Issues with the new CatLABS X 80 film . . .

[bascom49]

I have a question for all those involved in this thread. Has anyone here bought Shanghai GP3 from eBay instead of CatLabs? The reason I ask is I'm wondering if CatLabs might have made a sweet deal on the remaining stock that was on hand when the factory shut down for rebuilding or whatever. Maybe the eBay sellers are getting an upgraded film in the way of backing paper and tape??? I don't know and that's why I ask if there is a difference between CatLabs stock and eBay sellers stock. Just curious?? JohnW

Is it for certain that the CatLabs X-80 is actually the same emulsion as Shanhai GP3 and not a different emulsion made to CatLabs spec and coated by the Shanghai ?

 

[John Wiegerink]

Is it for certain that the CatLabs X-80 is actually the same emulsion as Shanhai GP3 and not a different emulsion made to CatLabs spec and coated by the Shanghai ?

I don't know the answer to that, but I would hope it's the same. The last pre-factory close down GP3 film I bought I had zero complaints about the emulsion. I would rate it better than Foma 100 since I had some strange results with that. Also, rating GP3 iat ISO 50 or 80 is what worked better for me. So, I'd say it's the same. Now the tape and backing paper is another story altogether.............

 

[Adrian Bacon]

Is it for certain that the CatLabs X-80 is actually the same emulsion as Shanhai GP3 and not a different emulsion made to CatLabs spec and coated by the Shanghai ?

See post #51, it has the same curve shape. It might be useful to look at the grain structure of the two as well as if they both dry the same way.

For me personally, I don’t care one way or the other. If it really is GP3, then catLABS is supporting film and giving others an opportunity to help support them by buying it. It’s no different than what freestyle is doing with their Arista.EDU line (which is foma film), what you also see with Holga film (which is also Foma film). If you don’t want to support an outfit or company, then don’t buy it, otherwise do your part to support them.

 

[Andrew O'Neill]

See post #51, it has the same curve shape. It might be useful to look at the grain structure of the two as well as if they both dry the same way.

For me personally, I don’t care one way or the other. If it really is GP3, then catLABS is supporting film and giving others an opportunity to help support them by buying it. It’s no different than what freestyle is doing with their Arista.EDU line (which is fins film), what you also see with Holga film (which is also Foma film). If you don’t want to support an outfit or company, then don’t buy it, otherwise do your part to support them.

I want to support them, but my Mamiya RB67 doesn't want to... so I'll buy sheet film, if the price is right up here in Canada. My Canham will eat it up!

 

[bascom49]

See post #51, it has the same curve shape. It might be useful to look at the grain structure of the two as well as if they both dry the same way.

For me personally, I don’t care one way or the other. If it really is GP3, then catLABS is supporting film and giving others an opportunity to help support them by buying it. It’s no different than what freestyle is doing with their Arista.EDU line (which is foma film), what you also see with Holga film (which is also Foma film). If you don’t want to support an outfit or company, then don’t buy it, otherwise do your part to support them.

It's not important for me either way as well, I'm happy on both sides. I do hope that it is a different emulsion, it opens up possibilities for others to have custom emulsions coated by existing vendors.

 

[Adrian Bacon]

I want to support them, but my Mamiya RB67 doesn't want to... so I'll buy sheet film, if the price is right up here in Canada. My Canham will eat it up!

What size? I have 11 boxes of 4x5 and 5 boxes of 8x10 sitting in my freezer and listed on Amazon. They just showed up last week. As fresh as it’ll get. I don’t usually ship to Canada, but have no problem helping out a fellow photrio member. Pm me if you want to discuss.

 

[Adrian Bacon]

It's not important for me either way as well, I'm happy on both sides. I do hope that it is a different emulsion, it opens up possibilities for others to have custom emulsions coated by existing vendors.

That would be so cool if it was a different emulsion.

 

[AgX]

For me personally, I don’t care one way or the other. If it really is GP3, then catLABS is supporting film and giving others an opportunity to help support them by buying it. It’s no different than what freestyle is doing with their Arista.EDU line (which is foma film), what you also see with Holga film (which is also Foma film). If you don’t want to support an outfit or company, then don’t buy it, otherwise do your part to support them.

But then one could also buy directly from China...

For a buyer in Europe both ways (from the USA or China) mean the import hassle and risks.

 

[Peter Schrager]

I don't know the answer to that, but I would hope it's the same. The last pre-factory close down GP3 film I bought I had zero complaints about the emulsion. I would rate it better than Foma 100 since I had some strange results with that. Also, rating GP3 iat ISO 50 or 80 is what worked better for me. So, I'd say it's the same. Now the tape and backing paper is another story altogether.............

Inever used Foma 100 in roll format but I have in sheet film. it's really a sleeper great film. learn ow to develop it properly and it will surprise you
no sense to dismiss Foma as they make some truly wonderful products
I did order a box of the Shanghai 4x5 from China and am not impressed. the Foma 100 has real personality. the Shanghai left me with an "eh" feeling.
You can make any film work but I chose to support those companies who have supported us in the long term.
why risk your time with questionable roll film when we certainly have some amazing films available...
I'm not going to try and understand people's logic especially when it is $6/roll??

