PDA

View Full Version : Results with long expired transparency film + America's 60th national park



QT Luong
1-Apr-2018, 12:24
I still use Fuji Astia stock that expired in the last century (1999!). In 2013, I opened a box and cut film to photograph Pinnacles National Park. The exposures I made were just fine, and I put the unused film back in the freezer, some in the form of loaded holders, enclosed in ziplock bags.

In late February this year, I opened another box and cut film to photograph Gateway Arch National Park. This post (https://www.terragalleria.com/blog/photographing-gateway-arch-national-park/) has a few LF scans, and I appreciate comments and votes.

I also brought one of the holders loaded in 2013. Less than a week later, I promptly sent the film to Edgar Prauss. Again, the newly cut film resulted in good exposures, with no hint of quality loss from film that expired 18 years ago. On the other hand, I was surprised that the film loaded in 2013 showed a bit of color shift, and noticeable lack of density, with light blacks including the holder rails marks.

Pfsor
1-Apr-2018, 14:09
Don't know what point you wanted to say with the post but it is a well know fact among photographers who were selling their output commercially that film can last long or not, depending on the storage condition. To have film for 10 years in storage and take good pics with it is surely possible but the result is never predictable, as it is difficult to know the exact storage history and the film quality afterwards. Basically, it's always lottery, hence it all depends on how much you want to risk and to pay for the risk. And if your client expects good pictures you don't play with this expectation if you want to keep your business in good health.

Pere Casals
1-Apr-2018, 15:02
...that film can last long or not, depending on the storage condition...

Yes, but this case points that fuji transparency film will in perfect shape after near two decades if frozen, while clearly it will not be well preserved after 5 years if not refrigerated. So this is an interesting situation.

Some were saying that frozen velvia lasts for ever, well, we can expect at least 20 years.

Pfsor
1-Apr-2018, 15:24
Yes, but this case points that fuji transparency film will in perfect shape after near two decades if frozen, while clearly it will not be well preserved after 5 years if not refrigerated. So this is an interesting situation.

Some were saying that frozen velvia lasts for ever, well, we can expect at least 20 years.

The story doesn't prove anything. It's lottery that paid off. And lottery doesn't prove any future gains. If it did, all people would be rich by now. They are not.

QT Luong
1-Apr-2018, 23:44
Yes, but this case points that fuji transparency film will in perfect shape after near two decades if frozen, while clearly it will not be well preserved after 5 years if not refrigerated. So this is an interesting situation.

Some were saying that frozen velvia lasts for ever, well, we can expect at least 20 years.

In the post, I wrote that after taking out the film in 2013, I put it back in the freezer. Yet, there was quality loss compared to the film which was never taken out of the freezer and never opened.

QT Luong
1-Apr-2018, 23:48
The story doesn't prove anything. It's lottery that paid off. And lottery doesn't prove any future gains. If it did, all people would be rich by now. They are not.

When you have used several hundreds sheets of film with repeatable results, it is more than chance.

Although this didn't make me rich, it did save thousands of dollars, not to mention let me use an emulsion to my liking which has since beeing discontinued.

Pfsor
2-Apr-2018, 01:10
When you have used several hundreds sheets of film with repeatable results, it is more than chance.

Although this didn't make me rich, it did save thousands of dollars, not to mention let me use an emulsion to my liking which has since beeing discontinued.

Sorry, QTLuong, can you explain? What repeatable results are you talking about? You took old film out of the freezer and took some pictures that were good. But the very same old film, just after being cut and put back to the freezer was not good. So how long the time out of the freezer makes the film going bad? The time you cut it and put back to the freezer, or the time you use it out of the freezer in your camera? What was repeatable there? You repeatably took old film out of the freezer and it was good but was not good when you just interrupted the freezing cycle without taking pics? It's all clear like mud.

Pere Casals
2-Apr-2018, 01:44
In the post, I wrote that after taking out the film in 2013, I put it back in the freezer. Yet, there was quality loss compared to the film which was never taken out of the freezer and never opened.

hmmm... ok, this suggests that unsealing the bag triggers degradation start.

