Fogged 8x10 Film

[matthew klos]

So i recently bought 10 boxes of expired 8x10 HP5 for 140 dollars. The film expired in 2007 and was kept in a fridge. I decided to pull a sheet and run it through a developing session to see if it was fogged, and indeed it is not to badly but noticeably. Obviously the price of this film was to good to pass up on especially being a student. My question is how can I compensate in either my shooting or my developing to make this film more workable? What sorts of things am i to expect with evenly fogged film? My other question is how should i store the film now, should I put it back in the freezer while I shoot it, or keep in a nice cool dark place?

[Vaughn]

My 2 cents -- no compensation with exposure or development -- and just print through the base+fog. A bit of experience might lead you to go one way or another. For example, you might notice a small drop in contrast relative to fresh film and need to increase your development a little.

But basically I would not mess around with the actual image formation in an attempt to keep the fog to a minimum.

Perhaps in the refridgerator for a good portion of the film, but depending on how fast you will be using it up, you might want to freeze 3 to 5 boxes -- and just a cool place for the box or two you are presently working with.

[Mark Woods]

You can do a test where you can find Dmin on the film you processed. You will probably need to decrease you EI for greater density overall, process for the densities you desire, and process normal. Usually, you looks about 1/3 stop of speed to compensate for the added density at Dmin. We deal with this all of the time with students who buy outdated stock t shoot films on. Good luck!

[ic-racer]

Test the film and see. The major reason I test film is because it may be expired. In the example I show here I use a surrogate for ISO testing (W-speed test) to determine the relative speed of some expired Delta 400 compared to fresh film on a calibrated sensitometer.
The ISO speed of the expired film is 160. This is a real ISO test, so ones shooting exposure index is likely going to be even less.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v670/ic-racer/2011/Wspeed-1.jpg

[matthew klos]

Interesting thanks guys. I will post some images when i have some results.

[patrickjames]

What developer did you use?

I had a super old box of T-Max ('93) that I wanted to use for testing a bunch of new holders. It fogged horribly in Pyrocat, but showed almost no sign of fog in Rodinal, so the developer could make all the difference in the world for you. I am not an expert, but I have noticed that before about Rodinal. Maybe someone here can give you more help.

[Heespharm]

Isn't hc110 good at reducing base fog?

[matthew klos]

When i performed the test i just ran it through quickly with sprint 1+9, my developer of choice is Pyrocat HD. I have never been pleased with HC110 results.

[JJeffrey]

This is a perennial problem and there are a few chemical remedies for serious fog. Kodak at one time had no fewer than four different "Kodak Anti-Fog" formulae. You might look around for some of the old Kodak darkroom databooks for further info. Meanwhile, this photonet link (http://photo.net/black-and-white-photo-film-processing-forum/002ZUl) will put you on the right track to research the matter. Patrick is quite correct that developers vary dramatically with respect to fogging response; trying Rodinal is a logical first step in dealing with expired b&w film.

[matthew klos]

I am somewhat concerned with using the Pyrocat HD, which would be adding even more fog to the film base, or maybe that wouldn't even matter. Has anyone here tried any of the ilford developer lines? I have heard some really good things.