Shooting expired film - interesting?

F

Forest_rain

Well-known
Local time
9:16 AM
Joined
Jun 14, 2020
Messages
322
I shot a few rolls of expired Fuji 400 awhile ago. Results were ok, colors came out what seemed like more oversaturated then normal, but otherwise the same as new film.

I see people bidding on expired film on ebay, often paying the same as for new film.

I wonder if their looking for “interesting” results as the film may be more faded or altered in some way?

Any value in shooting expired film, experiences, assuming I could find some at some point at a very cheap price at thrift shop, etc.
 
The only reason I shoot it is because I bought it much cheaper than new film.
I don't understand paying new or close to new prices for it. Sometimes you can see people pay more than new film prices!

Most of the time I cannot tell the difference from new film because it has been stored correctly.
I have had one or two rolls that had obvious heat damage after I developed them - really faded out etc.
 
Except for Panatomic-x, occasionally, where you can usually get away with it, I have quit buying significantly expired film. Too much time wasted in carefully setting up shots, hoping for nice results, and ending up with very poor results. Life’s too short, for me any way, at this point. Have bought way too much “always frozen” film from liars in 50 or 100 foot rolls, and ruined too many hundreds, literally, of photographic opportunities.
Yes, sometimes it’s more or less fine, but sometimes it’s not, and the results from those rolls tend to be “interesting”. Some of those might indeed be keepers, true, but it’s a gamble.
In the whole overall scheme of things, fresh film isn’t all that expensive, and it’s more predictable. Once in a lifetime shots, why intentionally lower your chances of doing those well just to save a few cents per frame?
Of course someone is always wanting to save a few cents per frame, I know I once did.
No longer, burned too many times. Penny wise and Pound foolish is, I think, how the expression goes.
 
If film is expired, I would only think about purchasing if it is black and white, but I would never pay more than retail of its current replacement. Black and white is not as badly affected by heat or years of storage.
Phil Forrest
 
I shot a roll of kodak b&w (I forget which one...) that expired in '94 and was "stored" in a forgotten camera bag, in 2009. The results were disappointingly good.


If you want interesting results from colour film then cross process...
 
I don't even begin to understand what people are willing to pay for expired film, and by expired I mean film more than 2 or 3 years past the expatriation date. It "might" be OK, it "probably" isn't. I found a Watson bulk loader with 10+ years expired Kodak Pan-X in it. In a box in my attic were temps reach 140F+. Amazing after working out a development it gave good results. Did I use it for anything important, NO. Would I buy it from eBay or any place else, NO. Why waste my time, developers, and shots on a "maybe". I used to take a chance on film recently out of date if it was cheap but I see film way past the expiration date for maybe 50 cents savings. No way.
 
I used to buy expired film to test out the $2.00 cameras I was finding at junk shops and charity stores. But then it got trendy for some reason, and the prices went up. Took all the fun out of seeing if my cheap cameras were any good. I do remember though that Fujifilm does not age well, with lots of color shifts even if stored in decent conditions.


PF
 
I have no problems understanding people who would like to get hold of some of the superb films that have been discontinued, like the Fuji Neopan 400 or the Fuji Reala Ace. I myself would jump at the chance of snapping up some Kodak Dacomatic 5461, an aerial surveillance film with some of the same characteristics as the Neopan 400. But not at any price.
 
it's an age-related thing.

We oldies gripe and grumble about everything - new film costs the earth, nobody on Ebay is selling expired film for two and six a roll nowadays, anything to do with analog is 20x the price it was in 1980, why isn't Leica still manufacturing the M2 or Kodak selling Panatomic-X. The list is endless. Nothing is as it was, and so on.

I'm as guilty of all that as the rest.

Almost all the photographers I know who are cross-processing color film are aged 35 or younger. We oldies persist with our well-aged-in-the-freezer stocks shot at box speed and complain if a 30-year old Verichrome Pan shows a little fog.

We are the past. They are the future. Ideally, both sides should just meet and stay firmly in the present. Fresh film bought in bulk orders is the way...
 