The single factor that's different after unsealing is atmospheric air in contact with film, probably because oxygen, this is easy to guess.

So perhaps it can be useful to re-seal the film with protecetive gas (protectan like, perhaps) inside, if wanting a long storage after unsealing. A perfect job would be vacuum, filling with gas, and another exterior bag (barrier effect plastic) with vacuum+gas as a safety belt.

If oxygen was the problem then a solution can be easy, but if it's another thing in the packaging atmposphere then it would be more difficult...

fotopfw
2-Apr-2018, 02:11
The fact that you saw rails marks, means the emulsion was soft, not frozen fast enough. By taking it out of the freezer and letting the film reach room temperatures (or even higher outside temperatures) the aging process already sets in. Film degrades fast in high temperatures. Kodak advises: process film directly after shooting.
Storage advise is for unopened boxes. So, I can very well see logic in this: straight from the freezer=OK. Opened, warmed up, handled and then again in the freezer is indeed another process entirely. With a different outcome.

Pere Casals
2-Apr-2018, 02:46
Opened, warmed up, handled and then again in the freezer is indeed another process entirely. With a different outcome.

But IMHO this is not because the thermal cycle, you can warm up and re-freeze the film a lot of times and it should remain intact for decades. But IMHO if you unseal the film without even moving it out of the freezer then the degradation should start because oxygen in contact, I guess. Also humidity can have a share.

A modern color emulsion have dozens of organic chemicals inside, with very complicated balances.

Perhaps resealing slide film would require inert gas and also some silicagel inside...

Color film is sold well sealed, a reason may be there.

Pfsor
2-Apr-2018, 03:21
But IMHO if you unseal the film without even moving it out of the freezer then the degradation should start because oxygen in contact, I guess.

Color film is sold well sealed, a reason may be there.

Then why is sealed film kept in a fridge in order to let it last? It is the temperature that has its role in its longevity, not just the sealing!

esearing
2-Apr-2018, 04:16
I'll play devils advocate. Did you really save money? You spent $x back in 1999 and have had to pay for the electricity to store the film which gives you $X+$Y + time and energy for potential disappointment. Film is not an appreciating asset to the point we should all run out and buy a bunch and hold it for 10 years and wait for a market increase to cash in. If you had only bought only the amount film you would actually use in a year, and invest the difference how much film could you buy today?

I understand that this film is no longer made, but there are other materials available each year which may require one to adapt. Will your aesthetic tastes change in the multiple decades you hold onto that old film?

Pere Casals
2-Apr-2018, 11:00
Then why is sealed film kept in a fridge in order to let it last? It is the temperature that has its role in its longevity, not just the sealing!

No doubt, slide film has to be frozen for long term preservation, just guessing that if we warm it up and we freeze it again then the degradation process won't start, but also guessing that by opening seal while always frozen then the degradation process will start, even if film has not been warmed up.



I'll play devils advocate. Did you really save money? You spent $x back in 1999 and have had to pay for the electricity to store the film which gives you $X+$Y + time and energy for potential disappointment. Film is not an appreciating asset to the point we should all run out and buy a bunch and hold it for 10 years and wait for a market increase to cash in. If you had only bought only the amount film you would actually use in a year, and invest the difference how much film could you buy today?
I understand that this film is no longer made, but there are other materials available each year which may require one to adapt. Will your aesthetic tastes change in the multiple decades you hold onto that old film?

In present situation it is important to understand well how to preserve Velvia/Provia. One of this days Fuji may discontinue an slide product or LF format, it would be painful for a kind of photography, we don't know if it can happen soon, but we have seen what happened to Acros LF. So it is important to know that unsealed film should be used propmtly, even if frozen.

QT Luong
2-Apr-2018, 11:33
Sorry, QTLuong, can you explain? What repeatable results are you talking about? You took old film out of the freezer and took some pictures that were good. But the very same old film, just after being cut and put back to the freezer was not good. So how long the time out of the freezer makes the film going bad? The time you cut it and put back to the freezer, or the time you use it out of the freezer in your camera? What was repeatable there? You repeatably took old film out of the freezer and it was good but was not good when you just interrupted the freezing cycle without taking pics? It's all clear like mud.

