Very strange Kodak Numbers showing up inside actual negatives?! Pictures inside!

[markbarendt]

I am such a brain dead idiot. Once I finished my move to the US i restocked my film supply and what did I buy? You guessed it, TMAX 400. How could I not remember this issue? My last 5 rolls of film in China were all ruined by this number problem and what do I do? But into the problem all over again. I can't believe how stupid I am to have bought 20 rolls of TMAX 400.

I'll pay you $20 plus actual cost for USPS shipping, send me that bad nasty TMax and your problem will be solved.

 

[Prof_Pixel]

Remember Occam's razor: "the simplest explanation is usually the correct one"

In this case, the simplest explanation is photo active ink which would result in a dark image on the processed film that had been in close contact with that ink.

 

[pentaxuser]

Anyone outside of the U.S. had this happen? I appreciate we know of one in China.

pentaxuser

 

[Ken Nadvornick]

In failure analysis one should never eliminate possibilities without evidence. It's usually not the fault of variables one knows about. It's usually the fault of the variables one doesn't know about. Or never considered as valid candidate variables in the first place. The problem is a problem precisely because unexpected things happened, so best to look at everything before dismissing anything.

..

 

[AgX]

Remember Occam's razor: "the simplest explanation is usually the correct one"

In this case, the simplest explanation is photo active ink which would result in a dark image on the processed film that had been in close contact with that ink.

And that is a known issue with other backing papers.

 

[removed account4]

moodlover

nice photographs ( even though the number is there )

 

[Prof_Pixel]

And that is a known issue with other backing papers.

Yup!

 

[Prof_Pixel]

The problem is a problem precisely because unexpected things happened, so best to look at everything before dismissing anything.

Then I suppose we can't rule out space aliens.

Simple is the best place to start.

 

[Ken Nadvornick]

Then I suppose we can't rule out space aliens.

Simple is the best place to start.

It's not that simple isn't always the best place to start. It's that simple isn't always the first place to stop.



Ken

 

[Lachlan Young]

Then I suppose we can't rule out space aliens.

Simple is the best place to start.

ie, what sort of level of humidity was the material kept in before, during & after exposure...

Also, why has only TMY been affected? I'd assume the backing paper is the same across all 120 products.

 

[removed account4]

according to the manufacturer they believe it might have been due to extreme heat
( what i was told during a phone call i made to them at the time of the other thread )

they couldn't be certain unless they were sent the film, and backing paper to
do tests and examine the product ... i don't think they were sent anything but scans of the issue ...

 

[MattKing]

according to the manufacturer they believe it might have been due to extreme heat
( what i was told during a phone call i made to them at the time of the other thread )

This is consistent with the email response I received from Kodak.

 

[Arnaud]

I've seen something similar on a Portra 400 roll I shot this summer. There are stains on the edges of the film and they bleed on 2 or 3 frames. On the surface of the film affected by the stains, you can read the text from the backing paper (I'm sorry I can't attach an image yet, nor link to one, as this is my first post). On one on the bad frames, the sky is partially stained ; the stain is lighter than the unstained sky, and the letters from the backing paper have the density of the unstained sky (they're darker than the surrounding stain, as if the film hadn't been stained where it was in contact with the ink). So it looks rather different from the OP picture, where the letters appear lighter.

The film was fresh when I shot it, but the humidity was high (seaside) and the lab might have mishandled the film (it also had scratches, and even traces of glue on the emulsion side...). I've shot a few rolls of T-Max 400 and Portra 400 in the same conditions (the color films being processed by the same lab), and they all came out fine. All in all I'm not sure what caused the issue.

 

[Sirius Glass]

Welcome to APUG

 

[ignatiu5]

I am such a brain dead idiot. Once I finished my move to the US i restocked my film supply and what did I buy? You guessed it, TMAX 400. How could I not remember this issue? My last 5 rolls of film in China were all ruined by this number problem and what do I do? Buy into the problem all over again. I can't believe how stupid I am to have bought 20 rolls of TMAX 400.

Perhaps you could shoot a test roll of your 20 (assuming they're all from the same lot). If it's unaffected, you're golden. If the same problem pops up, ask Kodak for a replacement of something different. I asked for and received an equivalent number of rolls of Tri-X to replace the defective TMAX400.

 

[ChristopherCoy]

..

 

[Raphael]

Remind me my own problem, with a different film...

(there was a url link here which no longer exists)

What about TMax 400 near IR sensibility ?

 

[moodlover]

Another completely different session of mine with T-MAX 400 film:

sigh, im not passing these rolls through x-rays/IR, putting these rolls through extreme heat or cold, or even wrapping them too tightly...this is kind of crazy to see in two totally different sessions!

