Temporary shortage of T-Max 100 has begun.

[trendland]

Äahhmm......Matt - by the time, I would also be happy to hear from some Apug Members "Ex Kodak" that my theory should be wrong....
Because this would mean that Kodak need a time more to produce new Tmax
100 ( from my position - because of me due to backing paper/ink/emulsion reasons )
And we will see Tmax100 again!
But to this time I am not very optimistic....

with regards

 

[Pioneer]

It will be a serious loss if TMax 100 disappears from the 120 film lineup. Fortunately there are other alternatives.

I think an interesting side note to this is that Delta 100, a similar type of film, does not seem to be affected.

 

[Arklatexian]

It will be a serious loss if TMax 100 disappears from the 120 film lineup. Fortunately there are other alternatives.

I think an interesting side note to this is that Delta 100, a similar type of film, does not seem to be affected.

Hope you are correct because I have stocked up on 120 and 135mm Delta 100 (2 rolls each which is stocking up for me. Saves refrigerator space), I have some TMax 100 (at least I hope I still have some) on order for over a year now (5 rolls 120). At my age, I hope it arrives while I can still pick up my Hasselblad or even my Rolleicord......Regards!

 

[MattKing]

FWIW, according to Robert Shanebrook's "Making Kodak Film" (1st edition - published in 2010) a master roll of film is 54 inches by up to 6000 feet.
If used for 35mm, that is enough for 49,000 rolls of 24 exposure film.
A calculation based on the size of each roll of 120 film (2.44" x 32.5") indicates that a master roll is also enough for approximately 49,000 rolls of 120.
49,000 rolls isn't all that many, when we are talking about worldwide use, so I doubt that we are working on old stock.
Quoting from Mr. Shanebrook's excellent book (pg. 58):
"The backing paper must be opaque and clean. Since it may be in direct contact with the film for a few years, it cannot contain any chemicals that will react with the very sensitive film."
I'd suggest that the same observation applies to the ink.
Mr. Shanebrook is an APUG advertiser. Here is the link to his website, which discusses the new, greatly expanded 2nd edition (which I covet): http://www.makingkodakfilm.com/

 

[removedacct1]

It will be a serious loss if TMax 100 disappears from the 120 film lineup. Fortunately there are other alternatives.

I think an interesting side note to this is that Delta 100, a similar type of film, does not seem to be affected.

My understanding is that Kodak recalled certain batches of TMY and TMX because of the numbers on the paper backing transferring onto the film. There are several discussions about this issue on the various forums, and in one such discussion a Kodak rep chimed in to say that Kodak would replace customer's stashes of either of these emulsions if they had certain batch numbers in their possession. I contacted the rep because I did indeed have several pro packs of TMX 120 rolls in storage, and I confirmed that the numbers from the backing paper were contaminating the negs. The gracious and promptly replaced the film but all they had to offer was TMY - but I accepted it and was grateful. I also recall being told that TMX production would be started again at some future time (see quote below), with late 2017 being suggested as a ship date. I am hopeful that Kodak Alaris actually restarts production of TMX and that we might actually see new inventory available before the year is out.

I was also told by Kodak rep that the numbering paper problem happened because some batches of TMX and TMY were "mishandled" at some point in the shipping/distribution process (parked shipping containers exposed to extreme heat, was one suggestion. No idea if this is true). I quote the following from the email I received from the Kodak Alaris rep:

"We have had a limited number of inquiries for backing paper graphics (“KODAK” and frame numbers) appearing as a latent image on film negatives. We believe the impacted film may have seen some abnormal shipping or storage conditions after it left the factory and our warehouse. In December of 2015, we modified the backing paper to make it more robust in the face of less than ideal shipping or storage conditions. All testing to date indicates these improvements will prevent future occurrences of this phenomenon.
T-Max 400 produced with this new paper starts with emulsion 0153

We are not yet producing T-Max 100. The first emulsion available with new paper will be emulsion 0982, and should begin shipping later this year."

So, you have reason to expect a renewed supply of TMX may be just around the corner.

For further information about specific batches of Tmax films affected by the issue, see: https://www.photo.net/discuss/threa...rs-of-kodak-120-size-film-please-read.474523/

 

[aldevo]

The problem with wrapper offset is a problem of interaction - between the film (emulsion), the paper and the ink. Different emulsions will react in different ways or amounts.
T-Max 100 is a significantly different emulsion than the other Kodak products. One indicator of that being that it is the only one with a UV blocker built in (thus making it unusable for a lot of the traditional and alternative printing processes).
It may be that T-Max 400 and Tri-X was not substantially re-worked - the change in the ink densities and distribution on the new paper may have been sufficient.
The same may apply to the colour negative materials.
And I've always considered 100-200 ASA/ISO to be medium speed, but then I first shot when Kodachrome was ASA 25!