What was repeatable was that unopened, frozen film gave good results regarding of film expiration date so far.

QT Luong
2-Apr-2018, 11:39
I'll play devils advocate. Did you really save money? You spent $x back in 1999 and have had to pay for the electricity to store the film which gives you $X+$Y + time and energy for potential disappointment. Film is not an appreciating asset to the point we should all run out and buy a bunch and hold it for 10 years and wait for a market increase to cash in. If you had only bought only the amount film you would actually use in a year, and invest the difference how much film could you buy today?

I understand that this film is no longer made, but there are other materials available each year which may require one to adapt. Will your aesthetic tastes change in the multiple decades you hold onto that old film?

All good points. The main reason I saved money was that it was bought as expired, cold-stored film (from Freestyle is I remember) for about 20% of retail.

Corran
2-Apr-2018, 11:50
How hot was it when you had the film at Pinnacles? I've had some issues when I brought thawed Quickloads with me out on the trail. Images made that day are fine, and then unshot film returned to the freezer and used later showed degradation. My assumption is that the heat of the day caused the issue, but I'm talking about south GA / north FL with 95 degree temps and 100% humidity...

I pack less color film with me lately. Just enough to make a few images if I find something interesting.

Pfsor
2-Apr-2018, 12:05
No doubt, slide film has to be frozen for long term preservation, just guessing that if we warm it up and we freeze it again then the degradation process won't start, but also guessing that by opening seal while always frozen then the degradation process will start, even if film has not been warmed up.


According to these comments https://photo.stackexchange.com/questions/52119/should-i-store-my-35mm-rolls-in-the-fridge it's the temperature changes that help deteriorating the film (see the last comment). And it seems that the seal on the film is more against getting condense on it, not to avoid a contact with oxygen. See https://www.kodak.com/global/en/service/tib/tib5202.shtml

faberryman
2-Apr-2018, 12:12
If you went back into an open box five years later, it doesn't sound like you shoot much, so I doubt you are actually saving much.

Pfsor
2-Apr-2018, 12:20
What was repeatable was that unsealed, frozen film gave good results regarding of film expiration date so far.

And what was also repeatable is the fact that the unsealed and refrozen film got bad.
It's like saying - I played the Russian roulette and I'm alive. You too can play it and stay alive!

How long did you have the unsealed film heated in your film holders and the camera and how long did it stay so after the exposure? There is no warranty you could give on the unfrozen film, like in the Russian roulette. On the contrary - you now know that the rest of the film gets deteriorated even if re-frozen. Why not the rest of the film that was used in the camera?
You got lucky - good for you. But from there going to say - it's ok, the roulette played with the old film - it is not too a logical step, it seems to me. That's how I see it.

Pere Casals
2-Apr-2018, 13:03
According to these comments https://photo.stackexchange.com/questions/52119/should-i-store-my-35mm-rolls-in-the-fridge it's the temperature changes that help deteriorating the film.

IMHO the low temperature preserving effect is because degradating chemical reactions become way slower. This is explained by Arrhenius equation https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arrhenius_equation

If it is because that then warming up the film for a short term would not make a difference, just during the periods in what film is hotter degradation will advance more, but IMHO rather than because temperature change, degradation progression would be related to the warmer periods.




And it seems that the seal on the film is more against getting condense on it, not to avoid a contact with oxygen. See https://www.kodak.com/global/en/service/tib/tib5202.shtml

If single factor was humidity then unsealed film could be resealed with some silicagel, or after filling with dry air. But I guess it's not that easy. We should learn what gas Fuji/Kodak uses in the packaging, if it is bare dry air, an inert gass, or even an active gas (like it happens with hypering...). I was told that the sealed container has an specific gas inside, anyway I've no source proving it.

We have the fact that a -20ºC frozen unsealed slide film experiments degradation, can moisture at -20ºC (pure ice) be the degradation triggering factor ? IMHO oxygen is way more suspicious... It would be great to know it for sure.

