The Film Apocalypse and Proper Freezing and Storage of Film

[Sal Santamaura]

Here are my base density results with HP5. Film in original packaging. Frozen since new. All film processed in the last 3 months.

HP5 Expiration 1986 = 0.74
HP5 Expiration 2001 = 0.50
HP5 Expiration 2013 = 0.21

Those are very interesting raw data that are useful to me after some interpretation.

I have found that a given film's base plus fog (fb+f) density varies substantially in different developers. For current, fresh, sheet HP5 Plus in Perceptol 1:1, which I process in a Jobo Expert drum with 5-minute pre-wash, then 7 minutes 0 seconds at 75 degrees F and 46 rpm, fb+f is 0.08/0.09 (the 0.01 variation probably reflecting my densitometer's repeatability). This is associated with a Contrast Index (CI) of 0.50, perfect for my stash of Canadian grade 2 Azo, and an Exposure Index (EI) of 500 with reference to my Zone VI-modified Pentax Digital spotmeter.

What developer do you use with HP5 Plus? I've seen fb+f densities with current, fresh sheet as high as 0.13 in TMAX-RS, but nothing close to 0.21.

In this 2003 thread

http://www.largeformatphotography.in...ead.php?t=8297

Carl Weese reported on changes that had been made to HP5 Plus roughly one year before then which extended its characteristic curve and lowered the fb+f level. Your two older emulsions are from the "pre-improved" Ilford film. Based on Carl's posting, in which he noted a reduction of between 0.06 and 0.08 in fb+f, I'll subtract 0.07 from your first two results:

Expiration 1986 = 0.67
Expiration 2001 = 0.43
Expiration 2013 = 0.21

Now we have fb+f increases over 10 and 25 years respectively of only 0.22 and 0.46. Those are very acceptable to me. My Azo, which works perfectly with a Zone VII density 0.9 higher than Zone I, will be very compatible with "printing through" fb+f of 0.55 (current 0.09 + a 0.46 increase due to age) in 25 years. HP5 Plus can reach 1.36 without breaking a sweat. In fact, it'll hit well over 2.0, more than adequate for expansions to support my printing medium.

Maybe there is too much radon in my darkroom...

Perhaps there is. Have you tested your house? The US EPA's action level is 4 pCi/L, but I'd prefer to meet the World Health Organization's 2.7 pCi/L action level. There are far greater consequences to high levels of radon than fogged film. Also, if your water comes from a well or community system drawing from wells, have it tested too. Depending on your location, significant radon gas can be released when such well water is used in sinks, showers and washers. That can be treated too, best using a "bubbler" device on the incoming line.

Your freezer-stored fb+f increases over time might reflect a radon problem, in which case my future HP5 Plus storage -- in a location that will most certainly not have high radon levels -- can only suffer less increase. Even assuming your results are from a relatively radon-free environment, I'm reassured by them.

...Five years past expiration I can expect 0.05 density units of increased density from TMY...

That doesn't seem too far off from the adjusted 10-year 0.22 increase I calculated above for HP5 Plus.

...film has base density that is so clear it is difficult to measure.

What developer are you using with TMY-2? Like most other films, its fb+f varies substantially in different developers. When processed in TMAX RS 1:9, for 6 minutes 40 seconds at 75 degrees F, using the same Jobo sequence I described above for HP5 Plus, fb+f was 0.08/0.09, EI 500 and CI 0.50.

[ic-racer]

What developer do you use with HP5 Plus?

All films processed at 24C to a contrast index around .65 to .75 in T-max developer 1:4.

Perhaps there is. Have you tested your house?

Radiation level of 1.7 picocuries per liter in the darkroom

[Sal Santamaura]

All films processed at 24C to a contrast index around .65 to .75 in T-max developer 1:4...

The longer development times associated with your higher contrast index range as well as use of TMAX developer probably account for most of the fb+f difference. Thanks.

...Radiation level of 1.7 picocuries per liter in the darkroom

Glad to hear that you're not at risk. Sorry for getting on my soapbox, but it seemed a good off-topic place to go briefly for the sake of health.

[Drew Wiley]

Wierd. With TMRS and TMY I'm getting an fbf way down around .05, virtually no fog at all, and substantially less than HP5 (though I've never used this particular dev for HP5)

[Sal Santamaura]

Wierd. With TMRS and TMY I'm getting an fbf way down around .05, virtually no fog at all, and substantially less than HP5 (though I've never used this particular dev for HP5)

Your 0.05 isn't too far from my 0.08/0.09 with that combination (TMY-2). At what dilution are you using the TMAX RS? I've also noticed higher fb+f at higher developer dilutions.

[Michael Kadillak]

I would contact Ilford to see what the normal fbf level for HP5 is from the factory. Simon is around these parts or over at APUG. I cannot fathom the possibility that any film manufacturer would accept a .21 fbf density level for fresh product. That means that the increased density is being added during shipping or is induced in some way where you reside. Either way I find this totally unacceptable given the costs of film today. I went down and looked at my old test data and it shows that in a wide range of developers, TMY and FP4 consistently exhibits insignificant levels of fbf.


By chance are you in Europe or the UK? I have been told that xray during shipping could be more of a problem than here in the US.

[Drew Wiley]

Sal - I use TMRS fairly strong, sometimes 1:1, but only for lab use for separation negs.
For general shooting I use PMK which of course stains, but still leaves only minor fog
on the borders of TMY. TMX is even cleaner, with an fbf approaching .03. It's obviously important to wash out all the anti-halation dye, but this seems to proceed
much more easily than with Ilford films. I do notice significant fbf levels on Ilford roll
films, especially Delta 3200, routinely, but that's acetate base and obviously more
sensitive to cosmic rays. With FP4 I end up with .04 in residual magenta stain which
won't wash out, but fades over time, so a total fbf of around .15 for this particular film. These results have been predicatable year after year.

[Sal Santamaura]

...I do notice significant fbf levels on Ilford roll films, especially Delta 3200, routinely, but that's acetate base and obviously more sensitive to cosmic rays...

It's not unique to Ilford nor related to cosmic radiation. Sheets on polyester have the lowest base density. Next comes 120, which is on inherently less clear acetate. Mine typically end up around 0.12/0.13, including fog. Finally there's 35mm acetate, which is not only thicker but includes intentional base density to reduce halation, since it lacks paper backing. Delta 3200 is on the 5-mil acetate Ilford uses for 35mm, thus your "significant" fb+f with that film.

[John NYC]

Maybe there is too much radon in my darkroom

Some others for comparison.

Again all films processed in the last year:

Arista 100 4x5 (fresh) = 0.23
Arista 100 8x10 (fresh) = 0.22
Trix 35mm (fresh) = 0.25
T-max 400 8x10 (2009 exp.) = 0.25
Delta 100 4x5 (2013) = 0.17

Maybe this is a sign of film sitting around in warehouses or on shelves. I do know my local film shop now keep B&W in the refrigerator as of this year. Previously they only had color film in there.

Or maybe your densitometer is hosed?

[ic-racer]

Or maybe your densitometer is hosed?

These film bases are dark to the appearance, but just for kicks (and seeing that it is a new year, and time for the yearly calibration) the calibration standard I have is 1.97 and it reads exactly 1.97 with both densitometers.

Those results were obviously from different rolls, but I actually can collect stepwise data from that 1986 HP5 batch. I'll have to go through the negative archives, but it would be interesting to see how a single batch of film, that has been in continuous freezing conditions, ages.