Film for some of us is shot because of the unexpected, so I can see the attraction of aged colour film, especially colour (given what’s been said already B&W is less affected). So instead of paying sharks on the auction site, why not pre-age the stuff such as leaving in a hot car in summer, or on a radiator in autumn / winter.
 
Old Kodak Ektachrome 200.

ABR_Kodakektachrome200E6H17763.jpg
 
I've found to my chagrin that Fuji film doesn't keep as well as Kodak. A friend gave up film and gave me his stash (which he never stored in a frig or freezer). All around 2001 dates the C-41 and E-6 some was fine if it was Kodak but the Fuji was useless in E-6 and unsatisfactory in C-41.

And as Larry Cloetta implied the higher the speed the less likely to be usable.
 
charjohncarter said:
I've found to my chagrin that Fuji film doesn't keep as well as Kodak. A friend gave up film and gave me his stash (which he never stored in a frig or freezer). All around 2001 dates the C-41 and E-6 some was fine if it was Kodak but the Fuji was useless in E-6 and unsatisfactory in C-41.

And as Larry Cloetta implied the higher the speed the less likely to be usable.
Click to expand...

I came to the opposite conclusion about Fuji and Kodak, but realized there are just too many variables to really know.

Lately I've been shooting some 1995 Fuji 1600 given to me by a friend. Colors are great. Crazy grainy, but it was in 1995 too.

Basically it is what it is at this point. Theorize away, but if I can make good pictures with a film, then I'm happy.
 
I've used 200 asa Tudor 110 film that had been expired by a little over 10 years several times and the only thing was a slightly warm cast. I was able to give an extra stop exposure as you're supposed to do for each decade out of date.
 
seany65 said:
I've used 200 asa Tudor 110 film that had been expired by a little over 10 years several times and the only thing was a slightly warm cast. I was able to give an extra stop exposure as you're supposed to do for each decade out of date.
Click to expand...

That made up rule of 1 stop extra for every 10 years is funny.
Who came up with that? And how?

I just shoot it at box speed and never had an issue. What issues you will have is to do with how the film may have been stored. Heat is the killer.

Good article here:

https://emulsive.org/articles/rants...no-you-do-not-need-to-add-one-stop-per-decade
 
Thanks for the link.

So it seems that for colour film it's not 1 stop for every decade, it's 1/2 a stop for every decade, if you don't know it's storage history and if it's not 120 format.
 
I have quit buying significantly expired film. Too much time wasted in carefully setting up shots, hoping for nice results, and ending up with very poor results. Life’s too short, for me any way, at this point.


This.
 
Kai-san said:
I have no problems understanding people who would like to get hold of some of the superb films that have been discontinued, like the Fuji Neopan 400 ......
Click to expand...

I think the merits of some of the discontinued films have been embellished over time, like our teen age years. I shot loads of Neopan 400 for 15 years but had no problems changing to HP5+ or Tri-X when I could buy 50 rolls cheaper. I ended up shooting them the same, developing them the same, and could tell absolutely no difference in the final prints.
 
Huss said:
That made up rule of 1 stop extra for every 10 years is funny.
Who came up with that? And how?

I just shoot it at box speed and never had an issue. What issues you will have is to do with how the film may have been stored. Heat is the killer.

Good article here:

https://emulsive.org/articles/rants...no-you-do-not-need-to-add-one-stop-per-decade
Click to expand...


I think that rule applies more to b&w than color, though that thumb is still kind of heavy to me, maybe by double.

When I started shooting a lot of old color film for something to do during these somewhat limiting times I gave pretty hefty exposures and got horrible results. I think heavy overexposure leads to, or exaggerates, color crossovers. I also think it is much different with scanning, which is mostly what there is now for color. I get good color from very thin color negs, right down to where the image looses its dark tones into a grainy mess. A little overexposure, sure, but blasting it sure helped me to build some color correction skills. A lot of negs that look great scanned would be useless for C printing.

I certainly agree on storage issues too. It is nice to know where the film has been, and to have a quantity from the same batch/source.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom