Expired TMAX

[dfoo]

I just picked up some expired TMAX 400 from 2002. The film was kept frozen the entire time AFAIK. Should I adjust anything in exposure, or development?

 

[charjohncarter]

I think not. But I am a little more relax than I used to be.

 

[dfoo]

I shot some test rolls today. I developed the first 12 shots in 1+2 XTOL 20C rotary processing for 10.5 minutes. Looks a bit thin. I developed the next roll of 36 in 1+2 XTOL rotary for 11 minutes. Also look a bit thin. I shot both at ISO 400. I have some test pictures which I haven't inspected well yet which I metered with an accurate spot meter, so that'll probably tell me the true speed of the film. I also developed in a cold basement which means that by the time the processing ended the dev was probably around 18C. Rotary processing in a cold room for a single roll definitely leads to a drop in temp of the dev!

Other than the speed, the film looks great. Very fine grain, no obvious fogging and no mottling of the emulsion.

 

[dfoo]

I printed the contact sheet and some shots from the roll. I did a series of test shots in my backyard. I determined the time for maximum black through the film fog, and printed some of the test shots. The one that printed best was ISO 200. I guess either I didn't develop the shots long enough, or film needs more exposure. The negatives on the roll in general look a bit thin which isn't surprising. What test can I do to determine the difference between underdevelopment and underexposure?

 

[dfoo]

One thing to note that I forgot is that the scene was very high contrast. ie: it was a very bright day. I shot EV 17, 16, 15, 14, 13, 12. 15 was what my meter indicated for ISO 400.

 

[El Jonbre Grande]

I recently shot some 13 year old rolls of Tmax 100. Developed at normal times in 1:4 Tmax developer and they came out great!

 

[charjohncarter]

If you have shadow detail on your thin negatives then you exposed properly. I still doubt that the factor of expired film is causing the thin negatives. Also, most people say they get thin negatives with Tmax (100 & 400), my EI for Tmax400 is 250. Let us know what the results are in your next try.

 

[dfoo]

I guess really what you've written should be "printable" shadow detail? If I look at the negs there is definitely detail there, but in the prints none of it shows (printed on grade 2 fixed contrast paper).

 

[palec]

The shadow detail depends on print exposure as well - you'll lose shadows faster than gaining highlights. You've mentioned that you've adjusted the exposure time to reach maximum black. In my experience this is not practically possible as the area around the film (and sprocket holes) will be always darker than the blank frame (base + fog). Ansel Adams recommended to match Zone V in print to get right exposure - and on this base you can evaluate if the contrast is high or low.

Btw. tabular films look thinner by eye inspection.