Mottling on 2020 expired Ektar 120?

[Agulliver]

I recently shot a 120 roll of Ektar which expired in 2020. It's been stored in it's protective package since I bought it new probably in 2018. Room conditions, that is East of England....so likely never extremes of heat or cold.

The roll came out with mottling and some frames have numbers visible from the backing paper. I was surprised as it's not exactly old...though is expired. Would a batch made with a mid 2020 expiry date have been made when Kodak was experiencing problems?

 

[Tom Kershaw]

Would a batch made with a mid 2020 expiry date have been made when Kodak was experiencing problems?

Does the film roll have the newer style of "gloss" backing paper? I think this is when the problems resolved.

 

[Agulliver]

Does the film roll have the newer style of "gloss" backing paper? I think this is when the problems resolved.

I didn't take note. The printing for the numbers was very faint, that I certainly noticed. I use a lab for C41 so I don't have the backing paper to hand, I do have three more rolls but I won't open one unless I use it.

What I can say is that I bought three packs of 5 in 2018, and have used them much slower than intended due to the plague. I started this box in September 2021 shooting a roll successfully, and this one came out mottled. I'm a but concerned the remaining three will.

 

[Tom Kershaw]

What I can say is that I bought three packs of 5 in 2018, and have used them much slower than intended due to the plague. I started this box in September 2021 shooting a roll successfully, and this one came out mottled. I'm a but concerned the remaining three will.

I don't have a reference to hand but I may have seen somewhere online a list of batch codes / expiry dates and when the film moved over to the newer backing paper.

 

[Agulliver]

Looking at one of the unopened packets, the expiry date is 06/2020 and there is another number which could be the batch number 1291012

Not that I'd complain to Kodak about what is now expired film. It's just a shame.

 

[pentaxuser]

I am sure that a batch number was mentioned in the very long thread about backing paper. What I am less sure about is whether that batch number was in reference to TMAX 400 only. macfred certainly has frame number problems with Kodak colour film but his I think was Portra and his problems seemed to be frame numbers only and not mottling

My search ability is very poor but it might be worth a look if you can find it again

pentaxuser

 

[Andrew O'Neill]

Yup. Looks like backing paper issue.

 

[MattKing]

I'd reach out to Kodak Alaris anyways: Profilm@Kodakalaris.com

 

[Agulliver]

I'd reach out to Kodak Alaris anyways: Profilm@Kodakalaris.com

I sent them an email this afternoon and received a reply from Andrew Church, who will phone me tomorrow to discuss it They clearly care, even though this is expired film. I did make it clear that I'm not after any compensation, but I'd like to have an idea whether it's likely to affect the remaining films from that box

 

[Agulliver]

OK So I've had a wonderful conversation with Andy at K-A.

To summarise, what most here probably know....the company Kodak had been using for decades to make 120 backing paper went out of business circa 2015 and Kodak quickly arranged for an alternative supply...which turned out to have problems. Kodak and the supplier worked to fix the issues and after lots of testing they believed they had....but there were still some circumstances where the mottling in particular could happen. The second set of improvements was made in 2017, which by the batch number on my film appears to be a few weeks after mine was made. So I did have defective film. Andy felt that if I'd used it within the expiry date or soon after it would have been OK, but nevertheless offered a replacement pro pack. This is incredibly generous, seeing as I am reporting an issue with expired film. He did advise me that the remaining rolls from my pack would probably have the same problems, so not to use them for anything at all important. He talked about the complexity of manufacturing photographic film, with that being the prime reason it's no longer cheap and why so few companies are doing it now. He did say the only possible way the price might come down is sales increasing....so my personal view is get out there, buy film and shoot!

We went on to have a brief chat about Gold 200 in 120, which he's really thrilled to see come to market. He says they have been able to release a lot of it into the market so hopefully there's enough to go around. He did say that when it's sent for processing, to ensure the person doing scans (assuming scans are being made) is aware it's Gold and not Portra as the profile is very different. The intention is that it is offered at 25% less than the pro colour films.

All in all *very* good customer service. K-A were under no obligation legal or moral to replace my expired film. I don't know if Andy watches these forums, he did mention seeing some users posting 120 Gold pictures on social media and enjoying shooting it. But we're a funny bunch here. Regardless of whether he reads this, I will say that he has delivered fantastic customer service. Not that I've ever had anything against Kodak but this is "above and beyond" and I'm really impressed.

 

[AgX]

Great to hear that at such still big company someone is still interested in a talk with a critical consumer, and even calls him back!

 

[albireo]

OK So I've had a wonderful conversation with Andy at K-A.

To summarise, what most here probably know....the company Kodak had been using for decades to make 120 backing paper went out of business circa 2015 and Kodak quickly arranged for an alternative supply...which turned out to have problems. Kodak and the supplier worked to fix the issues and after lots of testing they believed they had....but there were still some circumstances where the mottling in particular could happen. The second set of improvements was made in 2017, which by the batch number on my film appears to be a few weeks after mine was made. So I did have defective film. Andy felt that if I'd used it within the expiry date or soon after it would have been OK, but nevertheless offered a replacement pro pack. This is incredibly generous, seeing as I am reporting an issue with expired film. He did advise me that the remaining rolls from my pack would probably have the same problems, so not to use them for anything at all important. He talked about the complexity of manufacturing photographic film, with that being the prime reason it's no longer cheap and why so few companies are doing it now. He did say the only possible way the price might come down is sales increasing....so my personal view is get out there, buy film and shoot!

We went on to have a brief chat about Gold 200 in 120, which he's really thrilled to see come to market. He says they have been able to release a lot of it into the market so hopefully there's enough to go around. He did say that when it's sent for processing, to ensure the person doing scans (assuming scans are being made) is aware it's Gold and not Portra as the profile is very different. The intention is that it is offered at 25% less than the pro colour films.

All in all *very* good customer service. K-A were under no obligation legal or moral to replace my expired film. I don't know if Andy watches these forums, he did mention seeing some users posting 120 Gold pictures on social media and enjoying shooting it. But we're a funny bunch here. Regardless of whether he reads this, I will say that he has delivered fantastic customer service. Not that I've ever had anything against Kodak but this is "above and beyond" and I'm really impressed.

Fantastic insight, thanks for sharing!

 

[Agulliver]

I was honestly just hoping for confirmation that my films were from a dodgy batch and an apology in an email. The fact that Andy took time to personally phone me to explain what happened, and then offer to replace my film was just fantastic.