T-Max 400 - Mottling in negatives

[Sal Santamaura]

I wonder if Kodak and Rollei are sourcing their paper from the same place.....

https://www.photrio.com/forum/threads/mottling-on-rpx-25-in-xtol.161920/

RPX25 is manufactured by HARMAN.

 

[mnemosyne]

RPX25 is manufactured by HARMAN.

RPX25 = Agfa Aviphot Pan 80, but you are probably right that the finishing is done by Harman, so if the paper was at fault it would be Harman's paper.

 

[GLS]

This must be it. It could be mistaken for grain, but it is not, because it also shows on an entirely unexposed and undeveloped film that has been through a sequence of "alkaline solution-wash-acidic fixer". It is also not a typical reticulation, as it is much finer. Since it shows on a 120 film that is sealed from air for the most of its useful life, it should not be caused by a noxious vapor. The real problem is that its appearance is variable. If you can get your hands on a 400 ASA film which is past expiration date and do not expose and develop it, just cycle through solutions as above, you should see it in its most basic form.

Here is an example 100% crop of a file manipulated in the way I described. The dark portion is a patch of sky in one of the frames, the upper brighter portion is a blank piece of the roll. The grain/frosting pattern is subtle, but quite clear.

 

[Bill Burk]

Batch 0155 001, expiration 05/2019.

I thought the backing paper issue was limited to print-through of the backing paper numbers, and didn't cause any mottling?

TMAX 400 batch number 159 is the first with new backing paper - referring to a recent update from John Sexton.
Yours, being 0155 may not have benefited from the change.

 

[GLS]

TMAX 400 batch number 159 is the first with new backing paper - referring to a recent update from John Sexton.
Yours, being 0155 may not have benefited from the change.

Thanks for the info. My other unopened box is batch 157, so I may be looking at the same problem with that. I have not as yet shot a roll from that one to compare, but as soon as I do I'll contact Kodak Alaris with my findings.

This new paper for T-Max 400 then: would it be the same as the new shiny backing paper that's on the new batches of T-Max 100 following the snafu and long production halt? If so it should be easy to spot.

 

[GLS]

So an update on this situation:

I have now shot a roll from the batch 157 box, processed in Pyrocat-HD, and the bad news is the problem is still there. It definitely seems less severe than the other one however, but is still enough to be bothersome.

I guess all that's left is to try and seek some kind of compensation from Kodak and avoid this film (at least for the time being). It's annoying though, as I like the results from TMY-2 otherwise. Oh well, I guess I'll have to switch to Delta 400 and live with its larger grain and higher contrast.

 

[GLS]

Update 2:

I contacted Kodak, and thankfully there was no quibbling. They have said they will send me two pro-packs of TMY-2 from the latest batch with the new backing paper. Hopefully these will not exhibit the problem.

 

[warden]

Update 2:

I contacted Kodak, and thankfully there was no quibbling. They have said they will send me two pro-packs of TMY-2 from the latest batch with the new backing paper. Hopefully these will not exhibit the problem.

Excellent. It's unfortunate that the problem happened but I'm glad to hear Kodak is sending you product with the new paper. I shot my first rolls with the shiny backing paper recently with no issues and will look forward to hearing what you find when you try it out. Please share when you do.

 

[GLS]

I shot my first rolls with the shiny backing paper recently with no issues and will look forward to hearing what you find when you try it out. Please share when you do.

Will do. I have a box of T-Max 100 with that new shiny paper, and it has been absolutely fine, so hopefully the same will prove true with the 400.

 

[GLS]

I shot my first rolls with the shiny backing paper recently with no issues

What batch were they from btw?

I have received the two pro-packs and they are from batch 158 (expiry 07/2020). However, according to @Bill Burk the first batch with the new paper is 159, so I'm now wondering if I've been fobbed off with more film which will have the same problems as before...

 

[ic-racer]

I just processed five rolls of TMY 120 and had the same effect as the OP. All five roll useless. I don't shoot a lot of 120, so that represents a year of work. It is not worth the time and effort to make silver images if the film is bad.

