http://www.photographyblog.com/news/try_that_with_a_hard_drive/

I also developed some 1978 Kodak Verichrome Pan that I bought 20 rolls of new sealed in 126 format. It comes out fine after developing.

Impressive!!! Article says "ILFORD HP5 black and white film", didn't know that film had been around that long!!

400 Asa HP5 was launched in 1976 at Photokina

Some of this days i found in my attic some negatifs i take in 1983, and think wxactly that : where will be my digital files in 25 years ?
It´s possible to find my digital files in 25 years in my attic ?

Yep that is probably a real advantage of film over digital. Most of what has been done digital will be lost quickly. The ones that will survive will probably be of better than the average quality, but it ls likely that lots that have potential but did not came out quickly will be lost.

Looked at any 1950's Kodacolor prints recently?

How many will find their film after 25 years?
Almost nobody cares about their negatives, positives might be in a magazine for the projector, glued to the glass of the frames..

I do have mine though, back to some time in the 70's. Some films from my first try at photography is gone. I would really like to have them, but they are probably no value as images.

I really don't like the film vs digital discussion. Can't people just accept they are two different medias? I have used, and still use both. Both have advantages and disadvantages.

@ Lars this was a versus discussion.

Just the magic of finding old images. In this world of instant gratification, I love the delay in seeing my images. It builds anticipation and excitement. I can only imagine the joy of finding something new - but old - like this. It would be like using a time machine...

I still think of a roll of 400 kodak colour film that I shot as a kid in 1988. I took it at camp. I remember it being in my bottom drawer for what seemed like ages as I didn't have the pocket money to develop. I don't know why I didn't just askmy parents - but that canister is now long gone somewhere. I can remember the camp - sort of - and I can remember taking a photo of a spider hanging one day.... I'd love to find that time capsule again and see what was in it. But that is not likely at all.

Hi Richard,
I have many thousand colorslides, in closed trays, in the attic (slides, I had for free, because I made the advertising for it), the colors turned in to pink color... maybe, not the good quality of films, or to warm, to cold on the attic?
All my old b/w negatives are scratched, unusable and not good quality value.

I have seen photo prints, exposed in daylight, who lost there colors!!!
Modern photo-papers, printed with Epson ink gives a 25 years UV guaranty, even in daylight:-)

Some of my digital files, scanned with the first Nikon coolscan are +- 15 years old and have still the same quality, when I open them.
Now, I have saved them on a HD and on DVD (before, it was on a SCSI HD or tape HD, from which I even don't remember the name) and I think, I still can open them in 20 years ( if the PC still accept a HD or DVD) and will have the same color quality......
but don't know of it still make sense.

Well DVD's and CD's do corrupt very quickly... I have audio cd's with holes in them from mould and bugs as well as getting the backing stuck on the slips they were in.

Hard disks too are mechanical and prone to failure.

Tape is the best - but you need a working drive always to regain access to it.

The point I guess is - is that correct storage will keep things for a long time. Film means then in a coo and dry place. Digital means on blu ray disks that are duped every year for new ones?

Anyway - for me the story is not the tech. It is the magic of finding some old which is new again.

I had an experience much like this when I bought my Nikon Coolscan. I had a couple of boxes of paper mounted slides from the 1970's. I REALLY felt like I was seeing them for the first time. I had only ever seen them projected on a wall with a cheap projector back in the day. I had had a couple of them printed by having inter-neg's made. But, seeing the detail and color of these after @30 years of not very nice storage was remarkable. Now if I could just find that old book of b&w neg's...seems to be lost for ever. Thing that bugs me is, when we moved out to California in '99 I remember seeing it. Can't find it now though...

I have a box of negs from high school in a box at my mothers house. I am going to pull them out and go over them. Not that I think there are many amazing shots in there - but it will be good to see - how I saw things - back then....

Yep, you will have fun for sure. I really don't think my "eye" has changed very much over the years. I think I might have shot this pretty much the same today:

http://www.clydebeamer.com/2008/08/1970s-redux-1/

or this:

http://www.clydebeamer.com/2008/09/tahoe-sunset-1/

I believe I read somewhere that one limit to survival of film is the slow dispersion of the silver halide grains in the gelatin over time so that the image becomes progressively less sharp.

Excellent ! Honestly, I have never regreted switching back to analog... so much more joy

Possibly. As this is also an issue with developing and also affects peoples choice on how they like to agitate. However unless the particles are dispersing with the rule of difusion then things don't have to necessarily need to go to blurry.

I wonder how all those archivists work when dealing with old film, be it motion picture or still. I guess galleries have these discussions all the time for all mediums when it comes to preservation.

One of the fascinating aspects for me concerning B&W film photography is that we are moving into the "archival" era of the medium as it relates to negative and print stability. Work produced by Ansel Adams, Edward Weston etc are 70-80 years old offering a golden opportunity to study the effects of time on the silver halides and the possible morphing of negatives. The switch to safety films obviously had a positive effect on photography and I for one would like to know if studies have been done that address concerns mentioned above. Have, in fact, any of Adams' negatives blurred over time?

Well the Adams foundation/estate will still sell new prints made directly from his negatives by master printers who dodge and burn and print exactly according to Adams' records and coaching from his direct students like John Sexton.... They make a big song and dance about being true to him and the final product - so one could infer that they are holding up well?

This all sounds like a topic that King would be most expert on....

I doubt they have faded anything significant. I did a job sorting and copying lots of negatives and glass plates from a local photographer for a museum once. These had lots of damage from poor storage, but it was still not possible to see any fading. Of course, I didn't see them when they were new.
My impression of Ansel Adams don't exactly place him in the category of people throwing their negatives in a shoe box in the cellar, so I guess they are still in perfect shape.
The ones who should take special care are those living in areas with high humidity. The fungus will probably eat the negatives, as it do with the lenses..

I'm missing some thousands of negatives...stuff that's important to me. Can't find them anywhere. I distinctly remember seeing them about 15 years ago.

Me, too.

Thanks, Richard, but I don't presume to be an expert. I don't doubt for a minute that many or most of the Ansel Adams negatives can be printed today with no loss of fidelity.

From my own experience, a b/w film negative developed today using archival processes and appropriately stored will outlast any current member of 1X.com. I own a few near-100-year-old negatives of family photos that seem to be as good as new when I scan them (and to be perfectly transparent, they weren't that great when they were new...box camera stuff). I also have archivally processed 16x20 prints that have been hanging on my wall for 20 years that don't show the least amount of fading. Which is to say that appropriate processing and storage are both important in the longevity of photographic images. Adams was, of course, expert in both of these.

I do have some 40-year-old color transparencies on which something appears to be growing. My transparencies seem to be more vulnerable to the ravages of time than my b/w negatives.

Funny, I don't distinctly remember anything from 15 years ago...or even from 15 days ago sometimes! Now where are my damn car keys?

Me to, except i found it inside a box in attic, but inside that box i found also a huge fungus colony who eat all negatives :(((