Xray film hand rolled onto 120 backing paper: Kodak paper specifically is completely ruining the rolls but not ilford etc?

Andrew O'Neill said:

Can't help you with the backing paper issue, but I'm surprised that you are even able to roll this stuff, considering it's base is thicker, compared to 120 films...

Click to expand...

Crimeo said:

I am cutting down 36"x24" medical xray film and rolling it onto used 120 backing papers myself.

Whenever I use any of the Ilford or other brands with matte normalish paper types, it works great. Whenever I use the kodak gold style glossier 120 paper, the final developed roll is plastered with spots and gunk.

Obviously I can just avoid those papers, but I'd like to if possible know what on earth could be going on here. How is this not also affecting the original kodak films on those same rolls?

Click to expand...

Crimeo said:

It hurts my fingers a bit to hold it hard enough for it to not spring apart, but yeah you can do it. It just baaaarely fits under the flange without burning the edges with light. You gotta rubber band it to store and still pinch it hard while loading anything until it's all set up.

Click to expand...

MattKing said:

The films and backing papers are designed together, because backing paper induced problems are a result of the emulsion and the ink and the paper interacting with each other.
If you rerolled the Kodak films with Ilford backing paper, you would encounter problems.
If you rerolled Ilford film with Kodak backing paper you might encounter problems too.
The economies mean that none of the film manufacturers can afford to have separate and different backing papers for each of their film offerings, so the Kodak stuff has to work with black and white negative film, colour negative film, and colour slide film, of all the various types.
Most likely it costs the film manufacturers more for to buy the backing paper for each roll of film than it does to make the roll itself. Ilford has admitted that publicly.

Click to expand...