Issues with the new CatLABS X 80 film . . .

[Tom Kershaw]

After my recent experience experience with 'Rollei' branded film I'm increasingly tempted to stick with Fuji, Kodak, and ILFORD products.

 

[railwayman3]

After my recent experience experience with 'Rollei' branded film I'm increasingly tempted to stick with Fuji, Kodak, and ILFORD products.

I agree entirely.....I occasionally enjoy experimenting with querky or outdated films, but keep that totally separate from my "serious" photography. It's not worth trying to save a few pence on materials when you consider the other outlays involved in picture-taking, particularly travel and especially time (which can't be replaced.....), not to mention disappointment if results fail through no fault of your own.

 

[Tom Kershaw]

ADOX seems to be a high quality manufacture / brand as well. The idea of using Fomapan makes me nervous as there have been such conflicting reports of quality control or lack thereof. On the other hand Scott Davis ( https://dcphotoartist.com ) reports using Foma sheet films with great success, although I think he is contact printing and not enlarging the negatives.

 

[John Wiegerink]

I just shot and developed (its hanging to dry) my first roll of the catlabs 80 film. a few observations that tell me this film is the same as shanghai Gp3

1) the backing paper. thick almost construction paper like (?). the same as a roll of Gp3 I have sitting in front of me.
2) the cheapness of the film finishing screams gp3. I have not shot a roll of film in years that is the same as Gp3, except for this
3) the thinness of the film base as well as the clear color is the same as the Gp3 I have used before
4) the finishing sticky paper says shanghai Gp3 on it. doesn't get much more obvious than that
5) Like Gp3, this film is available in 120, 4x5 and 8x10, but NOT 35mm.

Now im saying that this is a bad thing. I like the tonality of Gp3. I just dont think the film, as the Catlab product is worth the price of admission at over $6 a roll shipped. More expensive than tmax 400, FP4, and panf, and a lot more expensive than ultrafine xtreme 100. Back when you could get Gp3 for under $3 a roll it was a fair trade, but not at $6 a roll. if they can get the price lower, I would think more about shooting it, but not at the current price. If its all that's available, I would have no problems shooting it. I just feel there are better options out there for me.

This is just 1 mans opinion. Please develop your own

John

Those are my feelings exactly. I used the new GP3 or post numbers bleed film just before it disappeared due to plant renovations. It's a great film and I'd use it 100% if it was at the same price as pre-plant renovation. It's not and I won't pay the price they want now when I can use Iford FP4+ or HP5+.. Even GP3 eBay prices are still far to high for me. If I want a cheap test film I buy Ultrafine Extreme. Truth is I could get by just fine if Ultrafine Extreme were the only film left on planet earth.
JohnW

 

[Peter Schrager]

ADOX seems to be a high quality manufacture / brand as well. The idea of using Fomapan makes me nervous as there have been such conflicting reports of quality control or lack thereof. On the other hand Scott Davis ( https://dcphotoartist.com ) reports using Foma sheet films with great success, although I think he is contact printing and not enlarging the negatives.

Love foma 100..it has an old timey look to it
Develop in pyro

 

[Flyingfortfan]

So my second attempt at using the film did not goes as well as the first. When I opened the back I was quite surprised to find it blossom into a total mess. This time I used a Bronica SQ-A. I've run over 100 rolls thru that back with no issues. I subsequently tested a roll of Acros and it came thru fine. I did email the company and they are sending a replacement.

 

[John Galt]

So my second attempt at using the film did not goes as well as the first. When I opened the back I was quite surprised to find it blossom into a total mess. This time I used a Bronica SQ-A. I've run over 100 rolls thru that back with no issues. I subsequently tested a roll of Acros and it came thru fine. I did email the company and they are sending a replacement.

Yep, that's just what mine looked like, Hasselblad A12 magazine . . Thought I was going to damage the magazine getting it out, that would have really pissed me off . . . destroy a $200 magazine for a cheap roll of film.

