FYI - film issue.

[dr5chrome]

This is an FYI film-stock condition we have now seen with a 3rd clients film. FP4-120 EM# 98DFN1C01/03 EXP.November 2016
We have seen this in positive & negative development. This particular image/film was from Singapore. No reply has been received from Harman/ILFORD, thus far. As posted here in the past by others, we have only seen this condition in PANf, and never in FP4. We can only determine that this is some sort of storage problem and an issue with the 120 paper - ILFORD has never addressed this particular condition. regards, dr5

http://www.dr5.com/CHANtest000188-R1-E008.jpg


- good shooting to all in 2015 -

 

[Sirius Glass]

What is the symptom(s)?

 

[dr5chrome]

IDK what is causing this mottling condition for certain.. symptom??

What is the symptom(s)?

 

[Richard S. (rich815)]

I've had this problem before. I solved it by not photographing older men in their underwear.

 

[Richard S. (rich815)]

Oh wait, you mean the mottling of the film?

 

[AgX]

dr5chrome, can you confirm that the lengthwise orientation of the film this image is from is horizontal?

Have you got information about storage of the affected films?


(I do not want to minimize the problem, or put in on storage, but rather want to understand the process. Yes, a general paper problem is known to me.)

 

[dr5chrome]

FP4 120

AGX - no, I dont have storage info prior to our clients buying the film. This client is from Singapore [the image]. the other 2 clients have been in the US, with the same issue, but not as bad as the Singapore client. I found out that all 3 events were the same EM#

This particular shot is Vertical, but orientation did not and would not make a difference, one roll is horizontal shot, a negative roll. ALL 6 120 FP4 rolls are like this, 3 dr5, 3 B&W negative[DDX]. ..only on 120 film, never on 35mm. This effect is not a process problem. There is no way processing can cause this. We usually only see this on PANf.

I have always thought this was a paper/moisture problem [maybe defective paper]. I also have a notion that this affect happens @ the ILFORD factory when they are packaging the film, but Ilford never responds to this problem. I have never seen this on fresh rolls however.

Personally, I have tried to duplicate this affect with some old expired ILFORD film. I have never been able to duplicate it, so I can only speculate.

Given that this has appeared on 3 separate occasions, with 3 different clients 1000s of miles apart, using the same fresh EM#, I thought Id post this problem here..

regards, dw

dr5chrome, can you confirm that the lengthwise orientation of the film this image is from is horizontal?

Have you got information about storage of the affected films?


(I do not want to minimize the problem, or put in on storage, but rather want to understand the process. Yes, a general paper problem is known to me.)

 

[gzhuang]

Can I assume that the film was stored under tropical weather conditions?

 

[Rudeofus]

Can I assume that the film was stored under tropical weather conditions?

If it was stored too hot, you would expect some fogging, but not a severe case of measles ...

 

[grommi]

I once had a very similar looking problem with Shanghai GP3 120. Additionally the numbers were visible on the negs. But the "fibre pattern" was the same. Also the fault wasn't visible when the films arrived, but after some months of storage at home in the fridge they all showed this fault. Of course the films were stored in the original package and adapted to room temperature before unpacking. There were a lot of other reports and it must be the backing paper to blame.

I'm surprised to see the same effect with an Ilford film. They probably got a bad paper supply. It should not be easy to detect the fault if it only appears after some time of storage of the packaged product. But they could say a word or two on this issue.

 

[AgX]

This particular shot is Vertical, but orientation did not and would not make a difference, one roll is horizontal shot, a negative roll. ALL 6 120 FP4 rolls are like this, 3 dr5, 3 B&W negative[DDX]. ..only on 120 film, never on 35mm. This effect is not a process problem. There is no way processing can cause this. We usually only see this on PANf.

I have always thought this was a paper/moisture problem [maybe defective paper]. I also have a notion that this affect happens @ the ILFORD factory when they are packaging the film, but Ilford never responds to this problem. I have never seen this on fresh rolls however.

I know similar artefacts with good paper and good manufacture but bad storage by the user (think of the period the film is in the camera).
But the orientation issue speaks against it.

 

[Ian Grant]

It could be film that's been frozen and not allowed to warm up slowly. It should be remembered that no manufacturer actually recommends freezing their films and it's not a manufacturing fault (film or backing paper) when problems arise because a film hasn't been stored within recommended temperatures.

Ian

 

[JW PHOTO]

Looks more like fungi having a feast on jell-o! I had the same thing on Shanghai GP3 from the Photo Whorehouse, except there was also the number and dot bleeding problem too. The molting looks the same as the GP3 and I would guess it's from monsoon/high heat and humidity encouraging those little buggers to chow down. I spent some time in Vietnam and know what can happen in a very short time in those conditions. I'd say bad storage for sure. John W

 

[dr5chrome]

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

 

[Rick A]

I favor frozen film with not enough acclimation time before opening. I have experienced that issue before, haven't done it in years though(I learnt my lesson). I did have a similar issue when I lived in Utah, came in from sub zero photo shoot and film got covered in similar when I came into a warm house.

