What's the best way to develop old, exposed film?

Question

A friend of mine just found 3 rolls of exposed 135 (i.e. 35mm) film. They are at least 10 years old. He'd like to know if it is even worth taking them to the local hour photo lab but also if he should give them any special instructions.

Asked by Paul Cezanne

Answer

I don't know from experience, but I think it would be possible for the film base to deteriorate after such an extended time, and thus cause it to become more fragile. I would consider developing it by hand rather than having it run through a machine which might put undue pressure on the roll. Also - In my opinion, "trying" it is always worth it ;) You never know what you could get!

Answered by dpollitt

Check more discussion of this question.

How to proceed after having developed the negatives?

Question

There are a lot of excellent questions (and answers!) about the process of developing (BW) film at home. I would like to try my hand at it, too.

But it's not exactly clear how to proceed after having developed the negatives (in the second question, @whuber says: "Then you're all ready to make a contact sheet and proceed to enlarge them...but that's a topic for another day.").

One possibility could be to scan them and then proceed as if they were raw images from a dslr. But this is obviously not the classical solution. So, how do you actually go from the developed negative to a printed photo?

As an aside, considering the scanner option (which would probably be easier for a beginner): I have read that a resolution of 300 or 600 dpi is "good enough" for some definition of enough. In particular, I would like to know if it is good enough to preserve the grain of the film (otherwise, where's the point of it?)

Asked by Francesco

Answer

Once you have the negative you use an enlarger to create your prints. An enlarger has a head containing a bulb, a negative holder and a lens. The head is on a column attached to a base. You can raise the head away from the base to make the image larger (or turn the head to project the image onto a wall for large prints)

If you want to do a contact sheet, you cut your negative into strips to match the size of your paper, and lay them on top of the photographic paper (in contact with the paper, hence "contact sheet"). You put a piece of glass over the top to keep the negatives flat and in place. You turn on the enlarger bulb to expose the paper, and then develop it with a similar mix of chemicals you used for the negatives (developer, stop bath and fixer)

Once you have your contact sheet to review, and decide to make a full sized print. You load a negative strip into the holder in the enlarger. You turn on the bulb and focus the image onto an empty easel (which holds the paper in place). Once focused, turn off the enlarger, and load the paper into the easel. Then you turn on the bulb once again to expose. Usually the enlarger is connected to a timer.

To get the correct exposure takes some trial and error. Generally you cut up strips of paper (so as not to waste entire sheets) and use these as test strips. You cover most of the strip up with your hand or a piece of cardboard. You expose for say a total of 60 seconds - every 10 seconds you uncover a bit more of the strip, so that when you are done, you have sections that have been exposed for 10, 20, 30, 40, 50 and the full 60 seconds. You can then develop and view the test strip in full light to judge what the correct exposure should be. Then you put in your 8x10 paper and expose for that amount of time.

Answered by MikeW

Check more discussion of this question.

What does it mean to “mount” slide film for processing?

Question

I just finished my first roll of a 35mm slide film and it is time to get it processed. I checked few places online and the options are to get them processed "mounted" or "unmounted".

So what do these places mean by mounting a film for processing and how does it change the quality of final output?

Answer

You can have slide film processed like normal film, left in long strips, or more commonly they are individually cut into single frames and mounted in a cardboard or plastic holder, which keeps them flat, and these mounted slides can then be put in a cartridge of a slide projector. The mounts can be seen here.

The processing is exactly the same, so no difference in quality. The mounting is done after the film is processed and dried.

Check more discussion of this question.

What are the results of developing slide film (E-6 process) with C41 chemicals?

Question

I recently got hand on some rolls of 35mm slide film (Kodak Ektachrome), and was planning on developing them at home (bad experiences with photo labs).

On a basis of budget, I wanted to develop them along with my other C41 rolls, so that I wouldn't have to buy two sets of chemicals.

So...
1) Will E6 rolls develop with C41 chemicals?
2) What kind of results should I be expecting? (Colors, physical film properties, etc).

Disclaimer: I am aware that they probably won't be properly developed, but I am also aware of techniques such as caffenol which I find quite acceptable, in terms of results.

