ILFORD Photo / CHANGE TO 120 WRAPPERS

[Reinhold]

Sorry, I had "blunderfingers"...

What I wanted to say was...

I'm on the last of my freezer full of Freestyle Arista "FP4" which has solid BLACK numbers on the wrapper. Whatever you used for our friends down in Los Angeles, why not use it again? I've never seen an "offset" problem with that film.

Reinhold

www.classicBWphoto.com

 

[Alex Bishop-Thorpe]

I guess I'm too young to have experienced mint flavored seals, but moves like this for increased efficiency can't be a bad thing for anyone involved. And when you see cases like SFX's return, it's pretty clear we're all winning.
Ilford's been very busy as of late...It's always exciting to see a new topic from Simon in Product Availability.

 

[Steve Roberts]

but the numbers just have to be darker. Please find a way to make it happen without causing the print-through problem. There has to be a way.

I don't use 120 very often, but when I do and use Ilford (in my red window kit!) I invariably end up with one or two blanks where I've managed to wind past the frame number without seeing it.

My theory is that this is deliberate and there's a Cornishman employed by Ilford to come up with ideas to make people use more film! ;-))

Best wishes,
Steve

 

[David Henderson]

I take all unexposed 120 film out of boxes and carry it in my camera bags/film bag in just the wrappers. If this change means that I won't be able to tell whats HP5 and whats FP4 until I tear open the wrapper it looks like I'll be buying rather less Ilford film in future.

If you're moving to totally unprinted wrappers I could see how money can be saved. If you're printing the wrappers with "Ilford" or a colour anyway then I doubt whether the savings would be worth any meaningful share loss. If you used a totally transparent wrapper of course my problem would disappear.

 

[jstraw]

I take all unexposed 120 film out of boxes and carry it in my camera bags/film bag in just the wrappers. If this change means that I won't be able to tell whats HP5 and whats FP4 until I tear open the wrapper it looks like I'll be buying rather less Ilford film in future.

If you're moving to totally unprinted wrappers I could see how money can be saved. If you're printing the wrappers with "Ilford" or a colour anyway then I doubt whether the savings would be worth any meaningful share loss. If you used a totally transparent wrapper of course my problem would disappear.

I'll get a sharpie and mark the wrappers FP4+ with a "4" and my HP5+ with a "5" as I take them out of the boxes.

 

[David A. Goldfarb]

I think there's some confusion here. My impression is that by "wrapper," Simon is referring to the paper backing on 120 film, and a few people are confusing it with the mylar wrapper that seals the roll in the box, which I think will still be printed with the film type.

Have I got that right, Simon?

 

[Simon R Galley]

Dear David,

You are quite correct, we refer to the very special backing paper to which the film is attached as the 'wrapper' , the foil in which the finished film is encased is called the 'sleeve' : Our 120 finishing and packing is all automatic so the sleeve is printed on line by high speed inkjet ( sorry ! ) with the film brand, this will continue.

Regards

Simon ILFORD Photo / HARMAN technology Limited

 

[jstraw]

<emily litella>

oh...that's very different....*nevermind*

</emily litella>

 

[Chazzy]

I don't use 120 very often, but when I do and use Ilford (in my red window kit!) I invariably end up with one or two blanks where I've managed to wind past the frame number without seeing it.

The same happens to me, too. If Ilford is unwilling to change, I will have to use somebody else's film in the 120 folder.

 

[hka]

No worries re the wrappers Simon, but is there any chance of a return of the peppermint sticky-tab? Its loss could endanger the entire future of after-dinner photography!

(Seriously though, it would be a nice touch if it could be returned.)

Please Ilford don't do this again. It's the most horrible scenario I can mention. I prefer the Fuji self-adhesive tabs. That would be an great improvement and results in an much more convenient handling to seal the wrapper preventing that the film jumps out of your hands.

 

[ajuk]

So how will I know whats in the box?

 

[haris]

So how will I know whats in the box?

120 type film is attached on plastic spool, together with paper (I will call it now wrapping paper). Both wrapping paper and film are wrapped over the spool, and small paper sticker holds film and wrapping paper to prevent unrolling from plastic spool. Then, film wrapped over spool is put into sealed very thin aluminium foil. After that, film, which is into aluminium foil, is put into small carton box. Of course you already know that.
What Simon tells is next: Type of film (and some other data) will be printed onto carton box, and onto very thin aluminium foil. Next, type of film will be printed on beginnig and end of wrapping paper (or on sticker which prevents unrolling film from plastic spool), that is onto place where is printed "exposed" or "unexposed" words. But, film type would not be printed onto wrapping paper itself. So, you will have informations what type of film you are using.

