Observations in Using Old Stuff

[Black Lightning]

During my recent restoration of my darkroom I came across a few pouches of old chemicals which had to be at least ten years old. I found a few pouches of Dektol, one of which was opened by the mice(I do not recall catching any over developed mice in the traps over that past decade) some D-76 and some Glacial Acetic Acid. Aside from the chewed open Dektol all of the pouches were intact and the contents still felt soft and powdery. I also found some opened boxes of ten year old Kodak Polycontrast RC paper. On my way home from work last night I stopped by B&H and scored some fixer. Today I tried out the old stuff I found laying around. The Dektol powder was a light tan color and the mixed developer looked more like espresso than developer. The Acetic Acid still smelled like salad dressing and seemed to stop the development just fine. The 8X10 paper was a wreck. Sheets taken out of the inner plastic bags from different depths were all fogged taken from the box and placed straight into the developer without ANY lights on in the darkroom the result looked more like a Rorschach test than a blank piece of paper. The 16X20 paper has an even mid-gray cast to it. The 5X7 paper was not too bad. Some fogging around the edges but yielded some acceptable results. I printed a 4X5 negative of a motorcycle I shot about 12 years ago and it looks quite nice. Although I don't shoot 4X5 to print 5X7. My seven year old son chose a 4X5 negative I shot of my wife when we were first dating and I taught him the basics of setting up the negative in the enlarger and composing the easel. He learned pretty quickly. It took two stacked PC filters: #3 & 4, to get an acceptable contrast but the negative is a little on the under exposed side. My son very proudly showed my wife the print he made of her.

It looks like I am going to be switching over to Ilford papers from here on in since Kodak is no longer available locally. Are the PC filters compatible across brands?

Also: Many of my negatives have some moisture damage from storage in a humid environment. Can some water damage (uneven wetting of the emulsion) be alleviated by soaking the whole negative in water?

[ic-racer]

The new Ilford filters are reasonably priced. I'd get a new fresh set.

[Black Lightning]

I s'pose that $70 is not much to invest in a set of filters made to work worth the paper I will use for the next few years or whenever the last box of Ilford rolls off the line.

[jp]

As long as the film is not physically eaten away by mold, it will likely clean up nicely with some distilled water or rubbing alcohol.

I don't recall Polycontrast RC paper to have been real good even when it was available. Ilford is king right now with darkroom paper and won't do you wrong. You may find your enlarger lens and innards due for a cleaning too after what sounds like less than ideal storage.

[rdenney]

Back in the day, I used Kodak polycontrast filters with both Ilford Multigrade and Oriental Seagull VC paper and it seemed to work fine. VC paper works by providing two emulsions, a soft green-sensitive emulsion and a hard blue-sensitive emulsion. The yellow filters suppress exposure to the hard emulsion, and the magenta filters suppress the exposure to the soft emulsion. I think all the variable-contrast papers used the same approach. I'd try the Kodak filters with the Ilford paper before spending the money on new filters.

Rick "also never a fan of Polycontrast paper" Denney

[Black Lightning]

Yeah, the enlarger got an internal swabbing down with bleach and then a more thorough and attentive cleaning with lens cloths. Only one of the lenses, my 90mm Wollensak has fungus between the elements. May take a trip to some camera repair shop with that lens.

As for the film, no sign of mildew damage. Just water marks. No harm in trying to rescue these negs, I suppose.

[Robert Ley]

I would not try to rehab that 90mm lens. It would be more expensive than it is worth. I think that you will be delighted to see that everything that you will need for your darkroom can be had very cheaply on the used market. Darkroom equipment is really a buyers market. Check out ebay or craigslist.

[Michael E]

On working with old stuff: I use old east german ORWO chemicals, made in the late 1980s. I have boxes full of them, they still work fine. I got rid of almost all the paper from that time, it was fogged. I don't have much time for darkroom work and don't want to waste that precious time on imperfect material.

Michael

[Merg Ross]

I have not been satisfied with old paper.

A few years ago I got a bunch of 11x14 and 16x20 Forte when I realized it was no longer being produced. When I compare all those prints to my recent stuff (all on 'fresh' paper) the light gray is very annoying. Everything needs to be re-printed. A years worth of printing down the drain. I'll not do that experiment (ie expired paper) again.


On working with old stuff: I use old east german ORWO chemicals, made in the late 1980s. I have boxes full of them, they still work fine. I got rid of almost all the paper from that time, it was fogged. I don't have much time for darkroom work and don't want to waste that precious time on imperfect material.

Michael

These are good lessons, learned the hard way.

Part of my concept of keeping the silver process simple, is to use fresh film and paper. I do not include chemicals, bacause some survive the passage of time better than others. My supply of Amidol, for instance, is close to one-hundred years old and works fine. Film and paper are in a very different category, and to waste time with outdated materials is just that.

[Corran]

I stopped using old color film (well, except for effect) for the same reasons. However, I've been using b&w film/paper just on the edge of "expired" for a while now with no apparent problem, but I'm no expert. Is there a point at which you would call paper officially "dead", Merg? I ask because I just today bought 100 sheets of 8x10 Ilford MG fiber for a mere $20. It's 3 years old, unopened. Seems like a reasonably safe bet to me. My stash of 8x10 fiber is up to about 600 sheets that I got for maybe $100 total, so I feel a lot more comfortable burning sheets experimenting than if it was at retail price of like $600. At worst, one package of this old paper has about a 2mm strip of black on one side when I develop, but it's in the border and I overmat so I don't care.

[Merg Ross]

I stopped using old color film (well, except for effect) for the same reasons. However, I've been using b&w film/paper just on the edge of "expired" for a while now with no apparent problem, but I'm no expert. Is there a point at which you would call paper officially "dead", Merg? I ask because I just today bought 100 sheets of 8x10 Ilford MG fiber for a mere $20. It's 3 years old, unopened. Seems like a reasonably safe bet to me. My stash of 8x10 fiber is up to about 600 sheets that I got for maybe $100 total, so I feel a lot more comfortable burning sheets experimenting than if it was at retail price of like $600. At worst, one package of this old paper has about a 2mm strip of black on one side when I develop, but it's in the border and I overmat so I don't care.

I did not mean to imply that all outdated paper should be avoided. Sometimes it will be fine, depending upon how it was stored, and it is likely that your Ilford MG will work well.

However, you will only know the condition of outdated paper with a knowledge of how prints on fresh paper should look. An experienced printer using outdated paper is one thing, while a less experienced printer might accept an inferior print from outdated paper as being the standard. The differences may be subtle, but fine printing involves mastering the subtleties.

[Corran]

Good point, I will have to keep that in mind.

[Black Lightning]

Got all new stuff today. I am set.

First question: Is there any 4X5 color print film available in quantities greater than packs of ten sheets?

Next question: What is a practical replacement for the Kodak 5L E-6 kit? Ten liter individual components would not be out of the question but I do not foresee using a whole lot within the shelf life of the chemicals. The three component kits just don't have the feel of authenticity that i like. What is the experience with the three component E-6 kits?

[rdenney]

First question: Is there any 4X5 color print film available in quantities greater than packs of ten sheets?

Be happy you can get it at all. Fuji has stopped distributing color negative sheet film in the U.S., and the only people even claiming to sell it recently are less than reputable (and they are offline this morning).

All that's left is Kodak, and we are holding night-time vigils and the neighbors are bringing food during the death watch.

Maybe Fuji will start re-importing it when Kodak stops making it.

I have about a hundred sheets of 160C in the freezer, but I don't have the money right now to build a substantial stash of the expensive Kodak stuff.

I guess I don't mind 10-sheet boxes--I need the box to ship the film to the lab, and a 50-sheet box might take me two years to work through.

I'll let others address the E6 question--it's been a while since I've been motivated to process my own color transparencies.

Rick "whose last E6 kit was an E4 kit" Denney