Answer

I worked in a professional photo lab for a number of years. Cross Processing was something that guys like Scott Clum and Trevor Graves were using for their photography back in the pioneering days of snowboarding. The effect produced is very striking.

The most common characteristics of cross processing is contrast and extreme color crossovers. Crossovers are color shifts that can't be corrected out of an image by normal means. For instance, an image might have a strong blue cast in the shadows but a heavy yellow cast in the highlights. Since blue and yellow are opposites (roughly speaking) if you attempt to correct out the blue cast in the shadows it only intensifies the yellow problem in the highlights. Although this image was manipulated in photoshop to achieve the effect it is a good example. Cred: basic clothing basica cross processing

On one occasion I inadvertently cross processed several rolls of E6 in the C41. It was a busy day and I simply walked to the wrong processor. I was mortified because the images were of a gentleman's mission trip to a remote part of the world. I was sick to my stomach. We ended up shooting copy slides and essentially re-cross processing the images. While it wasn't perfect the customer felt we had done our best.

If you decide to cross process be warned that getting reliable results in a positive image form are hard to achieve. Scanners and printers (as in photo lab printers) are designed to work with a negative that has a strong 'orange' substrate. Cross processing renders a negative without this baseline and the equipment rarely knows how to handle the extreme difference.

Have fun! Cross processing is a blast.

Check more discussion of this question.

What are my options for buying and developing film for a vintage 1913 Kodak camera?

Question

Today I was given a vintage 1913 Kodak camera, a Kodak Premoette Junior. What sort of film was it originally designed for and where can I buy it and have it developed?

Can I improvise with some sort of modern medium format film?

Answer

The manual (linked from the camerapedia page) says it takes a particular kind of 2^1/4 x 3^1/2 pack film, which (like I think you guessed) isn't made anymore.

It's hard to say without being able to look at the camera, but I'd suggest there are two main options:

The first is to use 2^1/4x3^1/4 sheet film, which should fit. You'd likely have to rig up some sort of way to keep the film in the right position, but that's usually fairly simple and non-destructive (like a piece of foam, or taping the film to a piece of card, etc). This size isn't particularly common, but is still available (e.g., from Freestyle). This would make it into a simple one-shot camera that you'd have to reload in the dark.

The second option, if you're particularly handy, is to modify the camera. You may not want to do this if the camera is particularly valuable (I don't think it is, but I'm far from an expert on how collectable this type of camera is, so best to find out for yourself). This is all very speculative, you'll have to judge for yourself if any of it feasible, but hopefully it gets you started:

• Modify the camera to take a 2x3 film holder. Remove (partially?) the back of the camera so that you can attach a normal 2x3 film holder.

• Fuji (and Polaroid until recently) makes instant pack films that are the appropriate size. Similar to the sheet film holder, maybe graft a Polaroid back in place of the current back of the camera.

• Modify the camera to use medium-format roll film. This would be simpler if this was a roll-film camera to begin with. You'll need to find out if there's space for the spools; it's certainly wide enough, but possibly not deep enough. You'll likely also have to rig up guides to keep the film at the correct distance.

As for development, medium format is by far the simplest: if there's noone locally, there's still lots of send-away options. 2x3 sheet film is trickier; not a lot of places develop sheet film these days, and 2x3 is a "weird" size - 4x5 is far more typical. I'd plan on doing that yourself, especially if you opted for the simple one-shot method. Instant film, obviously, wouldn't be a problem to develop.

Check more discussion of this question.

Is there any way to save the develop settings of a virtual copy in Lightroom?

Question

I usually set Lightroom to save the develop settings in a .XMP sidecar file, due to I don't like the whole "catalog" thing. Whenever I want to re-develop a photo, the developing information is right there in the sidecar.

But, as you can make "virtual copies" of a single photo, when the catalog gets deleted, the virtual copy develop settings are gone.

Is there any way to save the virtual copies develop settings in a .XMP sidecar file? Can a single XMP file hold two developing settings for a single image?

If not, what other workarounds exists?

Answer

Andres,

there is a second, potentially better, method that i have found.

