Serious problem with 'Rollei' film - when RPX 25 is not?

[trendland]

Processed one 120 roll, found curly, prone to scratches base and forget this brand forever.

Yes I agree with "curly" conditioned - but I had no problems - hanging to dry after development with this fine tools :

.......special designed for "curly Films"!

Seriously : They are curly for the first time - but after archivement over some weeks they aren't
much curly any more!
Scrached base is not so fine.....but I can't remember such problems!

with regards

 

[Tom Kershaw]

This morning I've had a message back from Maco with an acknowledgement of the situation so they do respond to e-mails.

 

[faberryman]

Yeah, and it's not the only film on the market. At least the RPX is still usable with its flaws...

Except that it is not even RPX25.

 

[trendland]

This morning I've had a message back from Maco with an acknowledgement of the situation so they do respond to e-mails.

I would not like to mention it before you state a sentence like this !
But now I will state : Be sure you get sent a new film!

with regards - problem solved ...hmm?

 

[trendland]

I am puzzled, Ferrania Chrome 100 or Kodak Elitechrome 100 ??

Yes at 2€ the Ferrania Version (I never saw this film) But price increased 2008 at some cent
with Kodak inside!
Guess Fujii had no production facilities in the US 2008 - 2009 (discontinued then)
All C41 films might be from Fuji (€1,89 a 3pack C200....) discontinued ~ 2014

with regards

 

[abruzzi]

This morning I've had a message back from Maco with an acknowledgement of the situation so they do respond to e-mails.

Interesting. It sounds like there is an entire batch out there that has ortho packaged as rpx25. I bought 5 rolls of RPX25 recently. Fortunately they were actually RPX25. I suspect that Maco can track down the problem rolls using the batch number. Hopefully people like you who have already shot a developed rolls get replacements. As for why the ortho was cut narrow--thats another mystery.

 

[AgX]

I dived into my archive and found a case reported at Apug some years ago of Rollei IR400 in 4x5 cut too wide to fit as neither Toyo nor Chamonix holders.

 

[Tom Kershaw]

An update this morning I made a 50cm x 50cm print of a 6x6 "not-RPX25" Ortho 25 Plus negative, and discovered there is more of an issue here than a confectioning error. Emulsion defects appear, see the image I've attached taken from a film scan of the negative. It looks as though the emulsion hasn't been properly applied. These defects also occur on the first film I tried, mentioned above.

 

[AgX]

Emulsion missing would yield max. density in positive.
Coating defects would look differently.

 

[Tom Kershaw]

Emulsion missing would yield max. density in positive.
Coating defects would look differently.

Whatever the cause of this additional defect is, it doesn't bode well for quality control in general, if we can now observe three problems with one completely fresh roll of film.

 

[kossi008]

what is the connection between Ortho Plus 25 and RPX 25? Is it the same film simply in a relabelled box?

Couldn't be, RPX 25 has enhanced red sensitivity (can, in fact be used with IR filters), so is exactly the opposite of Ortho film.

 

[destroya]

An update this morning I made a 50cm x 50cm print of a 6x6 "not-RPX25" Ortho 25 Plus negative, and discovered there is more of an issue here than a confectioning error. Emulsion defects appear, see the image I've attached taken from a film scan of the negative. It looks as though the emulsion hasn't been properly applied. These defects also occur on the first film I tried, mentioned above.

I had the same problem with RR80s a few years ago as did others. Rollei would not even reply to emails and when I gave up and called, they said "its not our problem" seems they haven't fixed the problem yet. That being said, I only had this issue with 120 film, NOT with 35mm film.

 

[Tom Kershaw]

I had the same problem with RR80s a few years ago as did others. Rollei would not even reply to emails and when I gave up and called, they said "its not our problem" seems they haven't fixed the problem yet. That being said, I only had this issue with 120 film, NOT with 35mm film.

Maco (Rollei) seem very mysterious in terms of the manufacturing processes for the films as well, which doesn't help clarify the source of some of these problems either. At one point I saw it suggested that RPX 100 and 400 were / are at least coated by Harman but I've since heard from other sources that this may not be the case.

Possibly worth noting that Mirko of ADOX has stated publicly that '120' roll film is a difficult manufacturing proposition, and one they need to take time over before being sufficiently confident to confection and sell the ADOX CHS 100 II film in that format.

