Fujifilm Quicksnap Waterproof..... loaded with Kodak 800 ISO film

[Film-Niko]

Has it been discussed on APUG in the past.?

I don't know. I am not permanently active here, and cannot 'scan' all threads. But I know it has been discussed in other forums and photo social media groups.
In our local photographer club all members are facing this problem, and as reported above, my local lab, too.
It is on every Kodak 35mm film, with no exception: You can easily check yourself: Open the box and plastic canister, and look on the metal cassette. The black dust particles are all over the cassettes (and inside, too). If you wipe with your finger over the surface, you will have these particles on your finger.
Over the last years I have used more than 500 Kodak 35mm films, and every single film has had these dust particles on it. With no exception.

How do you go about Cleaning...De-Dusting...that felt strip.?
Thank You

First I am blowing some of the more loose particles away, and the rest is wiped off with a cloth or clean (paper) handkerchief.

 

[MattKing]

None of the labs I have contact with have ever mentioned a problem with any of the 35mm Kodak cassettes. I don't have any current ones at hand, but have never seen the problem myself. No one before Film-Niko has posted here on Photrio about such a problem (I would have seen it if they did).

 

[CMoore]

None of the labs I have contact with have ever mentioned a problem with any of the 35mm Kodak cassettes. I don't have any current ones at hand, but have never seen the problem myself. No one before Film-Niko has posted here on Photrio about such a problem (I would have seen it if they did).

The only Kodak film i use is Color-Plus 200
And i do not (yet) develop color at home.
I have probably sent 30 rolls to The Darkroom in the last 4-5 years.
They have not mentioned anything about it to me, but that does not mean they have not seen it.

I have a few rolls of Color-Plus remaining. I will take a look and see what i see.

 

[mshchem]

Looks like bad news, as Superia X-Tra 800 is the better film compared to Ultramax 800 from Kodak (which is not bad, but simply not as good as X-Tra 800).



That is definitely Kodak. You can clearly identify it by the huge amount of all the black dust particles which are spread all over the film cassette. It is typical for all 35mm Kodak films.
And if you look inside the cassette, you will find these particles there, too.
These dust particles are from the velvet from the slit. Kodak is using an inferior material compared to all other manufacturers. Therefore you don't have this dust problem with 35mm films from Fujifilm, Ilford, Adox, Foma.
My local lab - Kodak customer for over 70 years - is permanently complaining about it: The velvet is crumbling and spreading the particles all over in the lab. Much more lab and machine cleaning is necessary because of that.

To avoid having all this dust in my 35mm cameras (and facing possible shutter failure because of accumulated dust in the long run) for years now I am cleaning all my 35mm Kodak film cassettes before I load them into the camera. A bit nerve-wrecking of course, but much much better than any camera damage which could occur of that in the future.
By the way, of course I also contacted my national Kodak office and reported that. They confirmed the problem. That was some years ago. But nothing has changed since then.

Baloney! I'm not buying this. Kodak film isn't dusty.

 

[woodlandSerenade]

I was initially doubtful of the Kodak dust accusations, so I just unboxed a roll of Ektar that I've had in the freezer for the past two years... I've never had the felt "dust" impact negatives, but it seems to be a real occurrence.

 

[mshchem]

I was initially doubtful of the Kodak dust accusations, so I just unboxed a roll of Ektar that I've had in the freezer for the past two years... I've never had the velvet "dust" impact negatives, but it seems to be a real occurrence.
View attachment 283377 View attachment 283378

That sure looks like felt lint to me. Huh?

 

[MattKing]

So I got curious, and started looking through the factory load 35mm film cassettes I have.
Almost none of them are current dated - I've got a decent amount of older refrigerated and frozen 35mm film, whereas my more recent film is mostly 120.
There was a fair variety in the appearance of the felt in the 35mm cassettes, which were mostly Kodak, but included some Ilford and some Fuji.
The picture shown above looks a fair bit like some of the old (1990 Kodachrome and the Fuji, but also like some middle aged T-Max. That picture just looks like how Kodak felt tends to look.
None of them are shedding any loose lint, and there is no loose residue on anything.

 

[mshchem]

So I got curious, and started looking through the factory load 35mm film cassettes I have.
Almost none of them are current dated - I've got a decent amount of older refrigerated and frozen 35mm film, whereas my more recent film is mostly 120.
There was a fair variety in the appearance of the felt in the 35mm cassettes, which were mostly Kodak, but included some Ilford and some Fuji.
The picture shown above looks a fair bit like some of the old (1990 Kodachrome and the Fuji, but also like some middle aged T-Max. That picture just looks like how Kodak felt tends to look.
None of them are shedding any loose lint, and there is no loose residue on anything.

That's good info. I've

 

[mshchem]

Misfire. That's good information. I've been shooting Kodak film all along never had a problem. I too shoot more medium format, so 120 is what I use most. I did see where Kodak Alaris posted something about a temporary change in the 135 magazine end caps.
Best Mike

 

[Agulliver]

Dust a problem with Kodak 135 cassettes? first I've heard of it. More importantly, first my preferred mini-lab operator has heard of it. Most of the colour film I shoot is Kodak...Color Plus 200 and Ultarmax 400 as well as some Ektar. I prefer Fuji Superia but price and availability in my area are big problems....so Kodak it has been for the last five years. Never had a lab mention any issues. Nor have I ever heard it discussed before even as a rumour.

The new end caps are not relevant as they are new as in 2021....they are irrelevant to an alleged issue which has supposedly affected Kodak film for some years.

Which lab is alleging there's been an issue with Kodak film for some years?