Ilford/Harman will use this generic (not printed) paper because that will make continuing of making 120 film easier and cheaper, that is afordable to us, final users of film. If choices are between using generic wrapping paper and more expencive film (or problems to buy it or even stop its manufacturing) I welcome Ilford/Harman effort to continue to make film and have nothing against generic wrapping paper.

Hope this was clear enough and I didn't tell something wrong.

Enjoy life,

Haris

 

[dsullivan]

... Next, type of film will be printed on beginnig and end of wrapping paper (or on sticker which prevents unrolling film from plastic spool), that is onto place where is printed "exposed" or "unexposed" words. But, film type would not be printed onto wrapping paper itself. So, you will have informations what type of film you are using.

After using a roll of HP5 kindly given by Ilford on the recent factory tour I've got some examples of the new wrapper compared to the old style wrappers.

You might also notice that the newer wrapper (the lower one in the first picture) has noticeably darker numbers than on the older wrapper.

Simon did indicate on the recent tour that they still had old style wrappers for some lines (I think PAN-F was going through the machine at the time) so old style wrapper might not necessarily mean older film.

Cheers!

David.

 

[CBG]

Just a quick word of thanks for Simon and Ilford's responsiveness! While I doubt they can satisfy everyone's varying desires, It's great they are sounding people out.

Thanks!

C

 

[Matt5791]

Just to say I was shooting a wedding last Saturday, and the new labeling makes absolutely no difference - and I had both FP4 and HP5 in my bag.

Anyone familiar with the kind of speed required for weddings these days, with the emphasis on reportage photography, will agree that this is a good test of the labels!

Matt

 

[Neanderman]

The biggest downside I see to this is for forgetful guys like myself who put a roll of film in a folding camera (with a red window...) then sticks it on the shelf for 6+ months. Then, when I come back to it, I can't remember what film is in it. Then it is really nice for the film type to be printed on the wrapping paper, in between the frame numbers.

It would sure seem to me that there would be a way to apply inkjet technology to printing some of this on the backing paper, thus 'customizing' the generic paper to the enwrapped film...

Ed

 

[Brac]

Why don't you put a note on a piece of paper of what type of film is in the camera and secure this to the camera with a rubber band? Alternatively do what I do and keep a very small booklet for each camera to record the exposures, dates and films. When you refer to that, you will see what film is in that camera. Ilford have already explained that not having to indicate the film type on the backing paper cuts costs. Your suggestion, even if viable, would inevitably increase costs as it's adding another step in the manufacturing process and removes the flexibility of only needing to stock one type of backing paper to cover every Ilford 120 rollfilm.

 

[juan]

In hardware stores there is a kind of masking tape that has a low-stick glue. It's almost like post-it notes. It's the color of normal masking tape - not the blue stuff. I stick a piece of this on my box camera and on my roll film backs with a note about film. This kind of tape does not leave glue on the camera.
juan

 

[Philippe-Georges]

Well done Ilford, it was about time to do so, Agfa (APX100/400) did it for years and there was no problem confusing emulsions.
I really do hope that Ilford will stand time and the D-storm!
BTW, your care to inform the customer is legendary, thank you for it, Symon!

Philippe

 

[Black Dog]

Yo Man!! your Ilford wrappers are wikkid innit!!!

 

[Roger Hicks]

Why don't you put a note on a piece of paper of what type of film is in the camera and secure this to the camera with a rubber band?

A soft pencil takes well on satin chrome. Or a Chinagraph (harder to clean off -- Everclear on a paper handkerchief instead of spit). Or cut/fold the box end in the accessory shoe. Works for me.

Cheers,

Roger

 

[Bob F.]

In hardware stores there is a kind of masking tape that has a low-stick glue. It's almost like post-it notes. It's the color of normal masking tape - not the blue stuff. I stick a piece of this on my box camera and on my roll film backs with a note about film. This kind of tape does not leave glue on the camera.
juan

Scotch Magic tape? Very useful stuff. Translucent white that you can write on and comes off without any residue (almost always...).

Cheers, Bob.