I spoke with CatLABS on the phone about my issues, no offer to replace the roll was made

 

[Adrian Bacon]

Yep, that's just what mine looked like, Hasselblad A12 magazine . . Thought I was going to damage the magazine getting it out, that would have really pissed me off . . . destroy a $200 magazine for a cheap roll of film.

I spoke with CatLABS on the phone about my issues, no offer to replace the roll was made

I strongly suspect that the issue is being caused by the tape not going far enough across the width of the roll to hold the corners down and one or both are lifting up just enough to catch on the tab hanging over the negative area as the film is advanced to the first frame.

I’ve run several rolls through my 500CM now and every single one I’ve felt catch on something as I advance to the first frame. I’ve gone slow and stopped as soon as it catches and pushed a little on the dark slide while still gently trying to advance and that’s been enough to get the corner to pop back under the tab and let the film advance without tearing off the backing paper.

 

[Sirius Glass]

My Hasselblads are too valuable to me, so I will stick with Kodak, Ilford, Fuji and Rollei films for now. I wonder how CatLABS will feel about my recommendation.

 

[canuhead]

My Hasselblads are too valuable to me, so I will stick with Kodak, Ilford, Fuji and Rollei films for now. I wonder how CatLABS will feel about my recommendation.

^^^^ this x1000

 

[Adrian Bacon]

My Hasselblads are too valuable to me, so I will stick with Kodak, Ilford, Fuji and Rollei films for now. I wonder how CatLABS will feel about my recommendation.

Considering that this is supposedly a first batch I’m not surprised, nor would I expect issues with every camera, however, failure to address it in future batches would be cause for concern. The 500 CM is somewhat unique in the tThe film magazine is relatively small and circuitous. Other cameras probably won’t exhibit the same issue. For example, I would expect no problems with my GW690 as that film path is amazingly flat in comparison.

 

[destroya]

first batch for catlabs, but same as always for shanghai. they have always had this issue for as long as ive used their film, what is it, like over 10 years? its just the way they make/finish their film. if you dont like it, dont think its gonna change any time soon. just buy different film if it doesn't work for you. luckily, their are many choices out there.

 

[John Galt]

After thinking long and hard on this . . . . I have decided that if I have another problem with this film pulling away from the backing paper in the Hasselblad A12 Magazine, I will be asking for a full refund and returning the remaining film stock I have.

 

[foc]

I haven't shot 120 film in years, I use 35mm but the problems with this 120 film mentioned above sounds like just bad quality control and/or a batch released without proper testing.

The short piece of tape attaching the film to the backing paper sounds to me like the manufacturer is penny-pinching and doesn't care about their product (sounds like some Soviet camera products from the late 1980's)

Why pay money for a product that is not fit for purpose.

 

[Sirius Glass]

I haven't shot 120 film in years, I use 35mm but the problems with this 120 film mentioned above sounds like just bad quality control and/or a batch released without proper testing.

The short piece of tape attaching the film to the backing paper sounds to me like the manufacturer is penny-pinching and doesn't care about their product (sounds like some Soviet camera products from the late 1980's)

Why pay money for a product that is not fit for purpose.

Well said. A case of false economy. CatLABS has got a lot of work to do to get my confidence back in their products.

 

[Dr. no]

I haven't used Shanghai in years, but one reason I quit (besides other quality issues) was the curliness...sounds like this film doesn't have that problem. Is there confirmation that this is Chinese or is that a supposition based on the construction paper backing?

 

[Pieter12]

I bought 5 rolls of 120. The first one seemed fine, the second one must have detached from the backing paper as the camera (Rollei 6008) acted as if it was at the end of the roll after the first shot and just kept on winding. The sealing tape at the end of the third roll had Shanghai printed on it.

Is there an issue with Chinese paper manufacturing? The backing paper seems soft to me, and concerns me that it might leave dust in the camera. I have noticed that Chinese cardboard boxes are usually flimsier than Western counterparts and also feel softer.

That said, the film loads on the developing reel "like butta" with no curl at all, and the 2 rolls I processed look good. I will be printing a few frames in the next day or so.

