df cardwell said:
Of course, none of US would think of suing Kodak for our own screw-ups, right ?
Classics include, "I gave you color slides for processing ! I'm going to sue Kodak for turning them into B&W negatives !".
And he did, too. Didn't get very far with it ( proabably because he didn't have a California jury !), but it's that sort of idiotic 'consumer activism' that led to an ultra conservative expiration date on your HC-110.
.
As I've mentioned a few times before, my Dad worked for many years for Canadian Kodak. I can clearly remember a time in the early 1970s when a neighbour came up to him and complained indignantly that Kodak had ruined his roll of (slide or movie) film. Dad calmed him down, and then offered to take his film in to the lab to be checked.
The film was in bad shape, but the reason was pretty clear. All the photos were of Christmas vacations in Hawaii - three of them!
The neighbour had had the same roll in his camera for three years - six sets of exposure to the airport x-rays in the 1970s!
I think he got a free roll anyways from Kodak, along with some gentle hints about traveling with film.
It was, of course, clearly Kodak's fault :rolleyes:
On the subject of expiry dates, I think I have read somewhere that when manufacturers put date of manufacture, rather than expiry dates on product, even the most long lived products become much harder to sell even a few months later. There is obviously some advantage to having a relevant date on the product, and a conservative expiry date is preferable to an overly optimistic one.
Expiry dates are chosen to take into account "worst case scenarios". Certainly the expiry dating for amateur film was always designed to take into account that the film was likely to spend time in a window display in some drug store, rather than a carefully climate controlled environment.
Matt