Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 69,759   Posts: 1,516,010   Online: 914
      
Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 37
  1. #21
    Aristotle80's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Baton Rouge and New Orleans
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    58
    Images
    3
    I recently bought a big package of 2004 expired Portra VC400. It was perfect when developed normally and exposed at EI200. Overexpose one stop and you should be fine if they were honest about the cold storage.
    I confess I'm a gear nut within my price range. ;)
    Nikon FM2n, FG, FG20, N2000, Nikkormat, Olympus Stylus Epic
    Minox 35EL, Voigtlander Bessa-L
    Yashica-D TLR 6x6, Seagull TLR 6x6
    Agfa Isolette 6x6, Welmy 6x6
    Kodak Tourist 6x9 Anaston lens
    http://www.wendelstout.com/

  2. #22
    martinjames's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Colorado, USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    50
    Images
    23
    Hmm... all this has me eyeing a roll of Kodak Vericolor III, expired 11/90, that came with a Rollei I purchased a couple of years ago. Obviously, way outside the range of expiration being discussed previously in this thread... but it might be interesting to see what comes of it. Just for fun, ya know!

  3. #23
    clayne's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    San Francisco, CA | Kuching, MY | Jakarta, ID
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    2,838
    Images
    57
    Expose the vericolor +1 or +2, develop as normal, and upload the results. I bet you'll be surprised to find out it isn't trash.
    Stop worrying about grain, resolution, sharpness, and everything else that doesn't have a damn thing to do with substance.

    http://www.flickr.com/kediwah

  4. #24

    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Boston, Massachusetts USA
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    35
    I think it also has a lot to do with how the expired film has been stored. Obviously, if it has been in the freezer, the results will be much better, at least for slower films. I've used film in the 100-200 ISO range which I had stored in the freezer since fresh, and it's been as good as new years after expiration. With faster film, not so much, as you're dealing with the effects gamma radiation, and no amount of freezing can prevent that. That being said, I have come across some exceptions. I'm not trying to start a brand war here, but I've had 35 mm rolls of the old Agfa Optima 125, as well as Konica Centuria Super 200, that have been virtually useless only a few years after expiration, even though they had been stored frozen since fresh. The odd thing about that was, in the case of the latter, Konica promoted their Centuria Super films as being more resistant to fogging from natural background radiation. The one thing I've found through personal experience is that Fuji C41 films do seem to be more resistant than others, including Kodak. I've used Superia 800 a few years out-of-date with little noticeable difference, yet have used Kodak 400 stored frozen for roughly the same amount of time that had noticeably degraded.

  5. #25
    TheFlyingCamera's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Washington DC
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    8,165
    Blog Entries
    51
    Images
    435
    I've found the opposite - the Kodak films seemed to do best vis-a-vis aging, but it's all relative to film speed. The stuff that's held up best has been the 100-ish speed films regardless of brand. The fast stuff, not so much.

  6. #26

    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Boston, Massachusetts USA
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    35
    Quote Originally Posted by TheFlyingCamera View Post
    I've found the opposite - the Kodak films seemed to do best vis-a-vis aging, but it's all relative to film speed. The stuff that's held up best has been the 100-ish speed films regardless of brand. The fast stuff, not so much.
    Yes, I should have clarified. I have seen little difference between slower speed film from Fuji and Kodak. However, I have found the 'freezer life' of higher speed Fuji C41 film does seem to be better than Kodak. That being said, I am basing my observation on my experience from a few years ago. Things may be totally different now, and there are certainly variables.

  7. #27

    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Castle Rock, CO, USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,282
    Images
    58
    Quote Originally Posted by Tom1956 View Post
    I've used Portra 160 3 years out of date. Wanna see a picture that no amount of Photoshopping could help? I had 5 rolls of it that came from a known source--new, bought by ME. After it ruining 3 rolls of my work, I threw the rest out. I say again: get rid of it.
    What's wrong with that? It looks great. Surely not real accurate, but it is cool.
    A politician is a man who will double cross that bridge when he comes to it.

    Oscar Levant

  8. #28

    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    126
    Quote Originally Posted by Tom1956 View Post
    I've used Portra 160 3 years out of date. Wanna see a picture that no amount of Photoshopping could help? I had 5 rolls of it that came from a known source--new, bought by ME. After it ruining 3 rolls of my work, I threw the rest out. I say again: get rid of it.
    That colour shift could equally be caused by indifferent film processing or scanning. It can be corrected in PS without much effort but I'm not about to discuss that here - start a thread on DPUG if you want to know more. OzJohn

  9. #29

    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Athens, Hellas
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    73
    Hello,

    I have already shot a couple of rolls of the 2002 batch with my holga (processed normally) and after a fast scanning I see that colours are ok (maybe not enough vivid) and perhaps the negatives are a bit more grainy than the normal. This without any adjustment of brightness or contrast in Photoshop. The only noticed problem is that there is a multiple faint trace along the lower part of the film on both rolls. I will shoot another roll to check if this is a film's failure or lab's process failure. Next week I will post a sample.

  10. #30
    TheFlyingCamera's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Washington DC
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    8,165
    Blog Entries
    51
    Images
    435
    Quote Originally Posted by Iridium View Post
    Hello,

    I have already shot a couple of rolls of the 2002 batch with my holga (processed normally) and after a fast scanning I see that colours are ok (maybe not enough vivid) and perhaps the negatives are a bit more grainy than the normal. This without any adjustment of brightness or contrast in Photoshop. The only noticed problem is that there is a multiple faint trace along the lower part of the film on both rolls. I will shoot another roll to check if this is a film's failure or lab's process failure. Next week I will post a sample.
    The results you got are exactly what I would expect for 10 year old expired film. Do post your results - I'd be interested to see what you got.

Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Contact Us  |  Support Us!  |  Advertise  |  Site Terms  |  Archive  —   Search  |  Mobile Device Access  |  RSS  |  Facebook  |  Linkedin