 

[dr5chrome]

..I have tried this practice, with intention to cause a problem. Likely your film had a problem prior to you using it. Utah, like Colorado, is very dry, with a capitol "V". In the winter it can be 5%. There is not enough moisture in the air to harm anything that gets cold. Try as I might to duplicate this problem, I can not.

This problem is a mystery. Of the 100s of rolls of B&W film we run weekly, I have only seen ILFORD film create this pattern..

dw

I favor frozen film with not enough acclimation time before opening. I have experienced that issue before, haven't done it in years though(I learnt my lesson). I did have a similar issue when I lived in Utah, came in from sub zero photo shoot and film got covered in similar when I came into a warm house.

 

[Xmas]

You could PM Simon for an address to send it to?

The only time I've got mottle like that was when I fixed before developing and realised the mistake 30 seconds into fix... And dumped the fix, washed and developed...

But I never freeze film either.

 

[Rick A]

..I have tried this practice, with intention to cause a problem. Likely your film had a problem prior to you using it. Utah, like Colorado, is very dry, with a capitol "V". In the winter it can be 5%. There is not enough moisture in the air to harm anything that gets cold. Try as I might to duplicate this problem, I can not.

This problem is a mystery. Of the 100s of rolls of B&W film we run weekly, I have only seen ILFORD film create this pattern..

dw

It may well have been a result of a cold camera and film coming into a busy hot kitchen, I haven't seen the issue since. I do remember having to wipe the condensation from the inside of my OM-1, and lenses were covered in moisture. I rewound the film in the kitchen before unloading. I remember how pissed I was that I lost the film, we had spent the day ice fishing at Bear Lake and I had some great shots on the roll. In retrospect, maybe it was from me tucking the camera in my parka to keep it warm all day between shots. IIRC, we were out in -20 temps, one hellofa party, nearly a hundred of us out that day.

 

[AgX]

But such condensation would only affect the first winding of a rollfilm, not the image part.

 

[Ricardo Miranda]

To dr5.chrome

Here is Harman's address:

ILFORD PHOTO, Ilford Way, Mobberley, Knutsford, Cheshire, WA16 7JL, England

Send your film to the attention of Technical Department for investigation.

But, I would be more careful in the future to come to a forum crying "wolf" and point the finger to the oldest still in manufacture film company before investigating your own process.

BTW, most Ilford film with expiry date of 2016 is already 3 years old since leaving factory. Not exactly fresh. Fresh is the last Harman film I bought last week dated to 2019.

 

[pentaxuser]

To dr5.chrome

Here is Harman's address:

To be fair Richard, dr5.chrome says in his first post that he is awaiting a reply from Ilford but I agree that until he gets one it may be premature to "warn" of a product failure on the basis of only a couple of examples.

I look forward to hearing what Ilford has to say

pentaxuser

 

[Xmas]

But such condensation would only affect the first winding of a rollfilm, not the image part.

Not my experience.

I've had reels of 120 that we're impossible to unwind where the emulsion and backing we're glued together all the way through the reel.

Freezing film can destroy it if it has been sealed with a relative humidity greater than zero...

35 mm tubs are not hermatic seals.

YMMV of course.

 

[Xmas]

To dr5.chrome

Here is Harman's address:

ILFORD PHOTO, Ilford Way, Mobberley, Knutsford, Cheshire, WA16 7JL, England

Send your film to the attention of Technical Department for investigation.

But, I would be more careful in the future to come to a forum crying "wolf" and point the finger to the oldest still in manufacture film company before investigating your own process.

BTW, most Ilford film with expiry date of 2016 is already 3 years old since leaving factory. Not exactly fresh. Fresh is the last Harman film I bought last week dated to 2019.

My ilford 35mm says 8/2019 and it was not direct from wholesale...

 

[AgX]

I've had reels of 120 that we're impossible to unwind where the emulsion and backing we're glued together all the way through the reel.

But I assume this was not a condensation problem (cold spool entering a damp, warm room).
But keeping a unshielded rool for longer period in a envrionment of extreme vapour content so that water could diffundated through paper and gelatin into the windings?

In a good spool the paper should seal the windings at the flanges too. But if this shuld not work droplets could enter the windings at the flanges.

 

[Dr Croubie]

I've also had this, example below.
It was FP4+, no idea of expiry date, probably bought 2nd-hand, no idea of storage conditions before I got it, but frozen by me until I used it.
1-hour 1+100 Rodinal Stand, in a film back I'd never used before (testing out the film back for leaks, mostly).
There were also some very black (undeveloped) spots at the bottom of the film that I put down to insufficient dev or air bubbles, cropped out of the scan but you can just see the edges of them.

This is 6x7, so the mottling runs lengthways along the film. This is the second frame, and the mottling is worst on the first few and seems to disappear by the end of the roll.
I've always put it down to dirty rollers on the film back that cleaned by the end of the roll, but it could also be something penetrating the roll not-completely, like Xrays or moisture from being frozen (ie, it's worse on the bits of film that were closer to the outside before being used).
With so many variables (and already one dev error) I don't think it could be pinned down exactly what went wrong with this roll, and always assumed that I'd cocked it up.

ps, I've also had the Shanghai GP3 mottling + number imprint issue, and this looks totally different.