Pfsor
2-Apr-2018, 14:10
We have the fact that a -20ºC frozen unsealed slide film experiments degradation, can moisture at -20ºC (pure ice) be the degradation triggering factor ? IMHO oxygen is way more suspicious... It would be great to know it for sure.

You're confusing two things together. I never said the humidity was a triggering factor of the chemical changes deteriorating the film.
The humidity you want to avoid by sealing the film is simply a physical factor physically damaging the film.
In any case, Russian roulette is Russian roulette, look at it as you want.

JMO
2-Apr-2018, 16:15
Permit me to interject a comment and some suggestions. Since I have a fair amount (for me) of Fuji 4x5 E-6 film in my freezer, and even one box of Astia w/ exp in mid-1990s, I was immediately interested in QT’s OP re his experiences. However, as I read the various responses and back and forth here, I’ve detected more than a trace of criticism and sarcasm about QT’s questions and his (presumed) level of experience with handling and using color slide film. ... Let me make a suggestion that some of you on this thread purchase and review a copy of QT’s magnificent book “The Treasured Lands”; and then realize that he made most (all?) of the wonderful images in it, over about three decades, with LF color slide film that he took on the road and into the field. With that background we can be assured QT knows what he’s doing with such film, and appreciate his OP to share his life perience and request our help to improve his considerable expertise.

Pfsor
2-Apr-2018, 16:43
Very nice, your confession - except that you forget that many other members of this forum have their professional experience in the field too. I was publishing pictures for several decades and travelled in the whole world to take them. As a photographer who needed to enter the dense field of photo business I always used what was called professional film - film that was sold from the same batch of film stock. And me too, I knew what I was doing. I'm still puzzled over the OP intention - guys, use old film stock from your freezer with no fear, I did and it went well... Hmm, good for him... but hardly advice to follow in the professional field.

QT Luong
2-Apr-2018, 17:06
And what was also repeatable is the fact that the unsealed and refrozen film got bad.
It's like saying - I played the Russian roulette and I'm alive. You too can play it and stay alive!

How long did you have the unsealed film heated in your film holders and the camera and how long did it stay so after the exposure? There is no warranty you could give on the unfrozen film, like in the Russian roulette. On the contrary - you now know that the rest of the film gets deteriorated even if re-frozen. Why not the rest of the film that was used in the camera?
You got lucky - good for you. But from there going to say - it's ok, the roulette played with the old film - it is not too a logical step, it seems to me. That's how I see it.

I meant to write "What was repeatable was that unopened, frozen film...". Sorry for adding to the confusion.

Fortunately, the consequences of using expired film are not as severe as playing Russian roulette. I don't have to show the transparency to any "client" since I do not do commercial photography - although I've been photographing full-time for over a decade - and most of the shortcomings that I observed with the opened and refrozen film wouldn't be too hard to correct digitally.

tgtaylor
2-Apr-2018, 23:26
A sheet of film is composed of atoms, countless zillions of them of several different types with one type being more or less massive than the other. They exist in a constant state of vibration and are constantly bumping into their neighbor. The higher the temperature the more energetic the collisions. This constant jostling results in an exchange of kinetic energy in which some atoms, totally random and unpredictable, receive enough kinetic energy to reach the mediums escape velocity. The higher the temperature the more energetic the collision and transfer of energy. Pressure can raise or lower the mediums escape velocity. For example low atmospheric systems (“troughs”) are characteristic of winter storms and hurricanes and high atmospheric systems (“ridges”) are characteristic of warm and fair weather. Consider the marine layer and rain bearing clouds passing overhead.

Thomas

Bernice Loui
3-Apr-2018, 00:41
Have very fond memories of 5x7 Fuji Astia back when it was available circa late 1990's. 5x7 sheet can be ordered as needed. 5x7 - 13x18cm was a popular size in Japan & Germany. In American 5x7 or 13x18cm color transparency film appeared to be similar to being affected by Leprosy.

The appeal of Astia had much to do with color rendition accuracy, moderate contrast with a look that was essentially opposite of Fuji Velvia.

-Astia became one of my all time fave color transparency films. Astia also served very well as a means to check color balance of lenses and the overall imaging system once it has been gray card tested at New-Lab in SF with a test base line lens ( Kodak Commercial Ektar was the base line lens used). Astia's color accuracy and rendition can be remarkable when the entire imaging system is properly dialed-in.

Of all the color sheet films that died, Astia was the one most regretted. The accurate color rendition and modest contrast helped to tame Ciba prints. Add contrast masking when done properly, can result in Ciba prints with subtle contrast and color gradations difficult to achieve using other color transparency films.

IMO, this color print rendition is not for everyone.

Storage temperature might not be the only factor that affects color balance, exposure to high energy particles, X-rays and similar can easily have a negative effect on film. The processed Astia images made two decades ago look remarkably excellent today. Overall, my experience with Fuji color transparency films have been very good, their later offerings are color stable over time and progressed to offer excellent color rendition, a range of contrast and color gradation range when used and processed properly.

-What are the possibilities this batch of Astia being not properly processed or the possibility of another variable that has creeped into the image projected on to Astia?

As or a modern replacement for Astia, I'm extremely skeptical as Astia died off early due to lack of demand and appreciation for what it offered. The color transparency film market demanded the Velvia image presentation.



Bernice

Pere Casals
3-Apr-2018, 00:44
You're confusing two things together. I never said the humidity was a triggering factor of the chemical changes deteriorating the film.
The humidity you want to avoid by sealing the film is simply a physical factor physically damaging the film.
In any case, Russian roulette is Russian roulette, look at it as you want.

No confusion...

> Most of us do keep velvia in the -20ºC freezer.

> It is well known that sealed velvia will last for decades if frozen.

> We also know that unsealed velvia will degradate even if kept frozen.

Then a question arises: Can velvia be re-sealed to stop degradation ? Do you know how to do it ? Any idea ? With preserving gas or not ?

Pfsor
3-Apr-2018, 02:49
... The main reason I saved money was that it was bought as expired, cold-stored film (from Freestyle is I remember) for about 20% of retail.

What do you think was the reason of their lowering the price (and so drastically)?

Pere Casals
3-Apr-2018, 04:00
Frozen (and sealed) expired fuji slide film is a good opportunity if comming from a reliable vendor, it can be in better shape than non expired film that was not well stored during its shelf life.

Sal Santamaura
3-Apr-2018, 07:57
...The appeal of Astia had much to do with color rendition accuracy, moderate contrast with a look that was essentially opposite of Fuji Velvia...That's the most succinct, perceptive appreciation of Astia I've seen. As in many aspects of life, there was no Fuji E-6 justice. Velveeta should have long ago disappeared, while Astia ought still be around. Alas, in a year or two all Fuji E-6 will be history. Those who shoot transparencies need to cross their fingers, knock on wood, etc. that Kodak brings its new Ektachrome to market.

Sal Santamaura
3-Apr-2018, 07:59
What do you think was the reason of their lowering the price (and so drastically)?

Insufficient market demand. The public's taste ran to crayon-primary-oversaturated velveeta color rather than beautifully accurate subtlety. Sad.

Pere Casals
3-Apr-2018, 09:43
That's the most succinct, perceptive appreciation of Astia I've seen. As in many aspects of life, there was no Fuji E-6 justice. Velveeta should have long ago disappeared, while Astia ought still be around. Alas, in a year or two all Fuji E-6 will be history. Those who shoot transparencies need to cross their fingers, knock on wood, etc. that Kodak brings its new Ektachrome to market.

Yes... it may happen like with Acros: roll film still there but LF film R.I.P. With Acros, sheets' high price led to low sales, and that to discontinuation, a different policy was there for rolls.

I see the same coming for slides, I find MF Velvia/Provia cost encouraging to me, while with sheets I'm only able to use it in special situations. Sure I'm not alone.

When Velvia/Provia sheets will be killed a kind of photography will be lost, it will be very painful, as you say, we should prepare for the worst situation, this is learnig how cold storage works for sheets, and learning to be happy with MF slides. My guess that slides roll film will remain comes from the perception that they look after that market, but I can be mistaken, of course.

We discussed that too much in the past, but it was worthless, the outcome will be the same.

