TMAX400 120 watermark defect - current status?

[MattKing]

Thanks Paul. I'll dump the Tmax 100.

Why not contact Kodak Alaris and request replacement?
profilm@kodakalaris.com

 

[Alan Edward Klein]

Thanks
I'll check with them.

 

[Roger Thoms]

Just experienced my first watermark defect, A015200, TMY-2. At least it falls in the group of emulsion numbers that are known to have problems. It is a little discouraging that Kodak is having problems with this.

Roger

 

[william wolfe]

Just received a replacement 'pro pack' of 5 rolls of film from Kodak. It's very nice of them to replace the film in question, but that doesn't help with the damaged negatives, but that's life I suppose.

Thanks to everyone who helped me so kindly with this issue! I really appreciate all the help. Here are a few prints (11X14 inch darkroom enlargements, not scans) from the effected batch. I then took iphone images of the prints, very low-tech I know.
I tried a very high contrast method to 'white out' areas where the watermark appeared. It worked in all but the 3rd image where you can still see 'Kodak' in the lower left of the print. I should mention that the old train car, the image that shows the watermark and the double (or triple) exposure were taken with a Holga 'toy camera'. That's why they're a little soft. The others were taken with my Pentax 645. Just so the differences are explained. Showing these images to friends, the high contrast 'look' is either loved or hated. Which is fine with me! It was really just an experiment anyway. I'm still knocking the rust off in the darkroom, as these are the first prints I've made in several years. Of course, it's also the first time I've shot film in years as well. Anyway, thanks again everyone!

 

[removedacct1]

If you know the film you have is from the affected batches, why would you continue to use it??

 

[william wolfe]

If you know the film you have is from the affected batches, why would you continue to use it??

I'm not sure that this question was directed to me, however, if it was, I didn't know the film was affected until it was processed. I only had the one 'pro' 5 pack and shot it all BEFORE getting any of it processed. So, I didn't know until after the fact. As I mentioned earlier, it was this issue that brought me to this page in the first place, I never even heard of this issue until I had the film developed. I hope that makes sense. I've since had additional rolls processed from a newer batch and it was totally fine.

 

[removedacct1]

I'm not sure that this question was directed to me, however, if it was, I didn't know the film was affected until it was processed. I only had the one 'pro' 5 pack and shot it all BEFORE getting any of it processed. So, I didn't know until after the fact. As I mentioned earlier, it was this issue that brought me to this page in the first place, I never even heard of this issue until I had the film developed. I hope that makes sense. I've since had additional rolls processed from a newer batch and it was totally fine.

No, William - it wasn't directed to you

 

[william wolfe]

No, William - it wasn't directed to you

Ok, sorry.

 

[Bill Burk]

william wolfe I can hardly see any Kodak watermarks in your prints. Wow what a lot of birds on those wires - fun pictures.

I’m looking forward to shooting some of the new stuff. Until I get ahold of some I’ll be shooting 35mm and 4x5

 

[william wolfe]

william wolfe I can hardly see any Kodak watermarks in your prints. Wow what a lot of birds on those wires - fun pictures.

I’m looking forward to shooting some of the new stuff. Until I get ahold of some I’ll be shooting 35mm and 4x5

Thanks! The only one that has it is the building with the arches across the front of it. The word kodak is in the lower left hand corner. These image samples are pretty small as they were emailed to my computer from my phone. They're just small samples. All of these had the watermark, but using this 'high contrast' method made it invisible. I know these prints aren't "normal" and they completely ignore the zone system of a black and white print, but this is the only way I could use the negatives without seeing the watermarks.

Yeah, there were actually a lot more birds than that! I used a tele lens, so I just got a portion of them.

 

[pentaxuser]

If you want to take part in a class action, please follow this link about Defective Kodak Tmax.