 

[brbo]

I can see some lint on my Kodak rolls. I never clean the rolls before loading my cameras and never had a problem with lint accumulation in my cameras or lint ending on my pictures. Since I also use scanners without ICE and print in darkroom I think I would've noticed if felt shedding when film is pulled out of canister during film transport in the camera was such a big problem.

If Fuji, like Kodak, had 10 different C-41 emulsions it might be a factor for my 35mm film purchases. But they have 2.

 

[woodlandSerenade]

Just wanted to give an update on this. I exposed a roll of the "Superia X-TRA 800". Same edge code as seen in post #10. I can't say I've used any actual Superia 800, so I can't compare graininess or color between it and this.
Unless Kodak is toll coating film for Fuji, I'm very surprised that Fuji would market a Kodak film (800 MAX) as one of their own.

 

[cmacd123]

Kodak is allowed to do Private label stuff. (remember Arista Prmium?) so perhaps if Fuji no longer produces an 800, they Might have (like Lomography) ordered some 800 .

 

[mshchem]

Fuji has Ilford coat Acros 2

 

[brbo]

Just wanted to give an update on this. I exposed a roll of the "Superia X-TRA 800". Same edge code as seen in post #10. I can't say I've used any actual Superia 800, so I can't compare graininess or color between it and this.

If this was meant to clarify anything I must admit that it failed. For me anyway...

Would you be so kind to clarify what do you mean by "Superia X-TRA 800" and what by "actual Superia 800"? AFAIK, Fuji doesn't sell any 800 ISO film ("X-Tra" or "actual" (whatever that means)) except in single-use cameras. So where and when did you buy a box of Fuji X-Tra 800 film that had Kodak edge codes?

Thank you!

 

[Agulliver]

Fuji used to sell Superia X-TRA 800 in 135 cassettes until about 2016? I still have one frozen and shot a few in 2019. I ought to be able to dig out the negatives at some point and have a look.

I imagine quite a few of Photrio users will have some in the fridge or freezer. I wish I'd had the money to stock up more than I did when it was cancelled.

 

[woodlandSerenade]

Would you be so kind to clarify what do you mean by "Superia X-TRA 800" and what by "actual Superia 800"? AFAIK, Fuji doesn't sell any 800 ISO film ("X-Tra" or "actual" (whatever that means)) except in single-use cameras. So where and when did you buy a box of Fuji X-Tra 800 film that had Kodak edge codes?

You unknowingly answered the question yourself, haha. I bought two of Fuji's somewhat-newly-released disposable waterproof cameras (as per the topic of this thread) and harvested their film. They advertise these cameras as being loaded with Fujicolor Superia X-TRA 800 (https://www.fujifilm.com/us/en/consumer/film-quicksnap/quicksnap/quicksnap-waterproof#). The supposed Superia X-TRA 800 from those cameras has the Kodak edge codes.
My hesitation in calling this film actual Superia X-TRA 800 comes from the Kodak confectioning and my lack of experience with the previous Superia X-TRA 800 that was sold in individual rolls. It may very well be that the formula hasn't changed, and Kodak is simply coating the film for Fuji, but I cannot say.

 

[Sal Santamaura]

Fuji has Ilford coat Acros 2

We outsiders don't know that for sure. It's possible, but there's also the possibility that Fuji ships coated master rolls to HARMAN for cutting/finishing.

 

[mshchem]

We outsiders don't know that for sure. It's possible, but there's also the possibility that Fuji ships coated master rolls to HARMAN for cutting/finishing.

Good point!

 

[MattKing]

My hesitation in calling this film actual Superia X-TRA 800 comes from the Kodak confectioning and my lack of experience with the previous Superia X-TRA 800 that was sold in individual rolls. It may very well be that the formula hasn't changed, and Kodak is simply coating the film for Fuji, but I cannot say.

Or equally likely, Eastman Kodak is doing the confectioning of Fuji coated film.

 

[brbo]

Or equally likely, Eastman Kodak is doing the confectioning of Fuji coated film.

Fuji paying for confectioning only and ordering Kodak to print exactly the same edge markings Kodak already uses for 800 film they sell to Lomography?! What are the odds? I'd say that is (far) less likely than just buying Kodak coated and confectioned film.

This puzzle can easily be solved by side-by-side shooting of "Fuji Superia X-Tra 800" from a disposable camera and Lomography CN 800...

 

[MattKing]

Maybe Eastman Kodak forgot to re-set the edge printer .

 

[Wallendo]

I suspect that a single coating of 800 speed color film provides more film that Lomography and Kodak can sell on their own, and also that Fuji doesn't sell enough single-use cameras for an entire coating run, so this works out to a mutually beneficial arrangement.

 

[woodlandSerenade]

This puzzle can easily be solved by side-by-side shooting of "Fuji Superia X-Tra 800" from a disposable camera and Lomography CN 800...

Working on it. Although I can't provide any quantitative results, it's worth investigating this mystery. I placed an order this morning for a 3-pack of Lomo CN800 (which is slightly more expensive than Portra 800 when shipping is taken into account).

 

[ilikecameras1010]

A quick update from observations running a retail film lab-- Film inside the QuickSnap waterproof cameras is indeed the same stuff as Lomo 800, produced in Rochester. Additionally, the film inside the latest QuickSnap Flash cameras has silver end caps-- also confirming Rochester production. It looks to be the same product (with white-on-black instead of black-on-white text on the cassette) as the "generic" 27-exposure 400-speed film for single-use cameras on a polyester base. It comes in a plain cassette and is found in Solo H20, CustomCameraCollection, AGFAPhoto LeBox, Dubblefilm and undoubtedly other products.