I chuckled at the title of the thread...After reading many threads, and having the problem myself, I don't think it is "strange" that this film has banding issues.
Mike
Hello everybody!
I have used ADOX CHS 25, 50 and 100 for about a year now, and i have never experienced any of the troubles you guys are reporting here!. It is true that the emulsion is very easy schratched when wet, but apart from that, i like the films very much, and at half the price of Illford or Kodak...
Maybe i just never noticed this.... I may have to inspect some old negatives one day
How do they do that???. Do they turn on the light and make visual inspections??This kind of defect would never occur with a Kodak manufactured film since they inspect every square mm for defects. Something to think about.
Or maybe they make a test-development of every sheet. That can explain why one of my friends got a double exposure on one of his sheets of 4x5 TMAX100.
Just kidding - of course there is a reason why Kodak and Ilford are priced so much higher than ADOX. QC may be one of them....
Regards
Per
I imagine that they would inspect the film with infra-red goggles in an infra-red lit room. Some people develop by inspection this way.
YouTube Channel: https://www.youtube.com/user/andy8x10
Flickr Site: https://www.flickr.com/photos/62974341@N02/
Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/andrew.oneill.artist/
At leas ADOX labelled films has better QC than original Efke's. I don't know what factory was used for Adox Pan 25, but old and poorly maintained machines brings instantly Efke/Fotokemika to my mind. I only know that 135 (and perhaps 120) formats are (was?) made by Filmotec. But a sheet film, I don't know.
I have had a lot of problems with Efke's IR820 film, but luckily none with Adox CHS Art series, which are just relabelled Efke PL25, PL50 and PL100 films.
By the way, Efke/Fotokemika doesn't react for any problem reports and queries. The one reason for buying Adox labelled film instead.
Jukka Vuokko
Flickr
I don't know... for me either a film company has or doesn't have QA issues.
I don't want to take chances on "maybe" this batch is OK, I can make enough mistakes on my own, I'll stick with Kodak 120mm and Ilford 4x5.
Mike
Nonsense. All film companies, as all other manufacturers, have QA issues. Kodak doesn't put that defective replacement notice on every box of film for fun, you know ("This film will be replaced if defective in manufacture, labeling, or packaging...").
What matters is how they control those issues. Can they catch a problem before it gets to the field? If not, what remedies are available to them to help out an affected customer?
Well Robert I know that, QA for a customer is only important one one level. Foma/Efke could throw away 90% of their product at the factory and as long as none of it reaches the shelf a lot of people would use it.
They may only have a problem with 30% of their product, but if all of it reaches the shelf it's a big problem.
We are consumers here so QA at the shelf is what most of us are worried/concerned about.
Sorry you didn't get that.
Mike
Some things not quite right here because on one hand there's Adox/EFKE CHS 25, 50 & 100 and then this other film coated at a plant that no longer exists.
The EFKE plant is still making & coating films which have never been sold as Adox Pan, so this one was from another manufacturer.
Now Foma had two coating plants, the former Foton plant in Poland as well as their main Czech factory, or it may have been from a decommissions Agfa facility - which is more likely.
EFKE is not Adox, athough their films are sold under that brand name by Fotoimpex, but so are films from a few other manufacturers.
Ian
Isnt Adox Pan 25 just rebranded Rollei Pan 25? From the film I have used, they have exactly the same characteristics.
Bookmarks