Film ruined by paper

[ignatiu5]

Credit where credit is due: Kodak responded within hours to an email I sent with a promise of replacement film.

 

[Sirius Glass]

Credit where credit is due: Kodak responded within hours to an email I sent with a promise of replacement film.

Great. I am glad that your contact with Kodak was positive. When I worked at Kodak I always found the people positive and helpful.

 

[Ken Nadvornick]

And here is the response:

Dear Mr. King,

This problem occurs when print from the backing paper transfers to the emulsion surface of the film. For that to happen, the affected rolls would have to be subjected to extremely high heat, and needless to say, obviously not in accordance with our standard guidelines for shipping / storage.

Please ask the photographer to contact me directly via email, and I will make arrangements to replace his film.

Thanks,


Thomas J. Mooney | Film Capture Business Manager
Kodak Alaris Inc., 2400 Mount Read Blvd., Rochester, NY 14615-03020

Profilm@kodakalaris.com

www.kodakalaris.com

Information contained in this e-mail transmission may be privileged, confidential and covered by the Electronic Communications Privacy Act, 18 U.S.C. Sections 2510-2521. If you have received this e-mail transmission in error, please
notify us immediately by return email and delete the message from your system without reading, forwarding or copying it.

The email I received had Mr. Mooney's direct email and office telephone numbers. I am uncomfortable including them in this post, and have substituted the general email (Profilm@kodakalaris.com) that I used initially to contact them. If anyone with a film problem like the OP wishes to have Mr. Mooney's direct email, for this purpose, just contact me by PM and I will share it.

Nice job Matt. And Kodak too. Just another timely reminder of the value of best practices in general, and the specific best practice of keeping one's film stored cool. There's are real reasons that such practices are designated as "best".

I was unaware this could happen, as I've never seen it. But then my film is always keep cool. Now I know more than I did prior to Kodak's reply.



Ken

 

[MattKing]

Nice job Matt. And Kodak too. Just another timely reminder of the value of best practices in general, and the specific best practice of keeping one's film stored cool. There's are real reasons that such practices are designated as "best".

I was unaware this could happen, as I've never seen it. But then my film is always keep cool. Now I know more than I did prior to Kodak's reply.



Ken

I would expect that any heat related damage for RM would have arisen as part of the supply chain. Shanghai is a long way from Rochester, but more problematic would be damage arising between Rochester and B&H.

 

[gijsbert]

The backing paper should have numbers for 12 and 8 exposures if you don't get both sets of numbers it is probable not ink transfer, unless your camera has a light leak into the film rear which could print both sets.

Eg rotten foam with non red window camera.

Ink transfer will be offset from normal frame position, with an offset which varies along the film, light leak will be exact to frame position(edit in a red window camera).

You align the uncut film with backing paper?

You are supposed to go slow when the little dots are visible!

400 ISO is exposed (ie risky) with red windows designed for 100 ISO or slower.

Yeah, those little dots tricked me! Second time I used that Ikonta with red window advance, it all seemed so easy to use, and then oops!
Alas, I cut the film for scanning and only then did I notice. Just by eye you don't notice the numbers on the negatives.
Interesting, I guess there was no 400 ISO film back in the day. However, another roll of tri-x came out pretty good.

Film goes upside down in this camera so the right frame (light poles) is actually frame 7, but with 8 numbers (hard to see on this crappy scan), but given the offset I can't say for sure if it is the print transferred to the emulsion or some light leak. In a way it doesn't look like a light leak, but to be honest I have little experience (fortunately!).

Shucks, I developed 2x Trix and 2x TMY this weekend and I did have two frames on one 400 TMax roll with more numbers, these were all shot without red windows (rest was fine).

Not sure if it is connected, but both rolls with number imprints did sit in a drawer for for 2 months (tri-x one) and 1 month (tmy), respectively, with at least one weeks of hot weather (ambient temperature of 30C or so). New film I keep in the fridge, but once opened (unsealed) I am scared the humidity in the fridge might be bad. Perhaps I should try to keep the unsealed+exposed film in a ziplock bag in the fridge? Does anybody do that?

Hmm, bit of a pita.

 

[analoguey]

And here is the response:

Dear Mr. King,

This problem occurs when print from the backing paper transfers to the emulsion surface of the film. For that to happen, the affected rolls would have to be subjected to extremely high heat, and needless to say, obviously not in accordance with our standard guidelines for shipping / storage.

Please ask the photographer to contact me directly via email, and I will make arrangements to replace his film.

Thanks,


Thomas J. Mooney | Film Capture Business Manager

Profilm AT kodakalaris.com

Good of Kodak Alaris to respond and offer films back!
I would've like to know what is the "extremely high heat" in actual terms (or temp terms) - it is just too vague to be of practical use.

 

[Photo Engineer]

And now I cannot read any more posts than #80 here. This seems to be a creeping problem.

PE

 

[RattyMouse]

I can't read page 9 of this thread.

 

[Prof_Pixel]

I can't read Page 9 either.

 

[winger]

And now I cannot read any more posts than #80 here. This seems to be a creeping problem.

PE

Yup, same here sometimes. Right now, I could read page 9, but not earlier.

 

[RattyMouse]

I see that lots of posts are still going on this thread but I'm stock on page 8. I see no way to get past onto page 9.

 

[David Lyga]

Years ago I bought some re-badged 100 ft rolls of Pan F+ from Freestyle that were re-named Arista 50. The first four winds were marked with an absence of density right were the small strip of tape was holding the roll together. I shot the first four winds and found everything to be perfect except where that tape strip had been, becoming less and less obvious as the winds progressed. Again, after the four winds, the problem disappeared.

