EcoLeica
Check out my blog!!!
Hey all, I have been offered a fairly good deal of 20 rolls of kodak 3200. Now this stuff expired in 2006 and has not been stored in the deep freeze (in a cupboard in a box I believe). Is this going to make a huge difference to my photos?
FrozenInTime
Well-known
It may be an urban myth, but I'm sure I read Kodak store stocks of this film in lead lined underground vaults to reduce radiation damage to the film.
I would be happy with old tri-x but I have thrown out a few old rolls of unused TMZ.
I would be happy with old tri-x but I have thrown out a few old rolls of unused TMZ.
Phantomas
Well-known
I'm just drying my hands off getting back from the kitchen having develope 2 expired rolls of TMax 3200 (2005/2006). Negatives look fine, will see how they scan.
Till now I've only shot 2 other expired rolls of this film and the results were if-ie, but that was more my fault than the films. You see, I shot one roll at night, on Fed 5, guessometering, another roll on Rollei 35, at a rock concert, mostly badly underexposed.
I say go for it, I think you'll get decent results, it's a fast and grainy film anyway, so don't expect smoothness, and three years is not long enough to ruin film even as fast as 3200.
(On another note, I recently got beautiful result from 40 year old Agfa Isopan at ISO25).
Here's some shots I've managed with my drunken exposure on expired 3200 (in dark):
Till now I've only shot 2 other expired rolls of this film and the results were if-ie, but that was more my fault than the films. You see, I shot one roll at night, on Fed 5, guessometering, another roll on Rollei 35, at a rock concert, mostly badly underexposed.
I say go for it, I think you'll get decent results, it's a fast and grainy film anyway, so don't expect smoothness, and three years is not long enough to ruin film even as fast as 3200.
(On another note, I recently got beautiful result from 40 year old Agfa Isopan at ISO25).
Here's some shots I've managed with my drunken exposure on expired 3200 (in dark):
projectbluebird
Film Abuser
If it truly is a good deal, take it. I had a brick of TMZ that I ended up not using for over two years, unrefrigerated. I've always shot it at 1600, and never had issues.
Film is not as fragile as everyone seems to think, especially if it's been kept moderatly protected (your cabinet, for example) If you're really worried, just do an exposure test on one of the rolls. That will give you the correct EV to shoot at.
Film is not as fragile as everyone seems to think, especially if it's been kept moderatly protected (your cabinet, for example) If you're really worried, just do an exposure test on one of the rolls. That will give you the correct EV to shoot at.
marke
Well-known
I've been using Kodak 3200 exp in 3/07 for several months now. I've had no problems with it.
I usually shoot this @ EI 800 (whcich is the real speed of this film), but I will ocassionally shoot it @ EI 1600.
I usually shoot this @ EI 800 (whcich is the real speed of this film), but I will ocassionally shoot it @ EI 1600.
Steve Bellayr
Veteran
I was advised by the sellers of film not to use experied film asa above 1600. Certainly, if you do not know the storage of the film be leery.
EcoLeica
Check out my blog!!!
Good advice people, though could someone explain to me how I would do a exposure test suggested by bluebird?
Al Kaplan
Veteran
Exposure test: Shoot 2 stops under, 1 stop under, the rated speed, and for good measure 1 stop over. Develop the film and see what you get. You can fine tune from there.
Chriscrawfordphoto
Real Men Shoot Film.
I've used expired TMZ and wouldn't recommend it for best results. Yes, the photos can look nice, but side by side with fresh there is a big difference. Not worth saving a few dollars. I'm poor, I always look for ways to save money, but not at the expense of quality for my life's work. Most BW films do work fine expired, even after several yrs, but NOT Tmax 3200.
Tom A
RFF Sponsor
The "speed" films are far more sensitive to storage and age. They fog quickly - however, if you shoot them at lower than rated speed - "T speed" around 800-1000 (which is the nominal speed anyway) and cut the processing time by 15-20% - you will be OK. The fog, if any will lower contrast a bit, but you can still "print through it".
If the price is right - i.e cheap ($1-$1.50/roll) it can be worth it. You can also use it for experiments with developer, like rating it at 3200 -6400 and frying it in Rodinal 1:10 for heavy grain and solid blacks - why not - it is only $ 0.05/frame anyway. You might even try it in stuff like D72 print (either straight or 1:1) developer - rating the film at 6400 asa and let it simmer for 10-12 minutes.
