Backing paper and numbers

[SalveSlog]

I plan to use Provia 100F in an old 6x9 folder depending on the red window. I've read that for some films the numbers are so faint today that it's difficult to read. Is this a problem with Provia?

 

[chassis]

I have no experience with Provia or with old folders, but have a look at this image. The numbers look bold to me.

 

[SalveSlog]

Thank you. If my rolls are like that, there will be no problem.

 

[pentaxuser]

If the Provia example above represents the actual backing paper and is current paper then Fuji would seem to have "squared the circle" in terms of avoidance of backing paper number bleed onto the film while producing very bold numbers

I wonder how we square this with the statement that all backing paper for Ilford Kodak, Fuji etc comes from the same source thus forcing Kodak and Ilford to insist on lighter, less bold numbers? Maybe there is something about slide films that makes bolder numbers possible, if so, what?

pentaxuser

 

[chassis]

Pentax maybe Kodak is specifying a different recipe from the paper supplier, to save costs or for another reason. It could be each film manufacturer has their own proprietary recipe for backing paper, while indeed coming from the same supplier. A variant of this goes on in other industries.

 

[DWThomas]

Pentax maybe Kodak is specifying a different recipe from the paper supplier, to save costs or for another reason. It could be each film manufacturer has their own proprietary recipe for backing paper, while indeed coming from the same supplier. A variant of this goes on in other industries.

That is certainly something I've considered. As I pointed out in one of the long running threads about the wrapper offset issue, when one looks closely at the actual backing paper it does not all look the same -- different texture, different gloss. That could mean it's from different sources, but it could be a matter of purchase specs. I still am suspicious of the single supplier claims, given the global reach, but even if it is a single supplier, that doesn't mean all the paper comes from the same roll of raw product. There are also finishing steps as to adding numbers, branding, logos, and various colors which are separate from making the actual web of paper. I have yet to hear whether all that is contracted out to the papermaker, done by a third party, or done in house by the film maker. All of those operations open the possibility of variations in the final product.

 

[chassis]

That is certainly something I've considered. As I pointed out in one of the long running threads about the wrapper offset issue, when one looks closely at the actual backing paper it does not all look the same -- different texture, different gloss. That could mean it's from different sources, but it could be a matter of purchase specs. I still am suspicious of the single supplier claims, given the global reach, but even if it is a single supplier, that doesn't mean all the paper comes from the same roll of raw product. There are also finishing steps as to adding numbers, branding, logos, and various colors which are separate from making the actual web of paper. I have yet to hear whether all that is contracted out to the papermaker, done by a third party, or done in house by the film maker. All of those operations open the possibility of variations in the final product.

Agree.

 

[MattKing]

As the problem involves interaction between film, backing paper and ink, it may be that E6 Provia 100F isn't susceptible, while other films are.
As there wouldn't be any overlap between Ektachrome production and the new, problematic backing papers, we would have no way of knowing whether the Ektachrome emulsions would be immune to the recent problems.
In addition, Kodak appears to have had a large stock of the backing paper that they produced on hand when they ceased manufacture - it appears to have been years before they had to buy more. Fuji may have on hand even more of their old stuff.
The fall in film sales in the mid to late 2000s was really precipitous.

 

[mshchem]

I'm thinking that all of the above could be correct. Huge stocks of old material, different suppliers, different film chemicals, cost savings, bankrupt suppliers, Ink changes you name it. The distribution channels have changed RADICALLY in the last 20 years. I just hope that it gets to where people have faith.

I'm buying TMY , never stopped, and LUCKY ME never had any effected lots. I just bought a bunch of Ilford HP5 and FP4, I am getting some really nice results.

 

[mshchem]

I plan to use Provia 100F in an old 6x9 folder depending on the red window. I've read that for some films the numbers are so faint today that it's difficult to read. Is this a problem with Provia?

You might want to bracket the first roll exposures. Make sure your shutter speeds are correct. Transparency film shows no mercy in exposure errors. I shoot 6x9 Fujichrome, love it!

 

[trendland]

I plan to use Provia 100F in an old 6x9 folder depending on the red window. I've read that for some films the numbers are so faint today that it's difficult to read. Is this a problem with Provia?

Just have a look to your 6x9.I should be
possible to replace the red filter - sometimes they are made from glass sometimes they are made with plastics.
I would not recomand to use 6x9 without
any filter as a protection to my cameras I noticed No light leaks at all cause from remove.
But it is smart to use Lee Filters for example.
I have got some complete filter exemplaries with 43 different red tones.

with regards

 

[mshchem]

Just have a look to your 6x9.I should be
possible to replace the red filter - sometimes they are made from glass sometimes they are made with plastics.
I would not recomand to use 6x9 without
any filter as a protection to my cameras I noticed No light leaks at all cause from remove.
But it is smart to use Lee Filters for example.
I have got some complete filter exemplaries with 43 different red tones.

with regards

Very good point. The red window is from the old slow ortho films like Verichrome ortho. Remove it if it makes it easier to see numbers. Maybe cover the hole with some black tape. I know I have some 1950s era Kodak 620 cameras that have a red window, and a little sliding aluminum shutter to block the light.

 

[SalveSlog]

You might want to bracket the first roll exposures. Make sure your shutter speeds are correct. Transparency film shows no mercy in exposure errors. I shoot 6x9 Fujichrome, love it!

A simple shutterspeed tester that all my cameras meet: