Kodak Portra 120 film (Sold by B&H + Adorama): Old Stock has the backing paper issue!!!

[MattKing]

I've just noticed that the OP (moodlover) has added this to his first post:

UPDATE: Kodak Alaris has informed me that in Dec 2015 they fixed this issue. T-Max 400 produced with this new paper starts with emulsion 153. Portra 400 produced with this new paper starts with emulsion 3272. I've come to the conclusion that B&H and Adorama in NYC are still selling old film before this fix, because my batch numbers for the ruined photos below begin with 3231. So Kodak is not at fault here.

Thanks for this update.
Many people (myself included) don't necessarily see updates to first posts, because we go directly to the first unread post in any thread.

I'm going to suggest that the thread title be amended to something like:
"Kodak Portra 120 film sold by B&H + Adorama may be older and may still show backing paper issue"

 

[David A. Goldfarb]

Thread title updated.

 

[EdSawyer]

hopefully B&H and Adorama and others return that film to Kodak and get the new stuff asap!

 

[BrianShaw]

Potentially ignorant question: is batch number on the packaging so a buyer can verify and reject old stock, or is it only between frames 11/12 and require processing to see?

 

[ignatiu5]

Potentially ignorant question: is batch number on the packaging so a buyer can verify and reject old stock, or is it only between frames 11/12 and require processing to see?

Batch numbers are on both propack carton packaging, as well as on the foil wrapper of individual rolls.

 

[BrianShaw]

Batch numbers are on both propack carton packaging, as well as on the foil wrapper of individual rolls.

Thanks very much. I guess I never really paid enough attention to the packaging.

 

[Wallendo]

I feel a little better after the update, but still am somewhat leery of purchasing Kodak film in 120 since I usually purchase online from B&H (no local photo shops where I live). How do I know I would get the new backing paper?

I don't know the supply chain from EK through KA eventually to B&H, but someone at one of the Kodaks needs to make sure the largest sellers of their films all have new stock.

 

[RattyMouse]

How is it possible that B & H can get their hands on old film? Surely they have to be one of the largest suppliers of film in the USA. Rarely are their prices ever beaten and outside of NY, you pay no sales tax. I always buy my film from B & H and I bet many other film photographers do too. I doubt they have years worth of film in their warehouse. I was burned hard by film I bought from B & H last year; 20 rolls of bad TMAX 400. Kodak claims this film was fixed in 2015. How is B & H still getting older, bad film? The distribution network needs to be cleansed of this defective film!

 

[RattyMouse]

I feel a little better after the update, but still am somewhat leery of purchasing Kodak film in 120 since I usually purchase online from B&H (no local photo shops where I live). How do I know I would get the new backing paper?

I don't know the supply chain from EK through KA eventually to B&H, but someone at one of the Kodaks needs to make sure the largest sellers of their films all have new stock.

I too would be very weary of buying Kodak film, not only from B & H but elsewhere. The distribution network seems to have many rolls of the defective film out there. Kodak never once issued a recall and so customers are left to fend for themselves. If you must use Kodak film, check all lot numbers against the known defective batches. It's up to you to protect yourself. Exercise extreme vigilance or do what I did and move over to Ilford and Fuji film.

 

[Lachlan Young]

I feel a little better after the update, but still am somewhat leery of purchasing Kodak film in 120 since I usually purchase online from B&H (no local photo shops where I live). How do I know I would get the new backing paper?

I don't know the supply chain from EK through KA eventually to B&H, but someone at one of the Kodaks needs to make sure the largest sellers of their films all have new stock.

It might be as simple as the newest stock being at the top of the pile, so if demand rises above the replenishment rate, older stock from the bottom of the pile goes out the door from the retailer - who in this case might be trying to keep a buffer of stock in case of higher than expected demand.

 

[railwayman3]

It might be as simple as the newest stock being at the top of the pile, so if demand rises above the replenishment rate, older stock from the bottom of the pile goes out the door from the retailer - who in this case might be trying to keep a buffer of stock in case of higher than expected demand.

Surely proper stock rotation should be a standard procedure for any dated product, photographic or otherwise ? I wouldn't be impressed if caught out in this way.

 

[twelvetone12]

The distribution network needs to be cleansed of this defective film!

It seems it is being cleansed, with OP part of the cleansing. Pretty sad for a big distributor IMHO.

 

[Lachlan Young]

Surely proper stock rotation should be a standard procedure for any dated product, photographic or otherwise ? I wouldn't be impressed if caught out in this way.

I quite agree! It seems that in this case the retailer has not been following good practice.

 

[moodlover]

I am confused too. Kodak Alaris has informed me that it's highly unlikely for B&H/Adorama to hold old stock since their turnover is fast. This is what I expect. But I'm not making this up, I have been purchasing lots of 5-packs of 120 Kodak Portra 400 all of this year and last year from these stores and no where else since I live close to them. I do not hold inventory which some people (even KA assumed) from 2015, I use my film one or two days after purchase. Nothing is saved more than two days, certainly not two years.

I even sent KA invoices of my purchases from these stores that date the purchases past the "fix" but again, probably useless to them since they can't prove anything with that. KA seems to be kind enough to reply, but how can we nudge B&H or Adorama at all?

 

[EdSawyer]

Henry Posner from B&H and Helen Oster (member HelenOster here on APUG) from Adorama are active on many photo forums and are usually the best ones to approach about this sort of thing, I'd say.

 

[MultiFormat Shooter]

UPDATE: Kodak Alaris has informed me that in Dec 2015 they fixed this issue. T-Max 400 produced with this new paper starts with emulsion 153. Portra 400 produced with this new paper starts with emulsion 3272.

Is there any information available regrading emulsion numbers for Portra 160 or Portra 800? Or were these these films not affected like the Portra 400 was?

 

[moodlover]

Is there any information available regrading emulsion numbers for Portra 160 or Portra 800? Or were these these films not affected like the Portra 400 was?

I wasnt given any, it could be because I didnt ask about them, but im not sure. KA said TMAX and Portra 400. But others have had TRIX affected too. I hope their entire line got a revamp of backing paper

 

[Lachlan Young]

Is there any information available regrading emulsion numbers for Portra 160 or Portra 800? Or were these these films not affected like the Portra 400 was?

All the new Portra 160 & TX I've seen since at least the start of this year has had the new backing paper.

 

[MultiFormat Shooter]

I wasnt given any, it could be because I didnt ask about them, but im not sure. KA said TMAX and Portra 400. But others have had TRIX affected too. I hope their entire line got a revamp of backing paper

All the new Portra 160 & TX I've seen since at least the start of this year has had the new backing paper.

Thanks for the answers, I appreciate them!

 

[RattyMouse]

It seems it is being cleansed, with OP part of the cleansing. Pretty sad for a big distributor IMHO.

I did my part, taking on 20 rolls of defective TMAX400 late last year.

 

[DREW WILEY]

I just processed a number of rolls of C41 Ektar, and am currently processing TMY rolls from B&H. No problem whatsoever. Yes, I did check batch codes in advance. But I have been shooting these two 120 films all along with no issues.

 

[Photo Engineer]

This is one of the things giving EK problems. Trying to find out what is going on.

PE