 

[Adrian Bacon]

You can make any film work but I chose to support those companies who have supported us in the long term.
why risk your time with questionable roll film when we certainly have some amazing films available...

By that logic, anybody new is questionable and shouldn’t even be tried. Sometimes, new is wonderful. Of course, you should do what you feel is best, and only you can decide that for yourself.

 

[Adrian Bacon]

Inever used Foma 100 in roll format but I have in sheet film. it's really a sleeper great film. learn ow to develop it properly and it will surprise you
no sense to dismiss Foma as they make some truly wonderful products

The roll and sheet are basically the same. Different plastic, same emulsion. Their 200 speed is the best of the 3 in my humble opinion. Foma has been around forever.

 

[Pieter12]

Just processed another roll of CATLABS 80. The leading corner of the film was bent in such a way that I can easily imagine it catching in a film back that has a more sinuous path than my Rollei.

 

[JonPorter]

I compared the backing paper of four films and found CatLatbs used the least amount of tape. Plus the Foma and CatLabs tape was thinner than on the Bergger and Ilford film. That being said, I've never had any trouble with Foma or CatLabs film. I use RB67, Bronica SQ-B and Mamiya 645 cameras.

 

[MattKing]

I compared the backing paper of four films and found CatLatbs used the least amount of tape. Plus the Foma and CatLabs tape was thinner than on the Bergger and Ilford film. That being said, I've never had any trouble with Foma or CatLabs film. I use RB67, Bronica SQ-B and Mamiya 645 cameras.
View attachment 225530

Looks like a great art installation.

 

[railwayman3]

I compared the backing paper of four films and found CatLatbs used the least amount of tape. Plus the Foma and CatLabs tape was thinner than on the Bergger and Ilford film. That being said, I've never had any trouble with Foma or CatLabs film. I use RB67, Bronica SQ-B and Mamiya 645 cameras.
View attachment 225530

I'm not sure how the tape is normally applied on roll films, but those illustrations seem to suggest that the Bergger and Ilford versions are neatly applied by machine, while the Foma and Catlabs look to be bits of torn sticky tape put on by hand (by bored workers?)

 

[John Galt]

Update: I really, really like the look of this film.

I spoke with Omer Hecht about my issues with this film and he was very forthcoming and helpful. He assured me that the "quality control" issue has been addressed and that the film now being shipped reflects that.

He is also sending me two new rolls to replace the ones I had the tape issue with.

It seems that the issues are primarily with Hasselblad because of the torturous path the film must take through the film magazine. I had the tape pull away on my second and third (?) roll. I have now shot 5 more rolls with no issue. Now that I am aware of the issue I am very careful winding to the first frame in my Hasselbald magazines, after that it is the same as any other roll 120 film.

I also asked Omer directly regarding the marketing of this film as "Following in the footsteps of Kodak's famous 'Panatomic-X' (which was used in Polaroid's equally famous Type 55 film), CatLABS X FILM 80 brings back a classic touch with its unique look" he indicated in the affirmative that this emulsion was deliberately formulated to emulate the classic Kodak Panatomic X.

I am looking forward to receiving these new rolls to see if the tape has been applied the full width of the film to the backing paper.

Thank you Omer!

 

[jim appleyard]

Thanks. Good to know, maybe it's worth a try now.

 

[BrianShaw]

Great update information... very much appreciated!

 

[Andrew O'Neill]

Good news. Thank you.

 

[Pieter12]

Just shot and processed my third roll of CATlabs 80 120 film. I like the look, the base is very clear--not sure what the material is (mylar?), it is certainly not the same as Kodak or Ilford. There is hardly any curl from being rolled up, and it makes it a bit difficult to load on the developing reel--other films stay rolled up when removed from the spool, the CATlabs sort of relaxes and can't be easily gathered in your hand. Which for me means the film can possibly touch the table or floor and pick up some dust while loading. Also, this last roll was on the short side. The last frame ended up right at the end of the film. I have never experienced that with other brands.

 

[Andrew O'Neill]

Just shot and processed my third roll of CATlabs 80 120 film. I like the look, the base is very clear--not sure what the material is (mylar?), it is certainly not the same as Kodak or Ilford. There is hardly any curl from being rolled up, and it makes it a bit difficult to load on the developing reel--other films stay rolled up when removed from the spool, the CATlabs sort of relaxes and can't be easily gathered in your hand. Which for me means the film can possibly touch the table or floor and pick up some dust while loading. Also, this last roll was on the short side. The last frame ended up right at the end of the film. I have never experienced that with other brands.

Weak QC. One has to wonder if they are attaching the film to the backing paper by hand... How did the tape look compared to the example in post #113? Thanks for sharing.

 

[Black Dog]

The film would probably be trouble free in most folders or Mamiya C series TLRS - anything with a really straight film path.

Interesting you say that Matt-I've put several rolls through my Rolleicord with no problems and the negs developed in ID 11 1+1 look great. Anyway you'll be seeing some of the results in a future postcard exchange.