I've been in touch with Kodak Alaris support a couple of times over the past year regarding the TMX 120 problem. My most recent interaction was in early June and your post is pretty consistent with what they told me. Basically, yes, there is a continuing issue that is secondary to the revisions they made to resolve the paper-backing issue - and one that is unique to TMX. And, yes, they intend to resume production of TMX in 120 - but not until that issue is resolved. I'm not a big user of 100 speed film, so I'm not stressing about it...it's back when it's back.

 

[MattKing]

I've been in touch with Kodak Alaris support a couple of times over the past year regarding the TMX 120 problem. My most recent interaction was in early June and your post is pretty consistent with what they told me. Basically, yes, there is a continuing issue that is secondary to the revisions they made to resolve the paper-backing issue - and one that is unique to TMX. And, yes, they intend to resume production of TMX in 120 - but not until that issue is resolved. I'm not a big user of 100 speed film, so I'm not stressing about it...it's back when it's back.

Thanks for this update.

 

[hacked - sepiareverb]

Another reason Panatomic-X should come back. It's replacement is no longer available.

 

[removedacct1]

Another reason Panatomic-X should come back. It's replacement is no longer available.

Its replacement is not CURRENTLY available. And its not really a replacement, but a reasonable alternative.

 

[RattyMouse]

Thanks for this update.

It's insane that customers have to get updates from Kodak second or third hand. All this uncertainty exists out there and Kodak simply wont talk. They are dealing with a legitimate issue and if they are working hard to solve it, customers should know, along with a current expected end date, updated as needed.

This is elementary business practice.

 

[aldevo]

In my company, if we suffer a disruption to any of our products, a press release is issued directly to customers who use the product, and to the industry in general, to potential customers. Kodak keeps 100% silent.

How are we to know if there will ever be a Kodak TMAX100 in 120 size again? When is the product discontinued? If not after 1 year, then how many? Two years? Three years?

It's insane that customers have to get updates from Kodak second or third hand. All this uncertainty exists out there and Kodak simply wont talk. They are dealing with a legitimate issue and if they are working hard to solve it, customers should know, along with a current expected end date, updated as needed.

This is elementary business practice.

How is the update I provided from a 2nd or 3rd part source? My information comes from Kodak Alaris product support...they replied at once to my email.

The supply chain that was supporting film manufacturing 15 years ago is basically ashes now. Disruptions of product manufacture lasting months or even years with no certainty of successful resolution are not uncommon now.

It ain't great that Kodak isn't publishing a date by which they will resume production of TMX 120...but it's probably better than publishing dates that they would successively miss.

Remember it took almost 4 years for FujiFilm to restart production of Velvia 50 after a key component became unavailable.

If one needs to shoot ISO 100 film in 120 there are available alternatives to TMX.

 

[RattyMouse]

How is the update I provided from a 2nd or 3rd part source?

You are not Kodak, so you are a secondary source.

My information comes from Kodak Alaris product support...they replied at once to my email.

The supply chain that was supporting film manufacturing 15 years ago is basically ashes now. Disruptions of product manufacture lasting months or even years with no certainty of successful resolution are not uncommon now.

Any Fujifilm or Ilford Film still in production but unavailable for 1 year or longer? No, I didnt think so.

It ain't great that Kodak isn't publishing a date by which they will resume production of TMX 120...but it's probably better than publishing dates that they would successively miss.

Remember it took almost 4 years for FujiFilm to restart production of Velvia 50 after a key component became unavailable.

Yes, but the key difference is that Fujifilm *communicated* with their customers. They didnt hole up and avoid those who pay for their products. Fujifilm announced the suspension of Velvia and then announced its return.

“Since we announced the discontinuation of Velvia 50, we have been inundated with requests from photographers worldwide to continue production,” said Christian Fridholm, Director of Marketing, Picture Taking, Imaging Division, Fujifilm USA.

Or

Valhalla, NY, November 14, 2006—FUJIFILM U.S.A., Inc. is pleased to announce plans to re-introduce an ISO 50 Fujichrome Velvia professional film

If one needs to shoot ISO 100 film in 120 there are available alternatives to TMX.

Indeed there are. I'm sure Acros 100 sales have jumped nicely this year.

 

[removedacct1]

It's insane that customers have to get updates from Kodak second or third hand. All this uncertainty exists out there and Kodak simply wont talk. They are dealing with a legitimate issue and if they are working hard to solve it, customers should know, along with a current expected end date, updated as needed.

On the contrary, the information I relayed here came to me directly from a Kodak rep. Just because it didn't come in the form of a public news announcement on Kodak's web site doesn't make it any less legitimate or meaningful. As for an expected ship date, I remind you, I was given info that is actually quite specific: " The first emulsion available with new paper will be emulsion 0982, and should begin shipping later this year." You may find this insufficient, but I find this information satisfactory, given that Kodak Alaris is not committed to future manufacture of any of its film products. It feels as if some of you think Kodak owes you something, which they do not. You seem to like Acros, so I suggest you stock up on it. Work with whatever film you enjoy working with!

 

[Sirius Glass]

It's insane that customers have to get updates from Kodak second or third hand. All this uncertainty exists out there and Kodak simply wont talk. They are dealing with a legitimate issue and if they are working hard to solve it, customers should know, along with a current expected end date, updated as needed.