 

[Tom Kershaw]

For the record, what I've seen is the same as this: https://www.photrio.com/forum/threads/rollei-retro-80s-problem-black-spots-on-print.147170/

my process is:
Jobo CPP-3.
no pre-soak
XTOL 1+1.5 (oddly this is yellow after processing the Rollei film, which I've never seen with ILFORD or Kodak) - solution made up completely with distilled water.
Kodak stop bath (acetic acid)
Tetenal Superfix Plus 1+4

 

[AgX]

I had the same problem with RR80s a few years ago as did others. Rollei would not even reply to emails and when I gave up and called, they said "its not our problem" seems they haven't fixed the problem yet. That being said, I only had this issue with 120 film, NOT with 35mm film.

That film proper is made by Agfa. And so far not a single Agfa film with coating defects has been presented here at Apug.

However, some members see artefacts and blame them on coating, whereas they originate from interaction with backing paper, from non-appropriate storage, non appropriate processing etc.

 

[Tom Kershaw]

That film proper is made by Agfa. And so far not a single Agfa film with coating defects has been presented here at Apug.

However, some members see artefacts and blame them on coating, whereas they originate from interaction with backing paper, from non-appropriate storage, non appropriate processing etc.

I'm not sure how storage and processing problems would relate to what I've found with the 'Rollei Ortho 25 Plus' film, but then that may not be produced by Agfa, who knows...

 

[Klaus_H]

XTOL 1+1.5 (oddly this is yellow after processing the Rollei film, which I've never seen with ILFORD or Kodak) - solution made up completely with distilled water.

The yellow color of the used developer is normal for the AGFA Aviphot material. It does not appear if the film is prewashed.

The RPX 25 in 120 format I used had been converted from the AGFA material to 120 film format by an UK based company.
The films had been of a very high quality. The same material is available under a different name and converting is done by an
east european company with a much lower quality standard.

 

[miha]

The yellow color of the used developer is normal for the AGFA Aviphot material. It does not appear if the film is prewashed.

The RPX 25 in 120 format I used had been converted from the AGFA material to 120 film format by an UK based company.
The films had been of a very high quality. The same material is available under a different name and converting is done by an
east european company with a much lower quality standard.

So what is the name of the film converted by Foma Bohemia?

 

[Tom Kershaw]

So what is the name of the film converted by Foma Bohemia?

This whole 'Rollei' film business just gets more mysterious, send for Hercule Poirot... (I've just been watching 'Murder on the orient express -1974 version')

 

[destroya]

That film proper is made by Agfa. And so far not a single Agfa film with coating defects has been presented here at Apug.

However, some members see artefacts and blame them on coating, whereas they originate from interaction with backing paper, from non-appropriate storage, non appropriate processing etc.

sorry, wrong

 

[JPD]

The RPX 25 in 120 format I used had been converted from the AGFA material to 120 film format by an UK based company.
The films had been of a very high quality. The same material is available under a different name and converting is done by an
east european company with a much lower quality standard.

What I have heard is that RPX 25 is a new, improved version of ORWO NP15, coated by Filmotec and cut and spooled in the UK. Agfa never sold this film. But perhaps NP15 was based on an earlier Agfa formula, since ORWO originally was Agfa. It's all hearsay, of course.

 

[Tom Kershaw]

What I have heard is that RPX 25 is a new, improved version of ORWO NP15, coated by Filmotec and cut and spooled in the UK. Agfa never sold this film. But perhaps NP15 was based on an earlier Agfa formula, since ORWO originally was Agfa. It's all hearsay, of course.

None of the companies involved seem at all forthcoming with information on this topic. I've also heard that the Rollei products have nothing to do with UK production (Harman Technology).

 

[AgX]

RPX 25 has, depending on its datasheet the same spectral sensitization as Aviphot 40. However the latter should not have the classic anti-curl layer and should be extremely thin.

 

[Klaus_H]

In some companies the creation of data shets is the job of the marketing division.
For these companies marketing aspects are more important than technical aspects.
So do not expect that all data sheets tell the truth and nothing but the truth.

 

[Klaus_H]

This whole 'Rollei' film business just gets more mysterious

The Rollei film range contains Agfa Aviphot 200 and Agfa Aviphot 80 in two different quality and price categories. If you know Ilford films in 120 format and Foma films in 120 format, then you can see which company did cutting, spooling and packing.
Rollei published in the past in german forums that RPX 100 and RPX 400 is produced for Rollei by Harman Technology, Rollei IR 400, Superpan 200 and Retro 400S are based on Agfa Aviphot 200 and Rollei 80S is based on Agfa Aviphot 80. RPX 25 is still a "secret". It is only known the film is spooled and packed by Harman Technology.

If you do some tests with RPX 25 you can see it is definitely shows the characteristic of aerialphot material and the film is infrared sensitive.
If you compare RPX 25 to Rollei 80S with an exakt test procedure (same exposure, development in one tank at the same time and analysis with a densitometer and a microscope ) you will see both films deliver equal results. They respond equal to different filters.