Humidity will always affect film, but I would dismiss this in this case. Consider our 2 other clients in the US with the same problem [one in the mid-west, the other in AZ], with the same fresh 2016 film. Our Singapore client bought the film at the photo store, then shot it. IDK how the rolls were stored prior. Freezing film has been common, in practice for many years. I have a freezer full of deep frozen film that does not have this problem - ever... some of it ILFORD film. Film manufactures store master rolls in deep freeze to sell as fresh years later. ALL film companies do this.. Shooting a totally frozen roll does not create this effect - I know this from personal practice.
I think only an engineer who makes the film on this scale can really say what is causing this for sure. I know there to be many such examples on this very forum, that have gone unresolved.
dw
In spite of the fact that I do not use Ilford film, I believe that their QC is second to none and the OP should not cry wolf until such time as Ilford have been given a chance to investigate and report back as to the problem, if any, with the film, after all, how would they like it if someone reported problems with their process on an open forum without being given a chance to investigate first, In todays world it does not take much to ruin a reputation, and Ilford is probably one of the best in the business, if something like this affected them it would be the worse for all here, so let's wait and give Harman a chance to sort things out, and if the problem is not the film itself but the way it was stored/used/processed
search "Pan F spots" on this forum and see how many results you get. Never resolved. This looks the same.In spite of the fact that I do not use Ilford film, I believe that their QC is second to none and the OP should not cry wolf until such time as Ilford have been given a chance to investigate and report back as to the problem, if any, with the film, after all, how would they like it if someone reported problems with their process on an open forum without being given a chance to investigate first, In todays world it does not take much to ruin a reputation, and Ilford is probably one of the best in the business, if something like this affected them it would be the worse for all here, so let's wait and give Harman a chance to sort things out, and if the problem is not the film itself but the way it was stored/used/processed
search "Pan F spots" on this forum and see how many results you get. Never resolved. This looks the same.
Ian
So you are suggesting move film from freezer to fridge for 24 hours before exposing to ambient?
I've several problems
- this is mono and slow PanF and FP4 which I frequently store for years at ambient 10-25C, freezing it will condense the residual water you mention and crystallise it what happens to water in the emulsion? Colour I keep in fridge in ziplock silica gel (@5C on fridge therm).
- where/how do you store your film?
search "Pan F spots" on this forum and see how many results you get. Never resolved. This looks the same.
Three people out of 10,000 have a problem. The problem is with the three people.
Dear All,
I have read this post and I would reply as follows:
1 ) This is not a manufacturing fault. This film was coated ( and finished ) in November 2103.
Simon ILFORD Photo / HARMAN technology Limited :
Dear All,
I have read this post and I would reply as follows:
1 ) This is not a manufacturing fault. This film was coated ( and finished ) in November 2103.
And with respect to the thread generally, I wonder whether the proprietary process that dr5chrome uses to obtain reversal results might reveal problems/differences that wouldn't otherwise appear in a more typical process run.
Dear All,
I have read this post and I would reply as follows:
1 ) This is not a manufacturing fault. This film was coated ( and finished ) in November 2103.
If this batch had a fault we would have known with our own testing, it didn't.
Nor do we have a QC level against this batch that would suggest a manufacturing
fault, nor a fault that developed post coating.
2 ) This film does exhibit a fault post processing, this fault is not necessarily with the processing :
As with any performance issue with any ILFORD Photo product it should be returned to us ( the full address is in the thread) , it will be investigated and if it is a fault in manufacture we will replace the product and tell you if it is our fault.
All companies that have iso 9001 accreditation as we do, have a system to do this, this system is audited annually.
Two statements in the thread need a reply :
From DR5Chrome ' film manufacturers store master rolls in deep freeze to sell years later, all film companies do this'
Well this film company does not do that, never has, never will, I cannot speak for other companies but I would be astounded if any stored parent rolls in this manner ( ie as frozen ).
We coat 46 weeks out of 52 ( 6 weeks are holiday and deep machine maintenance ) why would we ever coat when all we would need to do is store ? When we do coat we do store film as parent rolls as part of the normal supply chain and stock rosta, its kept in a conditioned area, never frozen and for a period of weeks.
From Grommi ' They probably got a bad supply of paper'
No we didn't, we never do, 120 backing paper is a highly sophisticated coating and construction made to exacting standards, these standards cannot be varied, each batch is tested, as is every raw material used in every manufacture of ILFORD Film or Paper products.
Monochrome film, and all ILFORD Films as finished product in its packaging and suitably protected can be frozen ( or kept cold as refrigerated ) that will help to extend its life beyond the 'use by' date. Ensure all film from frozen or refrigeration is allowed plenty of time to come up to normal room temperature.
Simon ILFORD Photo / HARMAN technology Limited :
Dear All,
I have read this post and I would reply as follows:
1 ) This is not a manufacturing fault. This film was coated ( and finished ) in November 2103.
If this batch had a fault we would have known with our own testing, it didn't.
Nor do we have a QC level against this batch that would suggest a manufacturing
fault, nor a fault that developed post coating.
2 ) This film does exhibit a fault post processing, this fault is not necessarily with the processing :
As with any performance issue with any ILFORD Photo product it should be returned to us ( the full address is in the thread) , it will be investigated and if it is a fault in manufacture we will replace the product and tell you if it is our fault.
All companies that have iso 9001 accreditation as we do, have a system to do this, this system is audited annually.
Two statements in the thread need a reply :
From DR5Chrome ' film manufacturers store master rolls in deep freeze to sell years later, all film companies do this'
Well this film company does not do that, never has, never will, I cannot speak for other companies but I would be astounded if any stored parent rolls in this manner ( ie as frozen ).
We coat 46 weeks out of 52 ( 6 weeks are holiday and deep machine maintenance ) why would we ever coat when all we would need to do is store ? When we do coat we do store film as parent rolls as part of the normal supply chain and stock rosta, its kept in a conditioned area, never frozen and for a period of weeks.
From Grommi ' They probably got a bad supply of paper'
No we didn't, we never do, 120 backing paper is a highly sophisticated coating and construction made to exacting standards, these standards cannot be varied, each batch is tested, as is every raw material used in every manufacture of ILFORD Film or Paper products.
Monochrome film, and all ILFORD Films as finished product in its packaging and suitably protected can be frozen ( or kept cold as refrigerated ) that will help to extend its life beyond the 'use by' date. Ensure all film from frozen or refrigeration is allowed plenty of time to come up to normal room temperature.
Simon ILFORD Photo / HARMAN technology Limited :
Thanks for the clarity in your post Simon.
But you might want to check the coating date.
And with respect to the thread generally, I wonder whether the proprietary process that dr5chrome uses to obtain reversal results might reveal problems/differences that wouldn't otherwise appear in a more typical process run.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?