• on your original file, save snapshot "original"
• on your virtual copy, save snapshot "virtual copy"
• "save metadata to file" on your original file
• the xmp will contain 2 snapshots. one of your original, one for your virtual copy.

open up the linked xmp file in a text editor and you will see settings for "VirtualCopySettings" and "VirtualCopySettings"

http://cl.ly/2Y0G2O1t3A0D2z3l3v3C

Having said all this, you are making quite a bit of work here. The catalog is in effect invisible to me as a user, apart from when reminded the user to backup. What in particular don't you like about it? Why trust xmp files and not the sql catalogue file?

Check more discussion of this question.

How long does undeveloped film last?

Question

I received a Mamiya ZE-2 from a family member who discovered it in a closet. Along with the camera were 3 rolls of film - 2 in white plastic holders and one inside the camera.

I have no idea what may be on the film, but they seem to have been used (not developed). Would it be worth it to go develop them, will they still have the photos on them?

The 2 rolls in casings are Fujifilm Superia 400.

Answer

This depends totally on the conditions it is kept. The date on the film tends to be a conservative figure and as long as it's been kept cool it tends to last a lot longer than this. If the film is years out of date you have to make a decision if you want to risk it because you may end up with nothing.

Check more discussion of this question.

What are my options for buying and developing film for a vintage 1913 Kodak camera?

Question

Today I was given a vintage 1913 Kodak camera, a Kodak Premoette Junior. What sort of film was it originally designed for and where can I buy it and have it developed?

Can I improvise with some sort of modern medium format film?

Answer

The manual (linked from the camerapedia page) says it takes a particular kind of 2^1/4 x 3^1/2 pack film, which (like I think you guessed) isn't made anymore.

It's hard to say without being able to look at the camera, but I'd suggest there are two main options:

The first is to use 2^1/4x3^1/4 sheet film, which should fit. You'd likely have to rig up some sort of way to keep the film in the right position, but that's usually fairly simple and non-destructive (like a piece of foam, or taping the film to a piece of card, etc). This size isn't particularly common, but is still available (e.g., from Freestyle). This would make it into a simple one-shot camera that you'd have to reload in the dark.

The second option, if you're particularly handy, is to modify the camera. You may not want to do this if the camera is particularly valuable (I don't think it is, but I'm far from an expert on how collectable this type of camera is, so best to find out for yourself). This is all very speculative, you'll have to judge for yourself if any of it feasible, but hopefully it gets you started:

• Modify the camera to take a 2x3 film holder. Remove (partially?) the back of the camera so that you can attach a normal 2x3 film holder.

• Fuji (and Polaroid until recently) makes instant pack films that are the appropriate size. Similar to the sheet film holder, maybe graft a Polaroid back in place of the current back of the camera.

• Modify the camera to use medium-format roll film. This would be simpler if this was a roll-film camera to begin with. You'll need to find out if there's space for the spools; it's certainly wide enough, but possibly not deep enough. You'll likely also have to rig up guides to keep the film at the correct distance.

As for development, medium format is by far the simplest: if there's noone locally, there's still lots of send-away options. 2x3 sheet film is trickier; not a lot of places develop sheet film these days, and 2x3 is a "weird" size - 4x5 is far more typical. I'd plan on doing that yourself, especially if you opted for the simple one-shot method. Instant film, obviously, wouldn't be a problem to develop.

Check more discussion of this question.

What does it mean when film turns out transparent after being developed?

Question

I had a B/W film turn out transparent after being developed. Does it mean that a) it was never exposed b) it was always overexposed or c) something went wrong during development?

Answer

The problem is definitely not overexposure; that renders negatives black.

To work out whether it was underexposure or a development problem, there's a fairly straight-forward indicator: Do you see any edge markings (marked red in the example below)?

They'll vary from film to film; not all will have barcodes, but there's usually a name or number at the very least. These are exposed onto the film at the factory, and should show up if development was correct.

If you have edge markings then the problem is most likely on the camera side of things. There's a few possibilities; the camera didn't wind correctly, the shutter is jammed or sticky and doesn't open correctly. On the less-likely-but-still-possible end of things, you may have left the lenscap on, or drastically underexposed the entire roll (e.g., set to 1/1000s accidentally while shooting in a dark pub).