This is elementary business practice.

You want that they should send you an engraved invitation? You should live so long.

 

[removed account4]

There are several discussions about this issue on the various forums, and in one such discussion a Kodak rep chimed in to say that Kodak would replace customer's stashes of either of these emulsions if they had certain batch numbers in their possession. I contacted the rep because I did indeed have several pro packs of TMX 120 rolls in storage, and I confirmed that the numbers from the backing paper were contaminating the negs. The gracious and promptly replaced the film but all they had to offer was TMY - but I accepted it and was grateful.

i am acquainted with somenoe who had exaclty the opposite experience. he contacted kodak/alaris and they refused to
replace his film unless he shot it and it showed to have problems.

Another reason Panatomic-X should come back. It's replacement is no longer available.

... but it would have the same flawed/faulty backing paper as its currently nonexistent replacement, so .. it might not exist either.

 

[RattyMouse]

You want that they should send you an engraved invitation? You should live so long.

Your ridiculous assertion has no basis in fact.

 

[removed account4]

It's insane that customers have to get updates from Kodak second or third hand. All this uncertainty exists out there and Kodak simply wont talk. They are dealing with a legitimate issue and if they are working hard to solve it, customers should know, along with a current expected end date, updated as needed.

This is elementary business practice.

its been this way for almost 15 years ...
old habits die hard ..

 

[paul ron]

holy macaroni! I just tried ordering my replacement stock of tmax100 and its on back order.., then I see this thread.

what now?
what next?

 

[Theo Sulphate]

... Just because it didn't come in the form of a public news announcement on Kodak's web site ...

I would expect that a business would use its web site to keep customers informed about their products, especially if there are issues related to a popular product (well, as "popular" as a film product might be...). It seems like a good business practice and maintains good customer relations.

Or, I could be wrong.

 

[aldevo]

I would expect that a business would use its web site to keep customers informed about their products, especially if there are issues related to a popular product (well, as "popular" as a film product might be...). It seems like a good business practice and maintains good customer relations.

Or, I could be wrong.

I'm not really sure how you would manage expectations in doing that. What good would a "projected date of availability" be when nobody at Kodak actually knows what that actually is?

I'd be happy to post my email response from Kodak that I received in early-Jane, verbatim - but I suspect that there are rules on the forum prohibiting that. And in any case - why should I post something when somebody else can easily email Kodak tech support and get either the same response I received or a more up-to-date one?

 

[aldevo]

You are not Kodak, so you are a secondary source.

“Since we announced the discontinuation of Velvia 50, we have been inundated with requests from photographers worldwide to continue production,” said Christian Fridholm, Director of Marketing, Picture Taking, Imaging Division, Fujifilm USA.

Or

Valhalla, NY, November 14, 2006—FUJIFILM U.S.A., Inc. is pleased to announce plans to re-introduce an ISO 50 Fujichrome Velvia professional film

Yeah, I was hoping you'd reference that exact press release, actually.

Oh, FujiFilm did eventually get around to announcing the discontinuation of Velvia 50 in early 2005. That followed 20 months in which FujiFilm reps geographies (e.g. Canada) informed customers (accurately, as it turned out) that FujiFilm had ceased production of Velvia 50 in mid-2003, but would not formally discontinue that film until stocks of the replacement Velvia 100F were sufficient to cover existing demand for Velvia 50 - while FujiFilm reps (including Mr. Fridholm, btw, who I was in contact with) in other geographies vehemently denied that there were any plans to discontinue production until the day FujiFilm Japan, themselves, announced it. Go research the threads on photo.net and similar sites if you don't believe me.

Kodak has not been broadcasting updates of the status of TMX 120 - but you can get them easily enough if you make the effort. And there are no conflicting stories coming from Kodak about the TMX 120 issue - everything is along the lines of there's a technical issue they are trying to resolve, it's not currently in production, they do not have a projected date of availability. As of early June, 2017 - the last time I bothered to try to get an update - nobody from Kodak has suggested that TMX 120 is discontinued.

 

[aldevo]

It will be a serious loss if TMax 100 disappears from the 120 film lineup. Fortunately there are other alternatives.

I think an interesting side note to this is that Delta 100, a similar type of film, does not seem to be affected.

There would be reason to believe that Delta 100 or any other 120 film would be affected.

 

[MattKing]

There would be reason to believe that Delta 100 or any other 120 film would be affected.

Are you, by chance, missing a "no" in this post? As in "...be no reason to believe..."?

 

[Theo Sulphate]

I'm not really sure how you would manage expectations in doing that. What good would a "projected date of availability" be when nobody at Kodak actually knows what that actually is? ...

They don't have to give a projected date or promise anything. Under the assumption that any news Is better than silence, they could simply say "as of July 2017 we're still working on it; we haven't forgotten you."

... why should I post something when somebody ...else can easily email Kodak tech support and get either the same response I received or a more up-to-date one?

You shouldn't have to, but the response you received could've been just the thing for their web site.