The Ilford 120 film issue - which films have people seen affected?

[sterioma]

So they're from 2018, with ill-defined storage since leaving the distribution chain. I've processed a lot of in-date 120 HP5+ this year (and last year) with no backing paper issues.

My HP5 was also from 2018. Expiry date Feb Oct 2021.

Some was shot in-date (2020) and already showed the issue (although I thought it was my fault), some earlier this year with same issue (and then I realized that it was not my fault doing some side-by-side test against 35mm).

 

[logan2z]

FWIW I've been shooting quite a bit of Ilford FP4+ in 120 recently and haven't had any backing paper issues. And some of the shot film sat for several months before I got around to developing it.

Has this mostly affected HP5?

 

[sterioma]

Has this mostly affected HP5?

Not according to Ilford:
"The issue of spots / mottle on 120 film negatives is still rare and has primarily, but not exclusively, been seen in our slower speed films such as PAN F and FP4. The degree of the issue varies significantly and is also not linked to specific batches of film."

(source: https://www.ilfordphoto.com/updated-120-roll-film-statement/)

 

[Lachlan Young]

See the photos above. There is actually what looks like droplets of rust on the paper.

Have you inspected the pressure plate in the camera that was used? It would not take much contamination with damp fingers (that had possibly been in contact with an oxidising agent) to potentially cause all sorts of problems.

 

[logan2z]

Not according to Ilford:
"The issue of spots / mottle on 120 film negatives is still rare and has primarily, but not exclusively, been seen in our slower speed films such as PAN F and FP4. The degree of the issue varies significantly and is also not linked to specific batches of film."

(source: https://www.ilfordphoto.com/updated-120-roll-film-statement/)

Thanks, I think I'd read that before but it seems like several recent reports of mottling have mentioned HP5, so I thought that film might be affected more often than expected.

I have noticed that my recently purchased rolls of FP4+ have a strong chemical smell that I hadn't noticed in the past. I wonder if that's related to a change in the backing paper made to eliminate these problems.

 

[calico]

FWIW I've been shooting quite a bit of Ilford FP4+ in 120 recently and haven't had any backing paper issues. And some of the shot film sat for several months before I got around to developing it.

Has this mostly affected HP5?

I have the mottling issue with FP4, not HP5. Ilford has said it is slower films which are more affected by mottling issue.

I thought I would be okay if I used very recently bought FP4 (and after batch numbers Ilford had given me last year), but I found mottling on film which I had bought just a couple months previously, definitely not expired, was well-kept, was developed soon after shooting, etc. Very frustrating. I love FP4 but......

I like the look of Fomapan in others' images posted online, but I keep reading about manufacturing issues with that, too (other types of issues), and also that it curls which is inconvenient for scanning.

 

[Andrew O'Neill]

Thanks, I think I'd read that before but it seems like several recent reports of mottling have mentioned HP5, so I thought that film might be affected more often than expected.

I have noticed that my recently purchased rolls of FP4+ have a strong chemical smell that I hadn't noticed in the past. I wonder if that's related to a change in the backing paper made to eliminate these problems.

To me, that distinct chemical smell smells like candy canes.

 

[logan2z]

To me, that distinct chemical smell smells like candy canes.

Hmm, you may need to see an ENT guy

 

[Andrew O'Neill]

Hmm, you may need to see an ENT guy

My nostrils are fine, thank you very much!

 

[John Wiegerink]

There has been backing paper issues for more than 100 years, so I wouldn't expect them to go away.
Eastman Kodak though is very protective of the technology that went into their new, almost plastic-like version. They are unlikely to give that technology away! And they may never be willing to sell it.

You're right Matt, but I've shot film since the late 50's, and I've never seen this much of a problem before. Even when I was in the hot and humid Southeast Asia my film was sent to California and back again with no sign backing paper bleed. Those are the harshest conditions I could think of for film and backing paper. It took its toll on a 124 Yashica, but my film was fine.

 

[relistan]

Have you inspected the pressure plate in the camera that was used? It would not take much contamination with damp fingers (that had possibly been in contact with an oxidising agent) to potentially cause all sorts of problems.

Yes, of course, the camera is absolutely fine. It’s my Bronica and it’s in like new condition.

 

[haliderollei]

We need to stop allowing Harman getting away with this nonsense, quit the rubbish carbon based backing paper and reformulate it already. I'll pay 25 cents as long as you fix it.

 

[John Wiegerink]

We need to stop allowing Harman getting away with this nonsense, quit the rubbish carbon based backing paper and reformulate it already. I'll pay 25 cents as long as you fix it.

Yes, the old saying, "squeaky wheel gets the oil" should apply here. I really don't care who's fault it is, just fix it. Maybe they could add a small amount of anti-fungicide to the paper backing? Sure seems long enough time has passed where the problem should have been corrected by now. Of course, it took Kodak/Alaris a long time to correct their offset/bleed problem, but at least they got a handle on it. It's really upsetting to shoot a roll of film and then see that the sky looks to be full of pimples.

 

[Pieter12]

We need to stop allowing Harman getting away with this nonsense, quit the rubbish carbon based backing paper and reformulate it already. I'll pay 25 cents as long as you fix it.

Yes, the old saying, "squeaky wheel gets the oil" should apply here. I really don't care who's fault it is, just fix it. Maybe they could add a small amount of anti-fungicide to the paper backing? Sure seems long enough time has passed where the problem should have been corrected by now. Of course, it took Kodak/Alaris a long time to correct their offset/bleed problem, but at least they got a handle on it. It's really upsetting to shoot a roll of film and then see that the sky looks to be full of pimples.

