Ilford statement on 120 roll film mottling

[ooze]

https://www.ilfordphoto.com/news/statement-120-roll-film/

 

[DWThomas]

A similar announcement with that link showed up in my Facebook feed this morning, so it appears they are making a serious effort to contact users and address the problems. I have to admit for the number of decades roll film has been produced, it's discouraging to see the problems we've seen over the last half dozen years (and not just with Ilford), but at least we can still buy the stuff! I feel sure the shifts in supply chains as the market contracted have probably undone some of the reliability once achieved.

 

[radiant]

They should start listing batches that had failures really soon so we could ask for replacement BEFORE shooting.

 

[BrianShaw]

Thanks for posting...

 

[pentaxuser]

1.5 complaints to Ilford per 10,000 rolls would seem to be an extremely low percentage but what is less clear is how many other complaints have been made on social media only nor of course how many can be laid at Ilford's door as opposed to problems created by causes outwith Ilford's control.

I am not a statistician but give the complaints percentage and it appearing to be a problem afflicting lower speed film such as Pan F it may not be possible to identify batch numbers which cover all affected films.

Ilford doesn't make clear why the problem has occurred more with the likes of Pan F than faster films such as presumably HP5+, D400, D3200 or XP2 Plus

Hopefully it will keep us informed via its website and social media. It may or may not make a statement via Photrio.

pentaxuser

 

[Patrick Robert James]

I am getting a 404 page at that address. What did it say?

 

[Ballinderry-Michael]

The URL seems to have changed: it is now https://www.ilfordphoto.com/statement-120-roll-film/

 

[Wallendo]

Apparently the statement has been removed or moved. I did get the Tweet this morning, but it also links to the currently unavailable web page.

A brief look at their twitter account suggests that numerous people have had issues, but most attributed it to poor storage, old film, etc.

 

[radiant]

Over the last couple of months, we have noticed an increased number of customers posting their concerns on forums and social media channels relating to our 120 roll films in which spots / mottle have appeared on the negatives.

We pride ourselves on our high quality and consistent production and want to assure you that this issue is being fully investigated as a matter of priority. We appreciate this will be of little comfort to those who have experienced the issue and for that we offer our sincerest apologies.

Over the last 18 months, to the end of February 2020, direct complaints submitted to us relating to spots / mottle account for less than 1.5 complaints for every 10,000 rolls of 120 film we have produced. These have also been seen primarily, but not exclusively, in our slower speed films such as PAN F.

However, we appreciate that there are photographers out there who may have experienced this and have not contacted us. In order to build up an accurate understanding of how and why this is happening, and tackle this as quickly as possible, we request that anyone who has experienced this issue to contact us directly using this form: www.ilfordphoto.com/product-feedback

We will be replacing any film that is shown to have been affected and communicated to us through this route. Note: we will require your address, as much detail about the film as possible and an image of the affected negative showing the 4-digit code on the edge signing.

Investigations are already underway and early findings show that the issue is significantly influenced by external factors such as humidity, temperature and film age. To minimise the risk of any issues we always advise the following:

Storage: Our films should be stored below 20C / 68F as shown on the bottom of each box. It is important to avoid extreme high temperatures, humidity or fluctuating temperatures.
Time: All films have an expiry date which is also printed on the bottom of each box at the time of manufacture. We recommend processing before that date and as soon as possible after shooting.

While we continue our investigations, we are reviewing our humidity controls in manufacturing and are working with our supply chain (channels to market) to ensure the films reach you in the best possible condition. With that in mind, we also recommend purchasing from trusted retailers.

Please note that this does not affect our 135 (35mm) or sheet film products.

Once again, we offer our sincerest apologies to anyone who has been affected and thank you for continued trust in ILFORD products and your ongoing support and patience while we resolve this issue.

 

[radiant]

There has been discussion on this issue here: https://www.photrio.com/forum/threads/ilford-120-backing-paper-issue-edit-probably-not.165480/

 

[radiant]

and here: https://www.photrio.com/forum/threads/odd-pattern-on-negatives-driving-me-nuts.167304/

.. and here:
https://www.photrio.com/forum/threads/what-are-these-strange-marks-on-fp4-120-negatives.147870/

 

[pentaxuser]

The announcement seems to be a little illusive from some members' posts and vedostuu has kindly reproduced it on this thread but it is on the IlfordPhoto website. On the opening page or at least on my opening page you can scroll down to "news" It is to be found there

pentaxuser

 

[Tom Kershaw]

Um, it has been taken down. When up earlier it acknowledged there was an issue and that ILFORD were investigating.

