tin cans are pretty well airtight and should pose no problem. The Microdol X is most likely the old formulation and I would test that one with modern fim - jus for safety. The boxed Ilford I would dump - not airtight enough and probably not full strength anymore. Same with the hypo - too much of a risk. I would certainly tun a test on everything before committing to using them - just in case.
I haveseveral 1 gallon tins of D76 (and one of D76 replenisher) that I keep as a reserve. I would have no hesitation using it.
 
I just gave away 5 pcs. 5 liter cans of Microdol-X from a photo lab. Concerning the numbers on it around 1970-1975. The new user used this on 1+3 and reported all was OK. I have one small 600ml can left. Which I will use myself. This can is even older.
When using important film material I personally would never use old chemicals, independent whatever somebody is telling. For an Euro I can make all receipts myself fresh so why take any risk? But that was not the question .....
 
There you have your answer(s) as usual conflicting. Some say ok from experience and some of us have had powder oxidize in the can. You'll know when you mix it. If it's straw color and light it's most likely ok but if it looks like chocolate and is dark its bad. Keep in mind cans co twin air/oxygen. There's enough in there to eventually oxidize the contents.
 
x-ray said:
There's enough in there to eventually oxidize the contents.
Click to expand...

No - quite apart from the fact that they probably used (inert, for that purpose) nitrogen in the filling, there is only about 0.2g of oxygen in a litre of air. The small D76 tin had maybe 200cc volume, which amounts to 40mg of oxygen even if we assume no volume displacement by the developer - a negligible amount compared to the around 200g of chemicals in there...

The later Kodak tin cans are not perfectly oxidation safe in that limited force can spring the pre-stamped tear marks on the lid, and in that the (food preserve or beverage can alike) pull tab on the later versions has a aluminium rivet, which promotes electrochemical corrosion if stored in humid conditions. I would not trust dented or corroded tins, but in a perfect shape, their longevity exceeds that of any other commercial developer packaging I've ever encountered by a magnitude or two.
 
sevo said:
No - quite apart from the fact that they probably used (inert, for that purpose) nitrogen in the filling, there is only about 0.2g of oxygen in a litre of air. The small D76 tin had maybe 200cc volume, which amounts to 40mg of oxygen even if we assume no volume displacement by the developer - a negligible amount compared to the around 200g of chemicals in there.
Click to expand...

Well I guess I just made that up didn't i. No I didn't. I have a degree in organic chemistry and microbiology and nearly 50 years as a professional photographer. I've opened several old cans of Dektol, Microdol X and D76 to find them brown and oxidized. When mxed they were muddy brown.

You're entitled to your opinion but I state this as fact from experience. If the person posting wants to try it that's fine. He'll know pretty quickly whether it's good or not. Personally from experience I won't count on developer older than a few years. What's the logic in spending thousands on cameras and lenses then cutting corners on film or development? I don't see the logic here.

In any case you're not in any position to say I'm wrong.
 
Thank you to all; especially for the advice on how to tell whether or not there has been deterioration before risking the film.

Now I'll get some FP4 and let you know the results.

David
 
Yes. The canned stuff is probably OK - just mix it 1st and try it. If it's off colour (not white but grey) ditch it. Go for caffenol. 🙂
I have some 55 year old FX-2 here and in 2008 I was playing around with Polypan F at a family lunch.
Here is a sample of PPF on 50yo FX-2. The carbonate was fresh.
The FX-2 I might add has been seald in glass (like a tin) and the 21% O2 above the liquid has not affected the quality at all..
Unfortunately I've almost finished that batch! :-(




iphoenix said:
Because of limited access to film processors, it's time for me to start developing my own films.

I have a sealed tin of powdered Kodak D76, another of Microdol-X, and a cardboard package (unused, still loose, but slightly bulging) of Ilford PFP (PQ Developer) - all 3 from the mid '60s. I also have some Hypo from the same time.

I'd like to use Ilford FP4 or HP4 films, which in my younger years, I processed with Microphen.

Are the current FP4 and HP4 films the same as the ones of the mid '60s and would these old developers be usable, compatible, and give good results with the currently available films?
Click to expand...
 

Attachments

  • B&J 2008.jpg
    B&J 2008.jpg
    31.7 KB · Views: 0
Do a test. Mix the developer, and put a small piece of exposed film (or film leader) in. Watch how fast the film becomes dark.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom