Comment about XTOL in Adox / Lina Bessonova video

[Tom Kershaw]

I spotted this video on YouTube a few days ago:

Curiously, there is a comment part way through about the current product producing lower quality results, but without much detail (3 min 58 secs) - I'm still working through an older batch at the moment but do have one of the new packages in stock. I had thought the recent XTOL problems were down to a packaging issue and not something more fundamental, if indeed this the case?

 

[DeletedAcct1]

You know me, I don't like the recent Kodak Alaris.
This time I fell off my chair when I watched this video.
I don't like Adox move when it relies on bloggers to do such videos and I don't like them this time about Kodak Alaris Xtol without carring evidences also.
Bad move.

 

[DeletedAcct1]

I spotted this video on YouTube a few days ago:

Curiously, there is a comment part way through about the current product producing lower quality results, but without much detail (3 min 58 secs) - I'm still working through an older batch at the moment but do have one of the new packages in stock. I had thought the recent XTOL problems were down to a packaging issue and not something more fundamental, if indeed this the case?

Don't rely on this video: Xtol is a fantastic developer when it works 100%. Fantastic, period!

 

[pentaxuser]

Who were these two people presenting the video? It looked and sounded as if there are employees of Adox but it wasn't clear what their positions are in the company

It was clear that they were alleging that the current Xtol was tested and found to be inferior. There was even a graph demonstrating this on a laptop. It further states that so concerned is Adox that it is working on a replacement that will match the "old " Xtol in quality

I am no lawyer but if these people are employees then a case could be made out for it being an Adox video and as such it contains Adox views and was cleared for release by Adox

If so, I agree that what they had to say about Xtol comes very close to being libel under U.K. law as I understand the definition of Libel

OK it was delivered in a short two line comment and possibly as a means of manly introducing the idea in the viewer's mind of an Adox version of the old Xtol is being produced but nevertheless it did seem to me to be "sailing close to the wind" in legal terms

What wasn't clear is whether the owners of Adox had any knowledge of the video its contents

pentaxuser

 

[DeletedAcct1]

Who were these two people presenting the video? It looked and sounded as if there are employees of Adox but it wasn't clear what their positions are in the company

It was clear that they were alleging that the current Xtol was tested and found to be inferior. There was even a graph demonstrating this on a laptop. It further states that so concerned is Adox that it is working on a replacement that will match the "old " Xtol in quality

I am no lawyer but if these people are employees then a case could be made out for it being an Adox video and as such it contains Adox views and was cleared for release by Adox

If so, I agree that what they had to say about Xtol comes very close to being libel under U.K. law as I understand the definition of Libel

OK it was delivered in a short two line comment and possibly as a means of manly introducing the idea in the viewer's mind of an Adox version of the old Xtol is being produced but nevertheless it did seem to me to be "sailing close to the wind" in legal terms

What wasn't clear is whether the owners of Adox had any knowledge of the video its contents

pentaxuser

The first person that is driving the car is Mirko Boddecker, the ceo of Adox.
The lady is Lina Bessanova, an independent photographer and blogger.

 

[pentaxuser]

The first person that is driving the car is Mirko Boddecker, the ceo of Adox.
The lad is Lina Bessanova, an independent photographer and blogger.

Thanks I take it you meant to write "lady" and not lad. It looked to me that the one with the coloured hair was female. The letter "y" makes all the difference

pentaxuser

 

[DeletedAcct1]

Thanks I take it you meant to write "lady" and not lad. It looked to me that the one with the coloured hair was female. The letter "y" makes all the difference

pentaxuser

typo.
yes, I meant lady of course...
i've corrected it.
Thanks for pointing it out...

P.S.: incidentally I understand the term "lad" is used in "lads and gents" to identify ladies in the USA... Am I wrong?

 

[runswithsizzers]

typo.
yes, I meant lady of course...
i've corrected it.
Thanks for pointing it out...

P.S.: incidentally I understand the term "lad" is used in "lads and gents" to identify ladies in the USA... Am I wrong?

In spoken English it may sound like “lads and gents” but the correct phrase is “ladies and gents” (or more often, ladies and gentlemen”). A “lad” is a boy.

 

[osella]

The first person that is driving the car is Mirko Boddecker, the ceo of Adox.
The lady is Lina Bessanova, an independent photographer and blogger.

According to her Instagram posts she is engaged to Mirko, which makes me wonder how independent she really is.

 

[koraks]

So Adox does analysis of old vs. new XTOL, they find a difference, it's shown in the video of a blogger who may or may not be independent, and Adox decide to make a developer to approach the test results they got from the old XTOL. What's the hubbub about? Nothing stands in the way of manufacturers evaluating each other's products unless they have non-analysis agreements, which Adox & Kodak are extremely unlikely to have. Nothing stands in the way of one manufacturer saying something about the products of a competitor based on their own testing. Nothing stand in the way of a blogger and/or a manufacturer posting videos about such tests.

I think Adox could be sued by Kodak Alaris for this video.

Sure. But not successfully. There's no basis for this.

 

[relistan]

Sure. But not successfully. There's no basis for this.

Exactly.

I think Adox could be sued by Kodak Alaris for this video.

Also, Lina Bessanova has been on Youtube for quite awhile, and has a good following, long before she was that close with Adox. IMO Adox have been one of the best and most open companies in the current environment. I do get tired of people always looking for ways to attack one of the most innovative companies currently in this space. I seriously doubt that the economics of a single developer that already has competitors in the market is worth any level of subterfuge.

Finally, there is nothing in that video about current XTOL behavior there that hasn't already been stated by people on here and RFF multiple times of late. I refuted some of those arguments myself since I am using current XTOL and my last two batches were totally fine. But not at all surprised to hear this stated in the video. Some people have not had a good experience with it.

 

[eatfrog]

Kodak could very well sue Adox for this.

Nonsense. Of course Adox are well within their rights to do testing on competitors products. Especially since they have their own films in their range and they want to give correct development times for those.

 

[koraks]

The problem is that Adox cannot afford to say that the new Xtol is inferior to the old one just because they run some tests (??), not disclosing the results. Some batches of the new Xtol suffered some production or packaging problem (there's a Kodak Alaris official statement about this - see here https://www.facebook.com/kodakprofessional/posts/3010366755648311) and maybe the Xtol envelope tested by Adox was one affected. This doesn't allow Adox to make such blunt statement about the new Xtol quality.
Xtol new is NOT inferior in any way to the old Xtol, by any means.
Kodak could very well sue Adox for this.

Your case wouldn't stand a chance in court. Adox didn't say anything about new XTOL being inferior. The only one who said anything normative was the blogger herself, whom as far as we know is not an Adox representative. Even if she is, there's little chance for legal prosecution of one company saying something about a competitor's product being inferior (implying competitors' products are inferior is kind of like the default in doing business...) The only thing Adox showed to this blogger who then presented it to the world was two curves. That's not a normative judgement, let alone an instance of defamation.

 

[radiant]

The problem is that Adox cannot afford to say that the new Xtol is inferior to the old one just because they run some tests (??), not disclosing the results. Some batches of the new Xtol suffered some production or packaging problem (there's a Kodak Alaris official statement about this - see here https://www.facebook.com/kodakprofessional/posts/3010366755648311) and maybe the Xtol envelope tested by Adox was one affected. This doesn't allow Adox to make such blunt statement about the new Xtol quality.
Xtol new is NOT inferior in any way to the old Xtol, by any means.
Kodak could very well sue Adox for this.

You are claiming something here without showing the proof. Basically you are doing same thing you are criticizng Adox.

I would trust Adox on this, we are talking about film manufacturers laborator here..

 

[DeletedAcct1]

Your case wouldn't stand a chance in court. Adox didn't say anything about new XTOL being inferior. The only one who said anything normative was the blogger herself, whom as far as we know is not an Adox representative. Even if she is, there's little chance for legal prosecution of one company saying something about a competitor's product being inferior (implying competitors' products are inferior is kind of like the default in doing business...) The only thing Adox showed to this blogger who then presented it to the world was two curves. That's not a normative judgement, let alone an instance of defamation.

