Shot some TXP 320, expired in 1999

Discussion in 'B&W: Film, Paper, Chemistry' started by adelorenzo, Mar 7, 2013.

  1. adelorenzo

    adelorenzo Subscriber

    Messages:
    740
    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2012
    Location:
    Whitehorse,
    Shooter:
    Medium Format
    Shot some Kodak Tri-X Pan 320 that I was given by a friend from her photo school days. Expired in 1999 but has been well stored. I wasn't using a meter but I believe I was trying to rate the film about ISO 200 or so. The negatives are darker than what I would expect, compared to what I normally shoot (Tri-x), even the film edges. Would that be normal or maybe fogged a bit?

    In any case I'm pretty happy with the results and have some more rolls of it to shoot.

    [​IMG]
    Toronto by Anthony DeLorenzo, on Flickr

    [​IMG]
    Toronto by Anthony DeLorenzo, on Flickr
     
  2. brucemuir

    brucemuir Member

    Messages:
    2,266
    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2007
    Location:
    Metro DC are
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    Looks great!
    Some fogging could be expected with a 320-400 speed film after 10-14 years but as you can see I wouldn't sweat it.

    Youy did right, be generous with exposure and maybe select a low fogging developer like HC110 or similar but any will do really.
    The proof is in the prints.
     
  3. polyglot

    polyglot Member

    Messages:
    3,469
    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2009
    Location:
    South Austra
    Shooter:
    Medium Format
    Dark edges is fogging. If you have enough exposure, it doesn't matter* as you just print through it.



    * as long as it's not so severe that it consumes a significant chunk of the film's dynamic range. That's rare.
     
  4. Whiteymorange

    Whiteymorange Subscriber

    Messages:
    2,385
    Joined:
    Jul 27, 2004
    Location:
    Boston area
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    I'm shooting TXP 320 that went belly up in 1994 and 1996 and finding it fogged but useable. Plus X from the same era looks fresh. Neither was stored well after about 2007 but they both had spent years in a freezer before that. HC110 does help, especially when used at 65 degrees instead of 68. I started at 8 minutes with a 1:49 mix (Jason Brunner's simple set-up) and didn't change the timing for the temperature, but you may want to lengthen it a bit. YRMV.

    This is, of course, if you want to change anything about what you're already doing. No sure, since your images look great.
     
  5. viridari

    viridari Member

    Messages:
    330
    Joined:
    Dec 14, 2008
    Location:
    Raleigh, Nor
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    I managed to get my hands on a roll that had expired about 25 years prior to my use of it. My only misgiving with this shot is that I didn't use a contrast filter.

    [​IMG]
    Candid Fisherman by magnus919, on Flickr
     
  6. adelorenzo

    adelorenzo Subscriber

    Messages:
    740
    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2012
    Location:
    Whitehorse,
    Shooter:
    Medium Format
    I think that the fogging isn't too bad and it sounds like a little extra exposure when shooting probably helped. When viewing the negatives they look dark but the images are clearly there. It scanned very well but as was mentioned, we'll see how it prints.

    @Whiteymorange That is exactly the recipe I use for Tri-X in HC-110. So you are saying develop at a slightly lower temperature? I might try that although I only have a few more rolls of this film so maybe I'll just stick to the usual routine.