If it works - you have something unique looking - if it doesn't - chalk it up to experience - and, no - I would not use it for something important prior to testing it.
If the price is right - i.e cheap ($1-$1.50/roll) it can be worth it. You can also use it for experiments with developer, like rating it at 3200 -6400 and frying it in Rodinal 1:10 for heavy grain and solid blacks - why not - it is only $ 0.05/frame anyway. You might even try it in stuff like D72 print (either straight or 1:1) developer - rating the film at 6400 asa and let it simmer for 10-12 minutes.
If it works - you have something unique looking - if it doesn't - chalk it up to experience - and, no - I would not use it for something important prior to testing it.
Al Kaplan
Veteran
Film doesn't just suddenly go belly up and die on the expiration date. It gradually ages from the time it's first made. The expiration date means that if you've taken reasonable care to keep the film from baking in the sun the manufacturer figures that the film should still be "within specs" at that point, and they'll stand behind their product. Very fast film doesn't age well. Heat, humidity, cosmic radiation, they all take their toll.
Film would be really slow stuff if it wasn't for all the "sensitizers" that are added to boost its speed and make it sensitive to more than just ultra-violet and blue light.
Film would be really slow stuff if it wasn't for all the "sensitizers" that are added to boost its speed and make it sensitive to more than just ultra-violet and blue light.
Peter_Jones
Well-known
I have a few rolls of expired TMZ and Delta 3200 (all date unknown) - what's the general concensus with these, rate at lower (than 3200) ISO then a bit more dev than normal for the rated speed ?
(I've had reasonable results from overexposed Delta from this batch but that was dev'd commercially in whatever they use for the box speed. the underexposed frames were poor, due to guessed exposure in poor light.)
(I've had reasonable results from overexposed Delta from this batch but that was dev'd commercially in whatever they use for the box speed. the underexposed frames were poor, due to guessed exposure in poor light.)
Trius
Waiting on Maitani
It wouldn't be worth my time and effort. You can always make more money, you can never make more time.
EcoLeica
Check out my blog!!!
Hey all, decided to take a chance and go for it! it only cost me $4NZ a roll which is basically $2USD a roll so im not too fussed, should be some fun results as Im only really going to rate it around 800asa anyway. Thanks for all your advice
Tim Gray
Well-known
I bought 20 rolls of 3/07 TMZ sometime in mid '07 for less than $2/roll. It worked out pretty good for a while. However, somewhere in mid '08, I started to notice the creeping base fog. It still works, and works pretty decent (I only have a couple rolls left, but have bought new TMZ for speed work) but I wouldn't rate it at 3200. You are probably best off at 800-1600. Doing a roll of the old stuff and a fresh roll side by side really shows how high the base fog has gotten. Mine had been freezer stored before and after purchase too.
raid
Dad Photographer
Rate the film at 800-1000 and keep on shooting happily ...
bigdog
Established
I agree that TMY 3200 will fog over time regardless of storage. I have been shooting from a few bricks dated 3/07, stored in my freezer since 08. Recently, it appears the base is slightly fogged but I normally rate the film @ 1250 and scan and print so the results are perfectly fine for my work flow.
Pablito
coco frío
I love TMZ and have shot hundreds of rolls of the stuff over the years. Based on this experience I would not shoot it beyond the expiration date even if it had been frozen. Frozen Tri-X I'd shoot for years beyond expiration date but not TMZ. I've seen fog on TMZ just a couple of months beyond expiration date.
katgut@earthlink.net
Established
I'd imagine that storage temperature has nothing to do with fogging.
But does anyone know about radon? If film is stored in a basement with radon gas, will that fog it?
But does anyone know about radon? If film is stored in a basement with radon gas, will that fog it?
P
PhotoJim
Guest
I don't know if radon will fog it, but cosmic radiation fogs all film, and the faster the film, the faster the fogging. A basement is nowhere nearly deep enough underground to help.
I find that fresh Delta 3200 (e.g. a year prior to expiry) has much less base fog than the same film, freezer-stored, at or near its expiry, so I believe it. Slower films when frozen tend to suffer little to no obvious degradation, although if you keep them long enough you will get damage.
I find that fresh Delta 3200 (e.g. a year prior to expiry) has much less base fog than the same film, freezer-stored, at or near its expiry, so I believe it. Slower films when frozen tend to suffer little to no obvious degradation, although if you keep them long enough you will get damage.