My current inventory of film that has been in the freezer.

[brbo]

Same here, although the cyan highlights are more obvious.

Is my Photoshop broken?

 

[Prest_400]

I went through most of the film that I had stored. IIRC 5 rolls of Provia + 1 E100 left, 5 of Portra 160 and a few Gold 200 and one Portra 400 left but that is due to me also shooting family and excursions during holidays.

The scans look kind of color-wonky to me with significant crossover and an overall bias towards yellow, but this is similar to what I see in a lot Portra scans online and what people appear to experience as "normal" for Portra. There's in particular a significant red/cyan crossover, but the other channels have gone off into the woods as well. Some of this may be due to the film being expired, but some of it is likely due to the auto-color balancing that was done in the scanning process. It's impossible to determine which factor accounts for which part of the deviation.

As always, what counts if is you're happy with the end result; if so, don't worry about it and live happily ever after.

Would attribute it also to operator priming. I specially note this with Kodak Gold. Most people aim for a general idealised look.
Having left a batch of 25+10 C41 in 2 small labs I've noticed operator inconsistencies across, even in the perhaps single manned lab. Portra 160 came beautifully in mosts shots (barely expired) and P400 has varied from very normal looking, to grainyish and strange. 400H quite well with some scenes very normal and then some higher key pastel portraits.
The 8 year old expired 160 NS has been interesting. Always frozen. I need to look at the negs more closely, which seemed fine but the scans vary from having a green tinge (I can correct most) to none.
Interestingly a couple of the provia rolls, I suspect exp 2020 that I had, were slightly fogged. It could have been processing also, because it's not all of them.

To top fog up a bit, 2-3 Xray passes during the trip were given.

 

[koraks]

Is my Photoshop broken?

There's indeed also an overall red (and yellow) bias, but the red bias is stronger in the shadows. Hence, the highlights are red and yellow relative to the shadows. If you do a sample of the shadows just like you did for that brightly lit windowsill, you'll see what I mean. The red bias is relatively speaking far more pronounced there - thus, red crosses over. Blue does it, too, but less so.

Would attribute it also to operator priming.

If a human operator was involved, that could certainly be a major factor.

 

[brbo]

There's indeed also an overall red (and yellow) bias, but the red bias is stronger in the shadows. Hence, the highlights are red and yellow relative to the shadows. If you do a sample of the shadows just like you did for that brightly lit windowsill, you'll see what I mean. The red bias is relatively speaking far more pronounced there - thus, red crosses over. Blue does it, too, but less so.

Yes, in absolute terms there is about the same difference in channels of what should be neutral tones in shadows and highlights and that make them relatively higher in shadows. Which might indicate a problem with film (although for a 20 years out of date Kodak film this is pretty good!) or mildly inadequate or "opinionated" scanning.

But, since two people commented on obvious cyan highlights, I had to check. There are no cyan highlights. I'm not blind yet

I also hoped @Wolfram Malukker would share which Portra film is this. If it's Portra NC it's still in very good shape, less so if it's VC. I have only one Portra 160NC RA-4 prints scanned, but this one gives the same kind of mood if Wolfram's photos with couple of clicks of C (minilab scanners work differently that PS, they have the tendency to hold the highlights around neutral and change midtones relatively more).

 

[MattKing]

But, since two people commented on obvious cyan highlights, I had to check. There are no cyan highlights. I'm not blind yet

Which itself could be due to differences in monitors, monitor calibration, ambient light conditions when viewing, etc.
Not to mention the role that the Photrio uploader performs.
Due to those differences, if the highlights look more cyan to us then they do to you, most likely the shadows look less red to us then the do to you.
But as the discussion is about crossover, it is the differences between the highlights and shadows that matters.

 

[koraks]

But, since two people commented on obvious cyan highlights, I had to check. There are no cyan highlights. I'm not blind yet

The sky in the first one is pronouncedly cyan:

However, this is mostly due to the yellow/blue crossover, not so much the red crossover.

If it's Portra NC it's still in very good shape, less so if it's VC.

The results are fairly good regardless, given that the film is >20 years old. I've seen Superia hold up similarly well, although it does get pretty dense to print/scan though.

 

[Andrew O'Neill]

I've been slowly working through my dwindling stash of 4x5 HP5 and FP4, that have been in the freezer since 2005. Expiry dates for 2007. The HP5 has considerably more base fog than FP4, which is to be expected since it is faster emulsion. But, TMY from 2009 (also frozen) is totally fine...

 

[Wolfram Malukker]

The film is Portra 160 NC.

I just did a B+W test development on a sheet of 4x5 Fuji RFP from 1987...I have high hopes. Unfortunately I have no way to scan 4x5 yet, I'm looking at a Canon 9950F locally this week though!

 

[abruzzi]

Yeah, I need to inventory as well. I probably have around 80 rolls of 120, and who knowshow many sheets of film. I have some more on the way, mostly Ferrania since its future availability is up for question, but when it arrives, I'll need to break everything down to see if I'm over buying anywhere. I have a total of 8 rolls of 35mm--all rolls of HIE that I haven't shot yet. Plus a few bulk rolls then I'll be done with 35mm.