• Welcome to Photrio!
    Registration is fast and free. Join today to unlock search, see fewer ads, and access all forum features.
    Click here to sign up

Kodak XTOL trade concern announcment

Oh yeah, I've been using China made Kodak Alaris Flexicolor C-41 chemistry for years, same with the RA-4 color paper chemistry. These plants have been in operation for a long time, I suspect that some sites were Eastman Kodak plants that survived the digital mess.
The black and white chemistry is a different story. I would guess that Alaris tried to move to a new vendor, for powders that was, apparently, in Germany. The Tetenal produced XTOL, Dektol, D76 etc was never a problem. But as has been said here, having the recipe, and having a supply chain you can count on are two different things. Brown Dektol, bad XTOL etc. The liquids for sale in the US transitioned without a problem, I suspect it's coming from a very well established vendor.
 
It may also be related to packaging problems.
 
Tim Stapp said:
Those three will have my business going forward.
Click to expand...
Ilford has gone through the Tetenal situation and the loss of their US distributor without a problem. Obviously management, employees and PLANNING may have been better handled by our friends at Ilford. And of course Foma manufactures (apparently) it's own products in the Czech Republic. Adox has been continuously building up their operations. Just dealing with , Reach, RoHS and local environmental regulations is a huge effort.
 
How well does XTOL keep in the old bags anyway? I have 3 or 4 bags with 2016-2018 expiration dates. Bought new but forgotten under the sink. Are they probably fine?

If I did use it, I’d definitely run a test roll though. Just curious if it is a lost cause or not.
 

I have never had a problem with bags of XTOL that are years old. All companies have problems with problems, correct the problem and the world still turns on its axis. I will continue use Kodak products.
 
Sirius Glass said:
I have never had a problem with bags of XTOL that are years old. All companies have problems with problems, correct the problem and the world still turns on its axis. I will continue use Kodak products.
Click to expand...

The issue isn’t the age of the Xtol. The issue is the un-pleasant surprise of finding negatives so thin they are useless. This was only revealed to be a problem for the 3rd or 4th time (check the threads around here) after spending way too much time researching the fact that they sold defective chemicals again. If it’s going to become necessary to have to verify there are no product “Trade concerns” (great term of art, by the way) every time I go to use freshly purchased Kodak Chemistry, I’m out. This isn’t the first time, nor the first chemical. Replacements were supposed to have been received a month ago. All there has been is silence. This is no way to regain my trust.There are enough other companies out there that actually care about the people who use their products. Adox comes to mind, as they communicate here.
 

I see. You want Kodak to ship product before the problem is corrected. Thank you for clarifying that. I will keep that in mind when I read your posts. Obviously you are neither an engineer nor have you ever worked in a manufacturing industry.
 
Sirius Glass said:
I see. You want Kodak to ship product before the problem is corrected. Thank you for clarifying that. I will keep that in mind when I read your posts. Obviously you are neither an engineer nor have you ever worked in a manufacturing industry.
Click to expand...

He’s a customer!
Chinakodak’s non-communication is absolutely unwelcome.
 
FWIW, my contact information for the people in Kodak Alaris' chemical department is now no longer functional.
I think they have been totally disrupted by the sale of that part of the business.
I'm interested to see what comes out with respect to the incredibly tiny portion of their business that relates to black and white photo chemistry.
As Sino Promise was, prior to the recent purchase from Kodak Alaris, the largest distributor in the world of Kodak branded film, photographic paper and photo chemistry, it is fairly likely that many of you have already bought product that went through their distribution channels.
Now they have to fix some sourcing issues that were formerly not their responsibility.
 
Sirius Glass said:
I have never had a problem with bags of XTOL that are years old. All companies have problems with problems, correct the problem and the world still turns on its axis. I will continue use Kodak products.
Click to expand...
I have similar experiences. I've used the old XTOL when it was still made in the US. I've always stockpiled stuff.
 
Cool thanks! I have enough to hopefully last me until this is sorted out. And if it doesn’t get sorted, the community will have figured out what to move onto.
 
Nico's photo news. @ 6:45 talking about Adox's version. @7:30 he mentions he talked to Alaris, not sinopromise, and was suggested to return the packages to store for a refund and let the store claim to the distributor and back to the company...

Didn't sinopromise tell us to throw away?

