Will Kodak Alaris refund the test roll and processing costs?
I've got 2 pro-packs of possibly affected film, and Kodak's response was to try a test roll, and if it showed problems they would replace the film. However, I don't know that one successful film will mean that the rest are unaffected. I don't know about Matt, but initially I was thinking of doing the test, but the reality is I wouldn't be able to trust the remaining rolls, so I'll probably request a replacement.
Will Kodak Alaris refund the test roll and processing costs?
Then what do you say the causal factors are? Kodak said heat exposure and changed the paper/ink. Kodak admits to more than just heat. What other causal factors do you believe are in play, and why? What do you believe is the other evidence not being acknowledged?I don't think anyone is denying the possibility that environmental
factors are triggering the fault. What I'm talking about is people using that possibility as an excuse for the problem.
yes it's probably pointless debating where the fault lay given the paper has now been changed.
If you prefer TMY-2 (as I do) it's quite easy to check batches to ensure they aren't affected.
Hear HearThe simple solution, it seems to me, is now the faulty batches are known, Kodak makes sure its stockists know those numbers and are asked to return those rolls. Should any of the batches have been sold the stockists should be told to replace them with no questions asked.
Anything less than the above may save Kodak some money in the short term but is liable to damage its reputation to an extent that far outweighs any saving.
Maybe Kodak has instituted such steps but it isn't clear to me what Kodak's position is in terms of the faulty or potentially faulty batches.
pentaxuser
The simple solution, it seems to me, is now the faulty batches are known, Kodak makes sure its stockists know those numbers and are asked to return those rolls. Should any of the batches have been sold the stockists should be told to replace them with no questions asked.
Anything less than the above may save Kodak some money in the short term but is liable to damage its reputation to an extent that far outweighs any saving.
Maybe Kodak has instituted such steps but it isn't clear to me what Kodak's position is in terms of the faulty or potentially faulty batches.
pentaxuser
I think this makes a lot of sense, and if I were a Kodak film customer it's what I'd like to see done too.
If they let potentially damaged film sit around, and just wait for them to get sold, which would increase the amount of bad press they get as a result, would be completely false economy. It's best to simply have the films returned and replaced.
It occurs to me that Kodak Alarms, Eastman Kodak and the backing paper supplier might just be stuck in that hell-hole known as "possible insurance claim" - where an admission of liability without insurer's consent results in a denial of coverage.
The simple solution, it seems to me, is now the faulty batches are known, Kodak makes sure its stockists know those numbers and are asked to return those rolls. Should any of the batches have been sold the stockists should be told to replace them with no questions asked.
Anything less than the above may save Kodak some money in the short term but is liable to damage its reputation to an extent that far outweighs any saving.
Maybe Kodak has instituted such steps but it isn't clear to me what Kodak's position is in terms of the faulty or potentially faulty batches.
pentaxuser
Which Kodak? The manufacturer, or the entity that markets the film?I think in this day and age it's impossible to tell what the full scenario is, and I suspect we will never know. All the same, I hope Kodak decides to do the right thing and limit the amount of damage to themselves, as well as their current and future customers by calling the faulty film home and replacing it, not just to customers but also to dealers and stores.
Since there are no public announcements from Kodak we can be pretty certain that customers are being left to find this problem on their own.
Which Kodak? The manufacturer, or the entity that markets the film?
I ask, because that may be another part of the problem.
Which Kodak? The manufacturer, or the entity that markets the film?
I ask, because that may be another part of the problem.
While this may be legally true, it doesn't help Kodak Alaris much if Eastman Kodak doesn't agree with them about a solution. Its not as if Kodak Alaris can go elsewhere to buy Kodak film.Kodak Alaris is, in this case, the manufacturer. The fact that they contract with Kodak to physically manufacture the film is between them.
Take your car for example. If a component fails under warranty, do you make your claim to Toyota or to whatever company made that component for Toyota?
While this may be legally true, it doesn't help Kodak Alaris much if Eastman Kodak doesn't agree with them about a solution. Its not as if Kodak Alaris can go elsewhere to buy Kodak film.
That attitude does not help some one shooting their sisters wedding in mono, when (s)he gets 12 sets of negs back with format numbers.I'm hedging on the fact that since this is your track record of negativity which plays like a rings of planet Saturn sized 33 LP, you are the only one who would even think like this.
I on the other hand, know for reasons I simply won't discuss here, that they are still figuring out what to do beyond what they have been doing already and that is replacing film on a as needed basis.
Yes, this is a mess and Kodak needs to step up pretty soon with a much broader scope game plan that includes how to deal with suspect stock sitting on retailer shelves. I think both Kodak and users of the products were hoping that it would be limited to small portions of one or two emulsion numbers but we now have the larger issues at hand.
And by the way, this kind of negative press affects ALL makers of film, it's the way that the internet works, if it bleeds, it leads and then the lines of something as controversial as who is still making film in 2016 become rather blurred.
I'm hedging on the fact that since this is your track record of negativity which plays like a rings of planet Saturn sized 33 LP, you are the only one who would even think like this.
I on the other hand, know for reasons I simply won't discuss here, that they are still figuring out what to do beyond what they have been doing already and that is replacing film on a as needed basis.
Yes, this is a mess and Kodak needs to step up pretty soon with a much broader scope game plan that includes how to deal with suspect stock sitting on retailer shelves.
I think both Kodak and users of the products were hoping that it would be limited to small portions of one or two emulsion numbers but we now have the larger issues at hand.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?