A short note about film quality....

[cmo]

A while ago there were rumours that a company named Maco had sold 120 slide films that had been cut too small: 60mm instead of 61,5mm width. That does make a difference in most cameras, I think. So, there was a product recall.

The former Maco director just confirmed that the films were purchased by Lomo for a bargain price - and they sold the faulty films to their customers - this link is only in german language:

http://www.aphog.de/forum/viewtopic.php?p=206979#p206979

I wonder whether the customers that bought these films got some hugs and kisses from Maco and Lomo - most people prefer to be kissed before they get f*****...

 

[Ian Grant]

That doesn't surprise many of us.

Ian

 

[Slixtiesix]

That would have been my question too. Would Lomo users care anyway?

 

[Diapositivo]

This is perfectly in line with the Lomo aesthetic of "unpredictable" results, the magic flair of randomness

Brilliant move!

It can actually work with any batch problem.

 

[bsdunek]

Agree. Would a Diana or Holga know the difference? They don't have much in the way of film guides anyway. As Diapositivo says, "This is perfectly in line with the Lomo aesthetic of "unpredictable" results, the magic flair of randomness"

 

[cmo]

If you buy a Lomo you know what you get and that you pay a high price for a plastic camera. No secrets about it. It's your decision whether you want it.

But selling faulty products as normal products without telling people that they are faulty, that's a different thing. There are very ugly words to describe this kind of business conduct.

 

[Rudeofus]

But selling faulty products as normal products without telling people that they are faulty, that's a different thing. There are very ugly words to describe this kind of business conduct.

The post you linked to specifically mentions that Lomo honestly told their customers that their film stock was too small. Maybe Hartmuth added this later in his posting, but it is there for all to see, so the situation is not as bad as you make it seem. What surprises me more is that in the 21st century confectioning companies make such screw ups, it's not like 120 roll film is a new product line ...

 

[AndreasT]

Talking about film quality, I few years ago, 2-3 years ago. I enlarged a photo from slow speed film from one of the alternative manufactures.
Meaning not Ilford or Kodak. This film had "holes" in the emulsion. The coating was not even orsomething and there were white spots on the photo. Meaning there were dark spots on the negative. It was made from a 35mm film (x-pan camera I think it was) and enlarged to about 80cm on the short side.
The manufacturer/distributor was informed and knew about this problems as far as I recall, but they kept it quiet because they had a large batch and many were sold already. However on normal sized prints nothing could really be seen.

 

[piu58]

> Meaning there were dark spots on the negative

I had similar problems with maybe the same product (RR Tonal). I gave up to use such films. We can try to use budget-piced paper but not film. Negatives cannot be replace by a better version.