No?
Please listen to 4:05 "rumors that the new Xtol has been inferior to the old one - Adox made some tests and found the difference to be quite huge".
This could depend to the batch problem and not the product in itself.

 

[koraks]

No?
Please listen to 4:05 "rumors that the nex Xtol has been inferior to the old one - Adox made some tests and found the difference to be quite huge".

Read back what I said.
Adox didn't say anything; the blogger did.
Saying that 'a test suggests there is a big difference between old and new product of manufacturer X' does not create a legal basis for lawsuit even if it were Adox saying this themselves.

This is of course even apart from the question how likely it is that Kodak would use this to trigger a lawsuit (they're smarter than that, and their legal department probably has more relevant stuff to work on atm) or if Adox would be careless enough to put themselves in such a position (they, too, are smarter than that).

It's just an insignificant little blip of noise from some random photog who likes posting youtube vids.

 

[DeletedAcct1]

Your case wouldn't stand a chance in court. Adox didn't say anything about new XTOL being inferior. The only one who said anything normative was the blogger herself, whom as far as we know is not an Adox representative. Even if she is, there's little chance for legal prosecution of one company saying something about a competitor's product being inferior (implying competitors' products are inferior is kind of like the default in doing business...) The only thing Adox showed to this blogger who then presented it to the world was two curves. That's not a normative judgement, let alone an instance of defamation.

It's not my case.
Yes, Adox didn't stated that the new Xtol is inferior to the old one, the blogger said that they had seen huge difference for the new vs. old.
That's correct.
But I don't like it.

 

[Tom Kershaw]

It's just an insignificant little blip of noise from some random photog who likes posting youtube vids.

Adox produce some very good products, and I'm sure they know what they're doing. However, it would be useful in this case if Lina Bessonova could explain in what way the "new" XTOL is less effective / inferior compared to previous versions.

 

[radiant]

Adox produce some very good products, and I'm sure they know what they're doing. However, it would be useful in this case if Lina Bessonova could explain in what way the "new" XTOL is less effective / inferior compared to previous versions.

I think she is referring to lower gamma?

 

[Craig75]

I dont know why people are saying lina bessanova is a blogger. Shes a top notch photographer who just happens to also have an extremely good youtube channel. Her indepth video on the new ilford paper was excellent.

 

[Ian Grant]

There were posts last year on various Forums about the differences between te old and new Xtol, so it's nothing new.

Ian

 

[Tom Kershaw]

I think she is referring to lower gamma?

So this reference could simply mean longer development times are needed, a little odd though.

 

[NB23]

Remember in the 80’s when it was the norm for a company to bash the competitor?

Coke’a ads were basically Pepsi bashing.

“Pepsi’s gross, people! Drink Coke!”

 

[koraks]

I dont know why people are saying lina bessanova is a blogger. Shes a top notch photographer who just happens to also have an extremely good youtube channel. Her indepth video on the new ilford paper was excellent.

One thing doesn't exclude another. I called here blogger because that's the capacity we see her in in this video. She's of course also a photographer. On the quality of her work I can't be a judge because I'm only superficially familiar with it (both her videos and her photographic work), but that doesn't change much about my message - there are many very good photogs and very good bloggers/vloggers. That automatically reduces any fragment of their work as a fairly small blip on the radar. An unlikely blip for companies like Kodak to respond to with drastic measures.

 

[twelvetone12]

Just out of curiosity I watched the video expecting a major shitting on Kodak. Instead she says:

As there have been rumours that the new Kodak XTOL is way inferior to the original one the ADOX chemists tested both developers and found the difference to be quite huge, so now they are working on a developer that would be exactly like the old one.

I infer from this:
1) there are rumours that the new XTOL is inferior
2) the chemists found a big difference between new and old
3) they are making a developer that is like the old XTOL

Am I missing something? I was thinking of some major insults towards Kodak, here she just says there are rumours and difference between the two products. Should I fall off my chair too?