Yes....is there a contingent here who refuses to believe anything except Kodak's "malicious intent" to abuse and deceive their customers?...
Correct....I doubt there's anything I could say that would convince those folks otherwise...
Why? Because any one person's experience is 100% statistically meaningless.
I stopped a long time ago... and as Sal said it feels better. There are still too many unknowns for anyone other than perhaps Kodak to be certain what the exact causal factor is/was. We seem to have some insights into corrective action but even that knowledge is incomplete.Then I shall happily refrain from adding my experience to this discussion, since my remarks are "meaningless". I no longer care whether or not my personal experience with Kodak is seen as either constructive or in any way informative.
Or is there a contingent here who refuses to believe anything except Kodak's "malicious intent" to abuse and deceive their customers?
Bill:I'm going to do an experiment today. I have a theory based on an earlier test with a piece of the actual affected backing paper. I found the imprint ink is hydrophobic.
Through a line of armchair reasoning I believe a presoak might reduce or eliminate the marks.
I have two rolls of TMAX-400 from an affected batch ready to develop.
I will presoak one reel and then empty the tank, add the second reel to the tank and pour in the developer.
I'm sure my results will be statistically insignificant. But if my presoaked roll shows no marks and the "developer first" roll shows marks, you can bet I will be excited about it.
Well the presoaked roll did not show KODAK and the one that went straight to developer did.
I have one more roll to develop... so I could cut that in half and try MattKing's suggestion.
Well the presoaked roll did not show KODAK and the one that went straight to developer did.
I have one more roll to develop... so I could cut that in half and try MattKing's suggestion.
Ya know, after this fiasco, I wouldn't be surprised if Kodak simply stops selling 120 film altogether. It will be hard for them to win back former users after this betrayal.
From a scientific method perspective you are correct. Sample size needs to be increased too. But give Bill some credit for a credible demonstration that adds some information in a discussion that is chock full of assumptions, assertions, and not much else. I would assume that "Kodak", if they were really interested, would have done the "real experiment" already. Kudos to Bill for actually doing something in an attempt to answer a question on this topic. There are way too many unknowns... still.Nothing is proven until the same roll is processed two different ways. Until then, we are just speculating that the presoak is the solution.
From a scientific method perspective you are correct. Sample size needs to be increased too. But give Bill some credit for a credible demonstration that adds some information in a discussion that is chock full of assumptions, assertions, and not much else. I would assume that "Kodak", if they were really interested, would have done the "real experiment" already. Kudos to Bill for actually doing something in an attempt to answer a question on this topic. There are way too many unknowns... still.
I do give Bill credit for his effort, but his results so far do not yield any information. Only with a valid control can this test prove that presoaking is a possible solution to this defective film issue. I hope that he can continue his experiment and prove that this way forward works.
I also would have hoped that the brilliant scientists at Kodak would have already thought of this possible solution and tested it out thoroughly. But since Kodak won't communicate with their customers, we are left wondering and holding the bag with this continuing film fiasco.
It is pretty ridiculous and has gone on long enough.
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?