 

[MattKing]

Another completely different session of mine with T-MAX 400 film:

sigh, im not passing these rolls through x-rays/IR, putting these rolls through extreme heat or cold, or even wrapping them too tightly...this is kind of crazy to see in two totally different sessions!

But who knows how the film was handled before you got it.

I repeat my post from the earlier thread:

Originally Posted by MattKing (there was a url link here which no longer exists)
I sent a link to this thread to the email on Kodak Alaris' Professional Film web page.



And here is the response:

Dear Mr. King,

This problem occurs when print from the backing paper transfers to the emulsion surface of the film. For that to happen, the affected rolls would have to be subjected to extremely high heat, and needless to say, obviously not in accordance with our standard guidelines for shipping / storage.

Please ask the photographer to contact me directly via email, and I will make arrangements to replace his film.

Thanks,


Thomas J. Mooney | Film Capture Business Manager
Kodak Alaris Inc., 2400 Mount Read Blvd., Rochester, NY 14615-03020

Profilm@kodakalaris.com

www.kodakalaris.com

Information contained in this e-mail transmission may be privileged, confidential and covered by the Electronic Communications Privacy Act, 18 U.S.C. Sections 2510-2521. If you have received this e-mail transmission in error, please
notify us immediately by return email and delete the message from your system without reading, forwarding or copying it.

The email I received had Mr. Mooney's direct email and office telephone numbers. I am uncomfortable including them in this post, and have substituted the general email (Profilm@kodakalaris.com) that I used initially to contact them. If anyone with a film problem like the OP wishes to have Mr. Mooney's direct email, for this purpose, just contact me by PM and I will share it.

 

[AgX]

But who knows how the film was handled before you got it.

The sale-chain is part of Kodak Alaris' business. Films sold in bad state to the customer in the end will not be sold at all.

 

[RattyMouse]

But who knows how the film was handled before you got it.

We have seen enough TMAX 400 go bad from locations all over the world to know that clearly this is Kodak's problem. They either have a problem with their product, or they have no clue on how poor their distribution systems is. Or both.

The film I bought in China that was covered with numbers was new stock, not old.

Has any of my Fuji 120 film showed up with numbers? Not a single time (and I shoot waaay more Fuji film than Kodak, so the odds would be against Fuji).

Has any of my Ilford 120 film shown numbers? Nope.

It's Kodak.

Guess which film I won't be buying anymore?

 

[JW PHOTO]

according to the manufacturer they believe it might have been due to extreme heat
( what i was told during a phone call i made to them at the time of the other thread )

they couldn't be certain unless they were sent the film, and backing paper to
do tests and examine the product ... i don't think they were sent anything but scans of the issue ...

That's it! That's it! That's it! Kodak says it's due to high heat or might be due to high heat. We've never heard of this problem with TMY2 before so it's the perfect proof that the theory of global warming is not just a theory, but a fact. The numbers prove it. Of course it could be something else? Like maybe Kodak did something different??? We've had the same problem with Shanghai GP3 as to the numbers bleeding into the emulsion. Hmmmmm! Maybe Kodak is now buying its backing paper from China on the cheap? All I know is I won't be buying any TMY2 until I'm sure it's free of this problem or unless they start making it in 220, which is not very likely. Nobody likes admitting they've made a mistake and Kodak is no exception. John W

 

[MattKing]

We have seen enough TMAX 400 go bad from locations all over the world to know that clearly this is Kodak's problem. They either have a problem with their product, or they have no clue on how poor their distribution systems is. Or both.

The film I bought in China that was covered with numbers was new stock, not old.

Has any of my Fuji 120 film showed up with numbers? Not a single time (and I shoot waaay more Fuji film than Kodak, so the odds would be against Fuji).

Has any of my Ilford 120 film shown numbers? Nope.

It's Kodak.

Guess which film I won't be buying anymore?

My local store buys some of their Kodak product from B & H because, even with shipping and importation, it is cheaper for them to pay retail to B & H than it is to buy wholesale from the authorized Canadian distributor.

All it would have taken is for one delivery to B&H to be compromised and the effects could have been felt around the world.

 

[RattyMouse]

My local store buys some of their Kodak product from B & H because, even with shipping and importation, it is cheaper for them to pay retail to B & H than it is to buy wholesale from the authorized Canadian distributor.

All it would have taken is for one delivery to B&H to be compromised and the effects could have been felt around the world.

Kodak is responsible for that failure.

My company sells 90% of its products through distribution. We take responsibility for EVER drum of product we sell. If it fails at the customer's site, we start a corrective action that insures that failure mode is corrected and does not happen again. If the distributer caused the failure, then they either fix the problem or they are no longer a distributer.



Kodak should be working non stop right now because clearly they have a big problem.

 

[AgX]

Kodak is responsible for that failure.

What Kodak ?
Kodak Alaris or Kodak?


The new set-up for still films further complicated things.