Has someone who calls himself rattymouse here on Photrio joined this class action yet ? Strangely enough it has suddenly struck me that I haven't seen much of rattymouse for quite a while. Has he left us?

pentaxuser

 

[winger]

Strangely enough it has suddenly struck me that I haven't seen much of rattymouse for quite a while. Has he left us?

Last seen Sep 2, 2018 according to his profile. He could have come here since then without logging in, though.

 

[JWMster]

...or couldn't he have simply chosen to NOT leave a message? View and not message?

 

[Sirius Glass]

His last series of post were critical about this website.

 

[mshchem]

Next Attorney General? ??

 

[Andrew O'Neill]

I think he was banned.

 

[removed account4]

...or couldn't he have simply chosen to NOT leave a message? View and not message?

Methinks that would be an impossibility. If he heard of the C-AL he would be handing out pitchforks and torches: I hope he is OK. He might be traveling? He has spent a lot of time with his family in the Far East &c. ...

 

[warden]

As a fine art photographer and photography tour guide I had so much misery with this - that i am shifting to Ilford. I have had it with Kodak hiding behind their liability limitations while selling their defective rolls. If you want to take part in a class action, please follow this link about Defective Kodak Tmax.

That's quite an introductory post. Good luck with your lawsuit, and welcome to Photrio.

 

[pentaxuser]

Last seen Sep 2, 2018 according to his profile. He could have come here since then without logging in, though.

I am still learning how Photrio works but it sounds as if

I think he was banned.

It is possible although apart from his visceral dislike of Kodak but I cannot immediately recall anything in the way of behaviour towards fellow members that might cause a ban. So, is this a "hunch" or is there evidence for this?

Thanks

pentaxuser

 

[Truzi]

Snip:

I am still learning how Photrio works...

Yes, sometimes it can be more mysterious than the Pyramids at Giza, lol.

If we search, there are a few threads (two, actually) that might be informative, such as this one:
https://www.photrio.com/forum/threa...cking-issue-and-ektachrome-100-update.155668/

 

[destroya]

mickeymouse, rattypig, whatever or whoever

hope he was banned. nothing but a troll and problem maker. He was banned from range finder forum, then signed up again under a diffrent name so he could continue to spread his hate. look for him to return soon, maybe under Ted Striker, which he now uses on RF forum

 

[Andrew O'Neill]

He kinda went off the rails when Fuji announced the end of Acros. It's just film, for crying out loud.
Anyways, I believe the watermark issue has been resolved and good on Kodak for getting to the bottom of it.

 

[pentaxuser]

look for him to return soon, maybe under Ted Striker, which he now uses on RF forum

I loved that film, especially Ted's adventures on the way to and then in the airport:. I saw an unexpected versatility to both Robert Stack, Lloyd Bridges and Lesley Nielsen as actors especially Lesley Nielsen whom I had only seen in straight small bit-part roles previously.


pentaxuser.

 

[removedacct1]

He kinda went off the rails when Fuji announced the end of Acros. It's just film, for crying out loud.
Anyways, I believe the watermark issue has been resolved and good on Kodak for getting to the bottom of it.

I found much of his ranting against Kodak to be histrionic and over the top. The moaning about the loss of Acros Neopan was equally exaggerated. I don't miss his nonsense.

 

[abruzzi]

I loved that film, especially Ted's adventures on the way to and then in the airport:. I saw an unexpected versatility to both Robert Stack, Lloyd Bridges and Lesley Nielsen as actors especially Lesley Nielsen whom I had only seen in straight small bit-part roles previously.

See if you can find the film "Zero Hour!" and watch it back to back with Airplane!. Its the film Airplane! was based on. Some of the biggest laugh lines in Airplane! are straight from Zero Hour! just made funny by the context or delivery like "We need to find someone who can not only fly this plane, but didn't have fish for dinner.". Zero Hour! include Sterling Hayden in the role reprised by Robert Stack.

(yes, both film have an exclamation in their title. I think the exclamation in Airplane! is a reference to the exclamation in Zero Hour!)