Bernice Loui
3-Apr-2018, 10:35
Consider the reasons why color transparency films were originally made and images produced with color transparency films were used.. mostly in the color printing industry.

Before modern times of digital imaging device (camera) to print or similar media distribution color film transparency images were the highly preferred means to input color images into the printing system. This was the primary market for color transparency films. A much smaller market of prints made from color transparencies via Ciba & Fuji popped up due to market demand. Both had is technical difficulties and visual advantages.

For working commercial photographers back then the absolutely preferred film format size for studio ad and similar work was 4x5 due to camera perspective control combined with highly controlled lighting allowed creation of images that were simply not possible by any other means at that time. 4x5 was a good trade off size due to cost of film, processing, optics, lighting power, focus control within the images made. There are many memories of visits to New Lab in San Francisco where a busy working commercial studio photographer would bring several hundred sheets of 4x5 E6 film to be processed or a photographer and art-ad director sitting together at the long rows of light tables discussing their work. This was the daily occurrence at New Lab back in those days. This was when purchasing color transparency film was a simple walk into Adolf Gasser, Sammy's camera and a host of other photo stores. Make images in camera, drop off at New Lab and about two hours later your E6 film was ready to view. New Lab processed Kodachrome before the demand dropped and cost involved became excessive.

Secondary market for color transparency films was 35mm & 120 roll. 35mm was primarily used for projected images, 120 roll was mixed trade off of printed work and projected work.

With this once large market demand for color transparency film gone, it has affected the availability of color transparency films.

Now ask, where does color transparency film fit today? Most if not all color printed and electronic media is digital. Color prints from color transparency films via Ciba or Fuji is essentially gone and forced into obsolesce due to the vast majority of color prints coming from digital image files and digital color printers or images transmitted, stored and viewed in the digital domain.


As for Astia or Velvia, is says much about image makers and their visual aesthetic choices. Astia had a bent towards rendering and producing color images as it would have been seen in the natural world. Velvia produces images that are high contrast with "enhanced" color rendition and in many ways not the way it was originally view-rendered in the natural world. Essentially Velvia produces a visual fantasy tugging at the image makers idealization of what an image could be rather than what the image really is.

Astia died long ago while Velvia continues on IMO due to the human need for projected fantasy of what they would like to see rather than seeing the world as it really is.

Question is, what does one do with images made on color transparency film today?



Bernice

Sal Santamaura
3-Apr-2018, 10:56
...As for Astia or Velvia, is says much about image makers and their visual aesthetic choices. Astia had a bent towards rendering and producing color images as it would have been seen in the natural world. Velvia produces images that are high contrast with "enhanced" color rendition and in many ways not the way it was originally view-rendered in the natural world. Essentially Velvia produces a visual fantasy tugging at the image makers idealization of what an image could be rather than what the image really is.

Astia died long ago while Velvia continues on IMO due to the human need for projected fantasy of what they would like to see rather than seeing the world as it really is...Yes, that's why I posted:


...Sad.

As for your question:


...what does one do with images made on color transparency film today?...Project them. There's no other real purpose. For color prints, shooting high-end digital provides far better results than scanning transparencies. In my opinion. :)

Pere Casals
3-Apr-2018, 10:57
Question is, what does one do with images made on color transparency film today?
Bernice

I can tell my case. I project my velvia for me and to show it to other people, or I view it with an slide viewer. No other commercial imaging system comes close to that, by far.

Of course once velvia is scanned and displayed in a monitor you cannot see the same, simply because monitors have a boring color triangle, a low cd/m2 output and second class static contrast.

Today we have Provia, Velvia 100, Velvia 100F and Velvia 50. Velvia 50 has "a design pitfall" that makes yellows more reddish, this is not like a simple Photoshop adjustment, this has an spectral nature that it's difficult to be imitated with Photoshop. The V 100F has been overlooked, but's also an incredible film.

Fuji slides are extreme beauty sold in cans, single problem is that this beauty cannot travel througt TCP networks.

There are people understanding this, and they buy slides.

For the Pro market... a Nikon D5 does all.