I have some Tri-X, 35mm, stored indifferently for about 5-15 years after exposure.

I have done one experiment in developing these images without any special techniques, and find high fog, low contrast, and low speed.

Benzotriazole anti-fog is not available to me easily or cheaply in New Zealand; potassium bromide might be a possible. Commercial "developer conditioners" are unknown out here.

Looking for actual experience but will take opinion as well as to how to get reasonable negs without special chemisty. The general range of packaged developers is available here.

Have considered using a low-fog dev like Rodinal, and perhaps HC-110.

But I'd like to know how to insure retention of speed, shadow detail, and high enough contrast, without blocking-up, all while keeping fog down, using just dev choice and time/temp/dilution controls, or perhaps, at most, addition of potassium bromide.

TIA

Michael Kopp Wellington, New Zeala

-- Michael Kopp (mkopp@xtra.co.nz), February 27, 2000

Answers

I would think that you are going to have fog no matter what you do, I would suggest a pyro developer if you can get it there, Kodak SD-1 or PMK, and the compensating WD2D. Regards, Pat

-- pat j. krentz (krentz@cci-29palms.com), February 28, 2000.

I recently found some Plus-X that had been floating around in a box from house to house for the last 16+ years... I used my developer at the time (since changed) of Ilfosol S and since I had written on the canisters that they'd been exposed at 250asa and 540asa I extended development by about 20% (250asa one) & 40% (540 asa) The end result was negatives that definitely have a higher base fog, but are printable. Here's an example (although this may show up a bit contrasty due to my screen setup when I did this... It's looks bad to me now! but I'm lazy and aren't going to rescan at the moment :)



-- Nigel Smith (nlandgl@eisa.net.au), February 28, 2000.

I agree that anti-fogging agents aren't going to do a lot, except lengthen the development time. The fog you've got is real, caused by the combined action of heat, cosmic-rays and other naturally occurring radiation over time. It's just as if the film had been exposed to a very weak light for 15 years. Fast films are more susceptible to this type of storage fogging than slower ones, and to make matters worse there's a thing called latent image regression. This means that the image on the film begins to fade from the moment the shutter closes, taking away the most weakly exposed parts of the image first. In other words, whatever you do, the shadow detail in those negatives is gone for good by now.

I had some Kodak High-speed recording film(1000 ISO) that had been in storage for a long time, and nothing would get rid of the high fog level. Kodak used to publish the formula for a developer specifically for high-speed films that were prone to high base-fog, I think it was called D65. I even brewed some of that up, with minimal effect.

I'd go for a vigorous developer without any additives. Perhaps using your Rodinal or HC-110 at above normal strength, but I can't give you specific time-dilution recommendations, as I don't use Tri-X.

-- Pete Andrews (p.l.andrews@bham.ac.uk), February 28, 2000.

I've just looked at Kodak's Website and I'm surprised to learn that they still do DK50, which is another developer once recommended for low fog levels with high speed film. The smallest quantity available makes up to a gallon though. {:-(

-- Pete Andrews (p.l.andrews@bham.ac.uk), February 29, 2000.

I've been using some very old HP5 with success, but it wasn't exposed then aged, just old when I loaded it. You're going to get fog no matter what. I tried adding some Orthazite (benzotriazole) and it didn't make any significant difference. Rodinal might be grain city, so I'd avoid that unless you like the effect. XTOL works as good as anything, and may retain the most shadow detail. Test, test, test!

-- Conrad Hoffman (choffman@rpa.net), February 29, 2000.

I recall a number of years ago when they found some photographs taken prior to World War I by baloonists trying to fly over the north pole (the film has remained frozen for 50 years), it was reported that the film was developed in a pyrocatechin developer. I can vouch for the fact that the new Pyrocat-HD developer generates virtually no base fog. You might consider it for a test. It uses a small amount of bromide to tame the fog generated by the addition of phenidone. The formula is on my site at UnblinkingEye.Com.

-- (edbuffaloe@unblinkingeye.com), February 29, 2000.