 

[Theo Sulphate]

...
Is there an issue with Chinese paper manufacturing? ... I have noticed that Chinese cardboard boxes are usually flimsier than Western counterparts and also feel softer.
...

In the words of a former engineer co-worker, a EE who has been to China many times over the last 25 years, "The Chinese will give you the quality you're willing to pay for." That quality can be very high or low. I have a large expensive book on Winchester firearms; the quality of the paper, printing, and photos is the best I have ever seen (and I used to work in the typesetting industry). I was so impressed with the quality of the paper and printing that I checked where it was published - it amazed me that it was printed in China. This was about 15 years ago.

 

[John Wiegerink]

Well, if it's not GP3 it's a perfect clone. I agree that there are many good products that come from China, but there are also many substandard items as well. Usually price gives you a good indication of quality, but not always. The sad part is that many old and well known trade mark names are like Bell & Howell are gobbled up and stamped on products that those companies would never have dreamed of selling. Enough on that and back to this film problem. I have used both old and the new GP3 film (prior to the so called NEW plant) and here is my experience. The very old batches were only worth use in testing old/new cameras. Then they came out with GP3 with no emulsion defects and much better backing paper. The old would wad up in a blad back just like is happening with this film. Then GP3 disappeared do to a new or renovated plant. Now it's back once again, but I have yet to try the latest resurrection. The main reason for not trying it is the cost. I can buyHP5+ or FP4+ for the same or very close to the same price. Why bother. Still, I do like the film, but not the price. Maybe the deal they cut wth CatLAB is why the GP3 prices are much higher than they were when I used to buy of eBay???

 

[Andrew O'Neill]

I've been using Shanghai sheet film in 4x5 and 8x10, and love it. If CatLabs X 80 is rebranded Shanghai, then I can confidently buy it. Defo won't be buying the 120, though.

 

[Pieter12]

In the words of a former engineer co-worker, a EE who has been to China many times over the last 25 years, "The Chinese will give you the quality you're willing to pay for." That quality can be very high or low. I have a large expensive book on Winchester firearms; the quality of the paper, printing, and photos is the best I have ever seen (and I used to work in the typesetting industry). I was so impressed with the quality of the paper and printing that I checked where it was published - it amazed me that it was printed in China. This was about 15 years ago.

As a designer, I have had high-quality books and catalogs printed in Hong Kong 20 years ago. I believe the paper was imported.

 

[John Wiegerink]

I've been using Shanghai sheet film in 4x5 and 8x10, and love it. If CatLabs X 80 is rebranded Shanghai, then I can confidently buy it. Defo won't be buying the 120, though.

Andy,
I too like the film itself and will be buying some 4x5 GP3 sheet film since it's the right price. I have had good luck developing it in Rodinal 1+100 and Pyrocat-HDC and MC. For 120 I think I'll stick with Ilford.

 

[Andrew O'Neill]

Andy,
I too like the film itself and will be buying some 4x5 GP3 sheet film since it's the right price. I have had good luck developing it in Rodinal 1+100 and Pyrocat-HDC and MC. For 120 I think I'll stick with Ilford.

I've been developing it in Pyrocat-HD... and I'm with you on your choice of 120! HP5, FP4, Delta's, SFX...have never let me down!

 

[Film-Niko]

first batch for catlabs, but same as always for shanghai. they have always had this issue for as long as ive used their film, what is it, like over 10 years? its just the way they make/finish their film. if you dont like it, dont think its gonna change any time soon. just buy different film if it doesn't work for you. luckily, their are many choices out there.

+1.
Out of curiosity I've done a direct comparison of GP3 and the new catlabs film. There are no real differences. The finishing is the same.
And the film is the same. I tested it in Rodinal and made the sensitometric work, too: The characteristic curves are identical, the film speed is identical.

 

[Adrian Bacon]

+1.
Out of curiosity I've done a direct comparison of GP3 and the new catlabs film. There are no real differences. The finishing is the same.
And the film is the same. I tested it in Rodinal and made the sensitometric work, too: The characteristic curves are identical, the film speed is identical.

Would you care to post the curves?