If you have no edge markings then there was almost certainly an error in development. Exactly what type of error is hard to say, but there are a couple of usual suspects:

• You developed the film yourself: if it's perfectly clear, with not a trace of density anywhere, then you may have used fixer before developer, or didn't use developer. If there's small amounts of density, the developer may have gone bad, or it may be severely under-developed (e.g., you only left it in for a minute or two when 12 was required).

• A lab developed the film: they may have developed standard black-and-white in a C-41 process. One of the final steps of C-41 removes all the silver from the film, leaving only dyes. Standard black and white is only silver, and the image is destroyed by the C-41 process.

Check more discussion of this question.

Scratches on negatives - me or them?

Question

I've recently dug out my old SLR camera again. I've just got the prints and scans back from a reputable high-street company and I'm not very impressed with the results.

For example:

There's a big vertical scratch in the negative on the right side of this crop and also some small blotches in the top left corner. The scratch on the right of the image is a scratch on the negative itself and corresponds exactly with a dip in the edge of the negative. I can't make out the blobs on the negative though, although they may be too small for my eyes! There are other similar examples on both this film and other films from the same batch.

My suspicion is that somebody or something in the lab did a hatchet job on the negatives whilst cutting them and the negatives were still wet whilst scanning and printing. I don't see how it could be my camera body, or dirt causing it given the direction of the marks in relation to the film. The example image is from the middle of the roll too, so not something I could have done whilst loading the film.

I'd appreciate some input though to check I'm not being an idiot before complaining; is my view a fair assessment? Is it likely to be just a shoddy processing service?

Another example:

Answer

Dirt scratches would go lengthwise on a horizontal or top-to-bottom on a vertical. It's not likely your camera. The two really bad scratches appear at about the same place -- I'd guess it's to do with something in the lab. Ask them.

Out of curiosity, why film at this point in time?

Check more discussion of this question.

What is push/pull processing?

Question

Researching nearby companies providing E-6 processing, I noticed some offer push/pull processing. What is it and when would I want it?

Answer

The ISO rating of a film is determined by the exposure required to produce a negative (or positive, in the case of slides) with a particular contrast level when the film is developed according to a standard recipe and process (time, temperature, etc.).

Simply put, "push processing" is developing a film for longer than normal; "pull processing" is developing it for less than the normal amount of time.

There are a number of different reasons why you might want to push or pull film. One of those reasons is that sinking feeling you get when you realise after removing the film from your camera that you've shot the whole roll (or at least the last few shots) at the wrong ISO. Pushing or pulling may be able to salvage usable shots. But that's not the ordinary reason for push/pull.

Push processing is often used with high-speed film to shoot at very low light levels. It's not so much that pushing is the best way to go about things, but it's often the only option since the film speed you need simply doesn't exist. You are forced, therefore, to underexpose and overdevelop the film you can get in order to capture the image you want.

Push processing tends to increase grain (or the size of the dye clouds in a colour picture), so it is often used (again with high speed film, which tends to be grainy to begin with) to produce a "grainstorm" effect in an image, giving the picture a sort of pointillistic and "artsy" feel.

When photographers specify a push or pull of less than a full stop, it's usually because they've tested the film and found that it gives the contrast (and, perhaps, the saturation or detail) they want with something other than the ISO standard method. (Pushing and pulling are core components of the Zone System; the idea being that you know the film and its response to developers well enough to get the contrast and tonality right on the negative so that you don't have to monkey around with paper contrast.) I might find, for instance, that shooting ISO 100 chromes at an exposure equivalent of 64 (a 2/3-stop overexposure) then processing for a 2/3-stop pull might be the best way to tame the high contrast in my landscapes on sunny days, and doing the opposite might add some sparkle and contrast on overcast days with flat light.

Check more discussion of this question.

Where can I develop 110 film?

Question

Where can I develop 110 film from my pentax 110 slr

Answer

I took mine (also from a Pentax Auto110!) to the local fancy camera store, and they couldn't do it. But CVS could! They sent it in to Kodak for processing, so it took a little while, but the results came back just fine.

Check more discussion of this question.