HA HA HA.

 

[hoffy]

So, I see its ongoing.

I hate to say this, but I am slowly (when I pick up the camera) transitioning away from Harman based films. While its still only a hobby for me, I hate having to deal with these defects

 

[John Wiegerink]

So, I see its ongoing.

I hate to say this, but I am slowly (when I pick up the camera) transitioning away from Harman based films. While its still only a hobby for me, I hate having to deal with these defects

I wouldn't give up on Harman completely, since they are very good about "caring" and should have this straighten out shortly.

 

[hoffy]

I wouldn't give up on Harman completely, since they are very good about "caring" and should have this straighten out shortly.

Sure. Shortly...

Actually, I mis-quoted myself. I won't use any Harman 120 product. I will still actively use them in 35mm and 4x5, where I don't have the problem. FP4+ is a hard drug to completely go cold turkey on

And yes, if there is an actual fix on the paper based films, I will gladly go back.

 

[Pieter12]

I wouldn't give up on Harman completely, since they are very good about "caring" and should have this straighten out shortly.

I don't know how much of this issue is within Harman's control, especially if the problem is originating with the paper (that I assume they don't make) and not the conditions in the factory or warehouse. Finding and testing a new source for backing paper could take a while and be expensive. And if its thickness or other physical properties are different enough from the current backing paper it could introduce new challenges on he line.

Sure. Shortly...

Actually, I mis-quoted myself. I won't use any Harman 120 product. I will still actively use them in 35mm and 4x5, where I don't have the problem. FP4+ is a hard drug to completely go cold turkey on

And yes, if there is an actual fix on the paper based films, I will gladly go back.

And how will you know if it has been fixed? Ilford/Harman barely acknowledges the issue unless you complain directly to them. I don't remember any recalls of batches, mainly because I don't know if they have been able to pinpoint the origin of the problem to begin with.

 

[hoffy]

I don't know how much of this issue is within Harman's control, especially if the problem is originating with the paper (that I assume they don't make) and not the conditions in the factory or warehouse. Finding and testing a new source for backing paper could take a while and be expensive. And if its thickness or other physical properties are different enough from the current backing paper it could introduce new challenges on he line.


And how will you know if it has been fixed? Ilford/Harman barely acknowledges the issue unless you complain directly to them. I don't remember any recalls of batches, mainly because I don't know if they have been able to pinpoint the origin of the problem to begin with.

I agree 100% with your last statement. That is why I said "An actual fix", which also means owning the problem and providing an actual solution.

 

[lxdude]

Put it this way, I say tyre instead of tire and litre instead of liter .

I litreally never tyre of these comparisons.

 

[John Wiegerink]

I don't know how much of this issue is within Harman's control, especially if the problem is originating with the paper (that I assume they don't make) and not the conditions in the factory or warehouse. Finding and testing a new source for backing paper could take a while and be expensive. And if its thickness or other physical properties are different enough from the current backing paper it could introduce new challenges on he line.


And how will you know if it has been fixed? Ilford/Harman barely acknowledges the issue unless you complain directly to them. I don't remember any recalls of batches, mainly because I don't know if they have been able to pinpoint the origin of the problem to begin with.

It's all within Harman's control. I'm sure if they really want this taken care of, they can put an awful lot of pressure on the backing papermaker. That's how it's done. Harman tells them to fix it or else. That should get something stirring.

 

[Dusty Negative]

We need to stop allowing Harman getting away with this nonsense, quit the rubbish carbon based backing paper and reformulate it already. I'll pay 25 cents as long as you fix it.

I've had backing-paper issues with Kodak and Fomapan as well. While not an excuse, this issue seems to be an industry issue rather than specific to any given enterprise.

 

[Pieter12]

It's all within Harman's control. I'm sure if they really want this taken care of, they can put an awful lot of pressure on the backing papermaker. That's how it's done. Harman tells them to fix it or else. That should get something stirring.

What if there is no "or else?" It's not like there are that many paper mills making backing paper, or middlemen transforming a mill's output into backing paper. Backing paper obviously has to have a set of very special specifications, and as a small market most probably contributes significantly to the cost of making 120 roll film. There is probably more money to be made making toilet paper than photographic backing paper.

 

[removedacct1]

It's all within Harman's control. I'm sure if they really want this taken care of, they can put an awful lot of pressure on the backing papermaker. That's how it's done. Harman tells them to fix it or else. That should get something stirring.

Since there's probably now only one manufacturer of backing paper, Ilford could easily find themselves in a position where they got NO backing paper to continue manufacture of 120 with. Put too much pressure on a manufacturer and they could easily say "fine, get someone else to do it then". Be careful what you ask for.

 

[MattKing]

When Eastman Kodak's backing paper + ink + film emulsion problems were at their height, no one could figure out what exactly was causing them nor how to fix them.
Not Eastman Kodak, not the paper manufacturer, not the printer. All the parties tried to find solutions within their areas of knowledge and expertise.
Eastman Kodak nearly stopped making 120 film entirely because of them.
Many, many, many things were tried, without success.
The current Kodak solution appears to be a closely held trade secret.
With its knowledge arising from Eastman Kodak's primary business - commercial printing systems - and its somewhat larger size, Eastman Kodak has/had certain advantages that Harman does not have.
This is not a problem that is straightforward or easy to solve!