Issues With Expired 120 Portra

wjlapier

wjlapier

Well-known
Local time
3:38 PM
Joined
Jan 30, 2008
Messages
1,896
Aside from the color cast what is that on the side of the image? It is present on some images but not others.

Expired Kodak Portra 400VC. I developed this roll today. Jobo C41 home kit. Shot with a new to me Fuji GS645S which seems to work fine.

Two more rolls of Ektar to develop tomorrow. Hoping for better results :)





 
Thanks for the reply. What is fat rolled? It was one of several samples I had. 2008 vintage.

I'll have to check the other negs, but I know some didn't have the marks like the above images do.
 
Looks like a light leak. This can happen if the film is not tightly rolled up in the spool before you tape it. Light can then get in between the inside rim of the spool and the light-tight backing paper.
 
Robert Lai said:
Looks like a light leak. This can happen if the film is not tightly rolled up in the spool before you tape it. Light can then get in between the inside rim of the spool and the light-tight backing paper.
Click to expand...

Yup, that is what a fat roll is. Basically the completed roll is fatter than a correctly tightly wound roll. I did that one time with my GW 690III. I got it by not maintaining tension on the film when I loaded the camera.
 
I respectively disagree with the various light leak theories.

I think it may be a problem resulting from too little solution in the tank which left the top edge, the right edge in the images shown, out of the chemicals. The streaks of "good image" on that edge would be where the chemisty flowed acoss that secion during the tank fill and agitation cycles.
 
While it may be light leak from the camera I don't believe this to be fat rolled. I've had fat rolls and the leaks are nothing like this. These look more organic. Does the camera have seals on the back ? Or I'd be inclined to suggest processing issues...
 
No light leak from the camera. Just did the second roll and no marks on the negatives. Turns out I can't read very well and don't remember how much chems a roll of 120 needs in the tank I use. 590 instead of 500 :bang:

;)

Now I'm a happy shooter. Negs look great. No light leak in the camera. Will scan later today when they are dry.
 
I have recently had nine expired rolls developed and scanned. I got in a few images such light leaks. It was not because of defective cameras. Remove all colors to get B&W versions too. Try it out.
 
After the cause has been determined - too little amount of chemicals in the tank, what is the point of using expired film at all?
OK, when this particular type of film is not available anymore, you give it a try and see what comes out of it. But in general why would anyone risk taking potentially great photographs just to find out that the expired film completely ruined the result?
 
johannielscom said:
Apart from that light leak issue, the images look very under-exposed.

Rate the film half the box speed when shooting it, it can handle overexposure a lot better than it can handle underexposure. Incident meter for the shadow that needs detail.

Read this to get a grip on exposing: http://www.johnnypatience.com/metering-for-film/
Click to expand...

Thanks for the reminder of Mr. Patience's article. I've read it before but you always gain by a re-read.
 
icebear said:
After the cause has been determined - too little amount of chemicals in the tank, what is the point of using expired film at all?
OK, when this particular type of film is not available anymore, you give it a try and see what comes out of it. But in general why would anyone risk taking potentially great photographs just to find out that the expired film completely ruined the result?
Click to expand...

For me it was one of the last rolls of a huge lot of expired film I had. I sold it all but had this one left over and never shot 400VC. In the end I didn't care for any of it. Some dating back to 1999.

I'm happily shooting Ektar again. And some Trix too.
 
Ektar 100

Ektar 100

A little more what I was hoping for.



Pretty much auto everything in Vuescan and a Epson V500 scanner.
 
Eric T said:
Raid,
How do you rate expired film if it has been stored in the refrigerator until use?
Thanks.
Click to expand...

I rate XP2 at ISO 100-200, as an example. I rate most types of film with ISO 400 around ISO 100-200. I also avoid taking photos of poorly lit scenes with expired film. No matter what I do, I need to use Lightroom or Adobe to increase contrast and also increase saturation.
 
I'm not so sure it's lack of chemistry as that would show underdeveloped areas whereas your shows overexposure. Still baffling unless you had a light leak in your dev tank. Is it a plastic cap steel tank ? I've had issues with those and very rare leaks
 
newsgrunt said:
I'm not so sure it's lack of chemistry as that would show underdeveloped areas whereas your shows overexposure. Still baffling unless you had a light leak in your dev tank. Is it a plastic cap steel tank ? I've had issues with those and very rare leaks
Click to expand...

It's a plastic Patterson tank. I'm really thinking it's the 90ml less of dev and blix that was the culprit. I do have a roll of black and white to develop that looks like a fat roll. The Portra 400VC was tight I remember. The Geppettos Toy Store photo and more I'm scanning came out great to me. Colors are fine and no marks on the images like the first three.
 
BTW, I read the Johnny Patience article and never heard of shooting half the box speed. All color film I ever shot was at box speed. I would underexpose a little to get more blue in the sky.

I'll have to give it a try.

I shot my M6 alongside the Fuji GS645S this past week in Cannon Beach, Or. Really makes me wonder if I could do all film and no digital camera at all. I had the Lumix GX7 and Leica 15/1.7 and 25/1.4 but rarely used them.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom