Quote Originally Posted by David Lyga View Post
STONE!!! YOU SAID (and you err): "The speed loss is often in the exposure level, so if the film was already previously exposed he wouldn't be losing any more speed"


WRONG! Let me remind all, including Stone, that, true, the exposure was proper AT THE TIME. But with decades passed, THAT exposure is NOW GROSSLY INSUFFICIENT. The film has steadily been losing speed through the decades, INCLUDING THAT WHICH RECEIVED SUCH ANCIENT EXPOSURE. The ONLY way to ATTEMPT to resurrect it is to give a LOT of development in order to get WHAT REMAINS out of the waning, feeble, age-agonized, incapable-of-self-sustainment, halides! - David Lyga
Ok, I did say in some form that I could be wrong. But, I've also shot film that was half exposed 25 years ago and half exposed now, and this was on local pharmacy film not pro film, and the exposure and color on the 25 year old images was perfect, and the new shots were all shot at canister speed and all dark and the shadows went green and the highlights went a sort of orange. And this film had been sitting in an in-air conditioned attic for at lest 10 of those years in the northeast the roof attic temps reach 120 degrees F and so from practical personal experience I have to disagree with you.

I know different film has different latent image failure rates, like PanF+ with its horrible 3 month after shot self life, but in general most other film seems to be recoverable without any adjustment if already exposed.

Again I'm going off of actual experience here. This was a C-41 film emulsion to be clear not B&W or C-22 or CN17. But I would assume they have similar latent image failure characteristics.


~Stone

Mamiya: 7 II, RZ67 Pro II / Canon: 1V, AE-1, 5DmkII / Kodak: No 1 Pocket Autographic, No 1A Pocket Autographic | Sent w/ iPhone using Tapatalk