EDIT: they did, I chcked my email
 
Last edited:
  • Rowreidr
  • Deleted
  • Reason: duplicate
Freestyle has ignored my email asking how I should return my 2 bags.
 
I am generally a fan of Kodak and of Xtol. But I find the notion that Kodak and Ilford products must always be the best overly simplistic. Some people say that Foma Excel must bad because Foma film has had quality control problems. Without any evidence, this sounds like an ad hominem argument, i.e., "Because Foma once did something wrong, therefore everything they will ever do must be wrong". The world is a complicated place and even on this forum you will hear a myriad of contradictory onions, many without any evidence--enough to drive one crazy. So is understandable people look for simplifying answers and think "Kodak and Ilford are tops. Dear god, in all this confusion, if I just use their stuff I'm in good shape." Similarly, people often dismiss home-mixed chemistry as crap, not equal to commercial formulations. To put in perspective, When Kodak introduced Xtol there were problems with self-life and with use of 1 liter packaging. Can anyone honestly say that if similar problems had occurred with a smaller brand or home-mixed recipe it would not have be written off as, "What you do expect from off brands, or home-made crap?" But for Kodak we gave much more leeway. People have panned Foma for quality control problems. But people, including me, have had success using Excel. Keep in mind that Kodak had a major quality control problem with backing-paper of it's 120 film. But we give Kodak more slack for that kind of thing than Foma, which seems to have backing-paper dialed in. My understanding is that Kodak made four major breakthroughs with Xtol: 1. An ascorbate developer with a reasonable shelf life. 2. An ascorbate developer with a lower pH, which allowed fine grain 3. A developer that was self-replenishing 4. An environmentally friendly developer. My impression is that major difference between Xtol/commercial clones and home-mixed clones has to do with self-life of stock solution and exotic materials used promote to self-life. The fundamental developing agents are similar, ascorbate (sodium ascorbate) /phenidone (dimezone) and the pH is similar. But if the stock solution is used as a one shot, shelf life is not of concern with home-mixed preparations. If you want to replenish, it is of concern. So home-made Xtol clones arguably can attain three out of the four Xtol innovations. I use a a home-mixed clone of Xtol developed by Jordan called Instant Mytol. Jordan said he could not distinguish a difference between it and Xtol, which is my experience. Someone said that it is easier to mix D-76 clones at home than Xtol clones and I don't see why Xtol clones are so much harder given the improved performance over D-76. I believe that Edward Weston and his sons mainly used home-mixed chemistry. Some say they did reasonably well. https://photosensitive.ca/easy-film-developers/
 
Last edited:
Foma is a top notch company and products that I proudly endorse.

foma 100 is outstanding.
foma 400 is a unique film that definitely has its uses.
Foma papers are extremely good. As a matter of fact, I am presently using the matte fb variant and I’m in love with it.
 

I love Foma 200! Though, I really like the look I get with it paired with Xtol. I tried Microphen recently and it was missing something I think. What an interesting film though, I'm definitely a fan! I have been meaning to try their papers too. I got some Adorama RC paper on sale a while back that was surely something rebranded, and I thought it was Foma? I found it really punchy which wasn't my jam and that kinda had me a little apprehensive about trying Foma. Adox MCC is my favorite paper. That's not just because I'm an obvious fan - I just really like the range I get between the grades. It's main problem is it tends to tone kinda red in Selenium. It's a neat look but I do think I like the more purplish tones of Ilford there (this is when using Ilford Multigrade as the developer)
 
Sirius Glass said:
I have never had a problem with bags of XTOL that are years old. All companies have problems with problems, correct the problem and the world still turns on its axis. I will continue use Kodak products.
Click to expand...
In my experience, it depends on if you have crack or split in the bag, even a tiny one, that will let air in. If that happens it will spoil quickly.
 
bluechromis said:
In my experience, it depends on if you have crack or split in the bag, even a tiny one, that will let air in. If that happens it will spoil quickly.
Click to expand...

I only split open a bag to mix it. Why would someone split a bag just for fun?
 
Sirius Glass said:
I only split open a bag to mix it. Why would someone split a bag just for fun?
Click to expand...
I don't mean violently ripping the package wide-open. The packages are only made of paper and that can take only so much stress, unlike old days when developer often came in metal cans.. For example, if the top flap of package is flexed too much in shipping or or otherwise, tiny stress fractures may open up, and that's all take to let in air and cause problems.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register