I think I'm going to start processing a test sheet or roll for ever batch of film I purchase before engaging in a project.

 

[warden]

What batch were they from btw?

I have received the two pro-packs and they are from batch 158 (expiry 07/2020). However, according to @Bill Burk the first batch with the new paper is 159, so I'm now wondering if I've been fobbed off with more film which will have the same problems as before...

TMax 0159 and Tri-X 1001.

 

[GLS]

TMax 0159 and Tri-X 1001.

Thanks.

So, I'm back to uncertainty again with the replacement film. I know I shouldn't really complain as it's free film after all, but I specifically asked for replacement packs with the new backing paper...

 

[warden]

Thanks.

So, I'm back to uncertainty again with the replacement film. I know I shouldn't really complain as it's free film after all, but I specifically asked for replacement packs with the new backing paper...

Does it actually have the new paper? You should see and feel a difference - it's shiny and "plasticky".

 

[GLS]

Does it actually have the new paper? You should see and feel a difference - it's shiny and "plasticky".

I checked, and no, it's the old type

 

[MattKing]

What batch were they from btw?

I have received the two pro-packs and they are from batch 158 (expiry 07/2020). However, according to @Bill Burk the first batch with the new paper is 159, so I'm now wondering if I've been fobbed off with more film which will have the same problems as before...

The batch numbers for the newest paper differ between the different films - T-Max 100, T-Max 400 and Tri-X. If I were you, I would get back to Kodak Alaris and ask them to confirm that they sent the right film.

 

[Andrew O'Neill]

I just processed five rolls of TMY 120 and had the same effect as the OP. All five roll useless. I don't shoot a lot of 120, so that represents a year of work. It is not worth the time and effort to make silver images if the film is bad.

I think I'm going to start processing a test sheet or roll for ever batch of film I purchase before engaging in a project.

Was that fresh film?

 

[warden]

I checked, and no, it's the old type

Dang. It's worth contacting Kodak again to double check before wasting your time. You could always expose a roll to see what happens, but you don't owe Kodak that of course.

 

[GLS]

If I were you, I would get back to Kodak Alaris and ask them to confirm that they sent the right film

I suppose it couldn't hurt to ask.

 

[pentaxuser]

On seeing that a thread recently that a place called 7Dayshop was selling 120 TMax for a price that beat all the normal retailers by about £5 minimum per brick of 5 rolls I was tempted but resisted and now the issue seems to have arisen again from two separate sources. There are only so many nails that can be banged into a coffin before I lose faith.

pentaxuser

 

[DWThomas]

I think I'm going to start processing a test sheet or roll for ever batch of film I purchase before engaging in a project.

This is certainly an appropriate procedure. I've pretty much avoided the Tmax flavors of Kodak in 120, but so far had good experience with even the older possibly questionable batches of 400TX. At any rate, I am awaiting receipt of a new order of 400TX from B&H and will certainly try a roll before I go trundling off to Europe in April. I also bought more Ilford HP5 Plus. When I did my big cross-USA excursion in 2016 I alternated between those two films, finding them pretty much interchangeable for my typical use, and figured I was bound to return with something! Thankfully back then all were fine.

It is frustrating to see these reports popping up, but as they used to say in international political dealings "Trust but verify!"

 

[ic-racer]

Was that fresh film?

The original box is gone, but I bought two 5-packs at the same time. Bottom of the remaining 5-pack box indicates "08/2019" with numerals "0156 001"

 

[GLS]

Update 3: I contacted Kodak again, and they have agreed to send me two more pro-packs from batch 159. As soon as I receive them I will test a roll. Hopefully third time will be the charm!

 

[AgX]

So, I'm back to uncertainty again with the replacement film. I know I shouldn't really complain as it's free film after all,...

It was not free. You paid for it with by buying that defective film. (I'm assuming that it was defective.)

 

[GLS]

It was not free. You paid for it with by buying that defective film. (I'm assuming that it was defective.)

True enough.