Apparently, even the major manufacturers are sometimes guilty of not paying close enough attention to the effects of the materials that they use. Maybe, in my case, the Freestyle film had new tape put on, but I hesitate to say, definitively, that Ilford is completely blameless here. This is a topic worth considering in depth. - David Lyga

 

[Ronald Moravec]

It seems to me that Kodak has recently changed their backing paper...maybe the newer stuff was not well tested? I think it would probably really be worth letting Kodak know what is up! This sucks! I have a family portrait session to shoot tomorrow, and it will be on Kodak 120 film...Guess I'll hope for the best. I have not had any problems recently though...

http://www.kodak.com/global/en/professional/products/films/filmsIndex.jhtml?pq-path=13319

They made a little announcement about a change in the backing paper....They mention that it will have no impact on performance...maybe that is not quite the case...

Pros buy stocks of film and test before using.

 

[Xmas]

Years ago I bought some re-badged 100 ft rolls of Pan F+ from Freestyle that were re-named Arista 50. The first four winds were marked with an absence of density right were the small strip of tape was holding the roll together. I shot the first four winds and found everything to be perfect except where that tape strip had been, becoming less and less obvious as the winds progressed. Again, after the four winds, the problem disappeared.

Apparently, even the major manufacturers are sometimes guilty of not paying close enough attention to the effects of the materials that they use. Maybe, in my case, the Freestyle film had new tape put on, but I hesitate to say, definitively, that Ilford is completely blameless here. This is a topic worth considering in depth. - David Lyga

It is hard blaming Harman at all about things that Ilford a different company with different management, may or may not have been responsible for.
Publishing weasel worded text with the wrong tense contributes to the panic that may be attributable to foam light seals and red window problems?
Was there a problem with PanF+ at the same time?
Did you send the film and backing paper back and get a diagnostic and replacement film?

 

[Xmas]

Pros buy stocks of film and test before using.

All the ones I know format and check memory cards.
But yes I used to buy several x10 packs with same batch number process and project.

 

[Ronald Moravec]

Since the backing paper is dark, according to one observer, the text is being exposed, not held back. I suspect x ray exposure.

Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk

x rays ruin film, the more passes the worse the problem. Believe all the stuff about safe x rays at your own peril. Anecdotal evidence like I don`t see any damage means you have no means of comparison.

Also the problem of shipping companies x ray packages.

Kodak is going to put itself totally out of business. Shame because that is where the pension fund money was invested. There is always social security, but I have not checked that account for a week or so.

 

[David Lyga]

It is hard blaming Harman at all about things that Ilford a different company with different management, may or may not have been responsible for.
Publishing weasel worded text with the wrong tense contributes to the panic that may be attributable to foam light seals and red window problems?
Was there a problem with PanF+ at the same time?
Did you send the film and backing paper back and get a diagnostic and replacement film?

Again, the film was not branded as either Harmon or Ilford, but it was Pan F+ (or at least I think that it was). And maybe Freestyle (or some other) put that bad tape on.

But I wanted to emphasize how easy it is to create problems; maybe even the major manufacturers can be amiss with not paying close enough attention to the things that can go wrong. - David Lyga

 

[analoguey]

And now I cannot read any more posts than #80 here. This seems to be a creeping problem.

PE

I can't read page 9 of this thread.

I can't read Page 9 either.

On tapatalk, I see these posts as 82-84, w mine as 81.
Are there any missing posts in between?

Sent from Tap-a-talk

 

[MartinP]

On my machine this post appears on page ten. The post by Analoguey, above this one, seems to have #93.

 

[DWThomas]

On my machine this post appears on page ten. The post by Analoguey, above this one, seems to have #93.

Yes -- page 9 seems to be stuck in a time warp!

 

[Xmas]

Again, the film was not branded as either Harmon or Ilford, but it was Pan F+ (or at least I think that it was). And maybe Freestyle (or some other) put that bad tape on.

But I wanted to emphasize how easy it is to create problems; maybe even the major manufacturers can be amiss with not paying close enough attention to the things that can go wrong. - David Lyga

Hi David

Simon has said that although Ilford had sold rebrands cheap Harman had not and would not do that.
But 'think' and 'maybe' would get you laughted out of a court room.

Your example in first para does not lead to the conclusion in the second.

The earlier problems in this thread need not be manufacturing they could be as easily camera problems or features. There is no compelling evidence either way.

You always need to inspect negatives before you cut them up for filing and retain the backing paper...

Kodak has always replaced products readily.

Noel

 

[analoguey]

On my machine this post appears on page ten. The post by Analoguey, above this one, seems to have #93.

Yup. Shows that way on both Firefox and tapatalk.
Was just checking if I missed seeing any posts between the 82-84. Looks like I didn't



Sent from Tap-a-talk

 

[analoguey]

Did this get sorted out Finally? Kodak replaced film and the issue didn't occur?
Did the folks who had complaints send their Film to Kodak?


Sent from Tap-a-talk

 

[Hatchetman]

Just for a data point, I shot a roll of "new paper" Tri-X 400. There were no problems. Got it at Central Camera in Chicago.

 

[David Lyga]

But...Hatchetman...you might not have waited long enough for such problems to manifest. There might be a 'time factor' here (which will scare people to death about this nonsense). Why manufacturers could not solve this problem in its (theoretical) incipience is both amazing and frustrating. - David Lyga