Stock Longevity

[Cole Webley]

I just picked up a bunch of film that has been sitting in a basement (not frozen) for the better part of two years. It was purchased in the summer of 2006. The majority of the stock is 5293 EXR 200T. Then a few cans of 5229 Vision 2 Expression 500T and a re-can of 5217 Vision 2 200T.

 

I will be sending them to the lab to get it tested but I was wondering what everyone thought...

 

I know the EXR and 5217 have a better chance b/c of the speed - so I hope they are still good. I may be able to shoot a test too - if its too close for Kodak to call, I know they will say don't shoot it - so it may come down to shooting some tests.

 

Anyways - any thoughts?

[Adrian Sierkowski]

Test is really the only way to know for sure. However, with the proper amount of over-exposure I'd say the 200T should be worth it. Might have more grain than you're used to on 200. The 500T. . . dunno. Should be alright, though; but, like you said, clip test and perhaps a quick exposure test to be sure.

[Robert Houllahan]

Anyways - any thoughts?

 

 

They are good looking stocks, two years is not too bad, they will loose a bit of sensitivity especially the 500 speed so just put more light on the film. Maybe think about rating the 200 speeds stocks as 160 or 120 and rate the 500 at 250 or 300. There will be more grain, especially in the shadows, grain is nice....

 

 

-Rob-

[K Borowski]

Maybe think about rating the 200 speeds stocks as 160 or 120 and rate the 500 at 250 or 300.

[. . .]

-Rob-

 

*320 ahem, ahem. . .

 

A lot of people normally overrate by 1/3 of a stop with new stock anyway, so think about 2/3 to a full stop of overrating.

 

If the stock has been stored properly, i.e. refrigerated, or even better, frozen, then this won't be necessary.

 

I've shot quite a bit of 400 film with '05 expiration dates recently without trouble, just rating it at 250 or 200 and it'll be fine, no noticeable effect.

[Dan Goulder]

I've shot quite a bit of 400 film with '05 expiration dates recently without trouble, just rating it at 250 or 200 and it'll be fine, no noticeable effect.

Hi, Karl. How was the stock stored? Was it necessary to overexpose one full stop to achieve "no noticeable effect"? What was the specific stock?

Thanks.

[Robert Houllahan]

*320 ahem, ahem. . .

 

 

Yes 320 Karl, thanks for the nitpick...

 

 

I got a pile (20k ft.) of So-290 leftovers that was about 2-1/2 years old from a Jet Engine manufacturer I was working for, this was a Polyester base 500T stock with .3000 perfs for high speed work, 16mm 2 perf. The film was stored properly but had lost sensitivity and got noisy in the blue layer. That was a few years ago and I shot it rated as 250 and it was just ok for what I was doing but one of the girls who worked here at Cinelab shot a set of dream sequences for her film that came out nice by playing into the deterioration of the stock. The 5229 is a better emulsion but the same general rule applies that the faster the color stock the less sensitive it becomes over time, starting with the blue layer....

 

 

A densitometer clip test is a good idea...

 

 

-Rob-

[K Borowski]

Hi, Karl. How was the stock stored? Was it necessary to overexpose one full stop to achieve "no noticeable effect"? What was the specific stock?

Thanks.

 

It was refrigerated the whole time, and 2/3 of a stop of overexposure (I normally shoot 1/3 over) gave results almost indistinguishable from 1/3 over with fresh stock).

 

Robert. . . anytime! ;)