 

[radiant]

Um, it has been taken down. When up earlier it acknowledged there was an issue and that ILFORD were investigating.

See post https://www.photrio.com/forum/threa...n-120-roll-film-mottling.173575/#post-2257696

 

[Ballinderry-Michael]

It hasn't been taken down at all, just moved. See my post, no. 7 in this thread, which seemed clear enough to me.

 

[mshchem]

I have the luxury of having a dedicated fridge. I've been lucky, never had any of the Kodak backing paper issues, and definitely nothing from Ilford.

I discovered a tiny bit of junk on a couple frames of Fujichrome 35mm a couple years ago. That's the first time I've ever seen a manufacturer's defect in the last decade.

I learned, years ago to stay away from squeegees, that was self inflicted.

As a kid on vacations I remember my Dad keeping his Kodachrome II in our ice chest. . He never had a problem.

Best Regards Mike

 

[mshchem]

It hasn't been taken down at all, just moved. See my post, no. 7 in this thread, which seemed clear enough to me.

Your thread works perfectly for me. Like the typical camera nerd, I zoomed in on the Hasselblad in the photo. It has a vintage Ilford property tag on the body. So cool! No stock photos for Ilford. Ilford is an awesome company. The owners are putting new products out, it's a going concern.

Best Regards Mike

 

[DREW WILEY]

Pan F has poorer latent image storage time than most other films. I don't know it that's a factor in this case. But nowhere do I get the impression that an actual manufacturing flaw has been detected. They're merely responding to complaints and assuring us that they hear us, whether these complaints are valid or not. Replacing an occasional roll of film is just good customer relations policy, though they aren't really solving anything unless the reason for an alleged issue is discovered.

 

[Deleted member 88956]

Part of the problem is that too many falks have happy tongs on social media and accusations without consequences are the norm brought in by this "great" technology of instant communication. Too easy to moan about anything with no need to prove it.

With this announcement it will be interesting to see if direct-to-Ilford conplaints skyrocket or remain in this statistically irrelevant territory.

 

[radiant]

Ilford statement defines that the problem is only with 120 film (not 135 or sheet). Which means the problem is in backing paper. How I read the Ilford statement is so that there is a known problem but Ilford is not on track yet what causes it.

Should I first get the symptoms before I can even write about this? Or is it OK to worry of my not-exposed frames being ruined because of this issue?

 

[Tom Kershaw]

Should I first get the symptoms before I can even write about this? Or is it OK to worry of my not-exposed frames being ruined because of this issue?

My own view is that it is absolutely okay to be concerned about this issue. I currently use a mix of ILFORD and Kodak 120 film.

 

[warden]

Ilford statement defines that the problem is only with 120 film (not 135 or sheet). Which means the problem is in backing paper. How I read the Ilford statement is so that there is a known problem but Ilford is not on track yet what causes it.

Should I first get the symptoms before I can even write about this? Or is it OK to worry of my not-exposed frames being ruined because of this issue?

If you already have film on hand and it's working for you then the rest of the stock on hand will likely be fine as well. (Same batch, same storage conditions, etc.) Perhaps test a roll with your next order if it is a large one. I'm about to make an order for D3200 and though it's not a slow film I'll sacrifice the first roll to verify all is well.

 

[Henning Serger]

For me this statement by Ilford demonstrates again that Ilford really cares for their customers.
In my opinion this is excellent customer service! Thanks Ilford!
I am using Ilford since my childhood when I made my first steps in BW photography. I have always been satiesfied. And Ilford has never disappointed me.
And my factory visit there with Simon Galley as the perfect guide has strengthened my trust in Ilford on top of that.
So they have been loyal to me and served me very well over all the years, and I will remain loyal to them and continuing using their products. Delta 100 is one of my favourite films since its introduction. Outstanding stuff.

Best regards,
Henning

 

[Ian Grant]

I'd just comment that I don't think age is the issue, rather that it's storage. I've been using a lot of Ilford roll film I was given and some is use by Nov 2011, it's stored in my darkroom at floor level in a large plastic container and no issues at all with Delta 100 & 400.

Not sure if the same factory tour but I was in Simon Galley's group, At the time Ilford did tell us that most issues with film were due to storage.

Ian

 

[AgX]

At the time Ilford did tell us that most issues with film were due to storage.

But as in the Kodak case, quite some people stated that they have not stored their Ilford films irregularly, and that they stored different film types the same, but only one type or so was affected.