Kodak XTOL trade concern announcment

[Auer]

Xtol is an excellent developer, and in fact a superior developer for some film types. In my experience it preserves full film speed, produces very pleasing mid tones and doesn't allow hot highlights to build to unusable densities. It is definitely one of my favorite developers. I would suggest you try the EcoPro version of it at this time, given that Kodak Alaris is repeatedly having issues with the manufacture of their product. When and if K/A figures out how to consistently produce the original Xtol, then I will once again return to using it. But not yet.

Thank you.
I'll go with Eco Pro.

 

[Tom Kershaw]

Bellini eco film is also claimed to be a ‘liquid’ version of xtol. Would be interested to hear of any user experience.

This must be the most expensive black & white developer on the market. 7 GBP for a litre of working solution. https://ntphotoworks.com/product/bellinifoto-ecofilm-developer-liquid-xtol-500ml-for-1lt-stock-solution/
At equivalent dilution XTOL would be about 1.50 GBP per litre in the UK market.

 

[warden]

I've tried to be cool with this issue but now the "trade concern" starts to sound really wrong. It actually sounds like they try to hide what is the real problem. They have stated they have problem so a great way to make it even worse, is try to be more sneaky or secret about it. Why just not say "there was production error on these batches, we recall and replace all, sorries" ?

And now I have four bags within the "trade concerns" it starts to get a bit more serious. I have also almost 5l of mixed stock in bottles but I don't know what batch was it mixed from. Nice.

BTW if anyone gets response from "Kodak" then post here so we know if something is happening..

Please Adox, make Xtol replacement soon. Actually Adox please make replacement for everything

It is odd that they haven't mentioned what the problem is, I agree. Last time they said there was an Xtol underdevelopment issue (my words, I can't remember how they put it) but not this time.

It's also strange they they made the announcement on Facebook (where they have 34K followers) but haven't warned the larger Instagram community (85K followers).

 

[pentaxuser]

Fotoimpex on Fomadon Excel:

"Longevity of working solution 4 weeks. Please do not store longer, as this developer can suddenly turn over without a discolaration (similar to Xtol). It then does not develop at all, instead of a bit less."

Thanks AgX I feel that the above may have a lost something in translation or if not it puzzles me. I have difficulty believing that in a full container with no ingress of air Excel will only last 4 weeks. Kodak claims 6 months or about 26 weeks assuming calendar months if stored in full unopened bottles. From my experience of Xtol in a winebag which I am sure is not as good as full bottles with secure screw-tops then 6 months is very conservative. I cannot say that Fotoimpex is wrong as I have never used Excel but at least it would be nice to know if this is Fotoimpex's own statement and has not come from anything Foma has stated to Fotoimpex and secondly if this 4 weeks is for an unopened container of stock solution

Frankly if Fotoimpex is right about 4 weeks then unless you have a stock of exposed films ready for development or want to use it a stock solution for 120 films and dump it after one use so it only does 2 x 120 films ( 500ml per film) then yes it represents a very poor developer in longevity and a very expensive one as well

However you are right that if this translation is correct then Excel does exhibit sudden death after 4 weeks without even the indication that Xtol gives which is that of some deterioration to a pale straw colour which is this not sudden death but as I say indicates only some deterioration which may or may not be compensated for by extra development time. It is that part I have put into bold script that is the unknown for me but on some film that I will expose on shots that do not matter I will attempt to test this

pentaxuser

 

[jvo]

I wonder what the problem is...

really? it's a "trade concern", everybody knows what that is!!!! (actually corporate PR speak for "maybe they'll blame somebody else!")

very sad - the last dodge of very irresponsible executive behavior for a once proud name.

 

[radiant]

It is odd that they haven't mentioned what the problem is, I agree. Last time they said there was an Xtol underdevelopment issue (my words, I can't remember how they put it) but not this time.

It's also strange they they made the announcement on Facebook (where they have 34K followers) but haven't warned the larger Instagram community (85K followers).

Adox / Lina Bessonova video had about the underdevelopment https://www.photrio.com/forum/threads/comment-about-xtol-in-adox-lina-bessonova-video.179546/ - could this "trade concern" have something to do with this?

About just posting to FB: oh man I hate FB. Why information is nowadays only in some stupid web service.. Internet has become handicapped. But I guess they knew what shitstorm this will raise so no need to post it elsewhere

 

[AgX]

Thanks AgX I feel that the above may have a lost something in translation

I stuck to the original german text as much as possible and am sure I got it right contentwise.

 

[AgX]

I repeatedly raised that Facebook issue. If they reach people via Facebook, that is good. But not stating such at their own website too is bad. Their website is free accesible for most people in the world, what cannot be said for Facebook. I myself not being a member at Facebook often have difficulties accessing even parts of their sites, in the past some had been completely unaccesible for non members for many days.

 

[warden]

Adox / Lina Bessonova video had about the underdevelopment https://www.photrio.com/forum/threads/comment-about-xtol-in-adox-lina-bessonova-video.179546/ - could this "trade concern" have something to do with this?

About just posting to FB: oh man I hate FB. Why information is nowadays only in some stupid web service.. Internet has become handicapped. But I guess they knew what shitstorm this will raise so no need to post it elsewhere

I don’t have any facts about the trade concern but I won’t be surprised if it’s underdevelopment from some cause. Significant underdevelopment is the symptom that I reported and my problem came from one of the bad batches. I know that’s just one data point but still.

I hope when they come back to the office after the holiday they use every means at their disposal to warn people that are about to ruin their photographs with bad chemistry. Posting a message on Facebook is not nearly enough.

 

[pentaxuser]

I stuck to the original german text as much as possible and am sure I got it right contentwise.

I fear you got the translation correct It is just that the translation makes Xtol look like a very superior product in comparison with Excel. Who would want to buy a developer that has a maximum life of only 4 weeks as a stock solution in an unopened bottle if that is what Fotoimpex means? Not me certainly. If Fotoimpex does not mean this then it need to say exactly what it does mean.
I really do have difficulty in believing that Excel has to be used or dumped after 4 weeks

The problem on Photrio is that we seem to have so few who have used it and can say how long its working life is. Arcadia4 had good experience but as one shot and hasn't mentioned if it was used in less or more than 4 weeks or if one shot was stock or diluted 1+1. Was this 135 fllm or 120? At stock and then dumped and if it is for 120 films then Excel becomes expensive but is likely to last for its alleged 4 weeks All you have to do is wait until you have exposed 2 x 120 films and at stock you can use it in one session or say 2 sessions in 2 days at most but at a cost

pentaxuser

 

[removedacct1]

Significant underdevelopment is the symptom that I reported and my problem came from one of the bad batches. I know that’s just one data point but still.

I had two packages of Xtol from one of those recalled batches, which I mixed up about 6 weeks ago, and used it on a few rolls the same day. They came out surprisingly thin. I checked my development time for that film and I was correct, so I concluded that it was yet another bad batch. Turns out I was correct.
Waiting to get a reply from K/A

 

[petrk]

I use Fomadon Excel in a replenished mode, usually more than year from an original stock. I hear exactly the same complaints about Excel as they say about xtol. sudden death for example. But these are often situations that cannot be well traced back to the real cause. Or decrease in activity. Not my experience fortunately. At least nothing unusual happened to me after about 6 years of working with Excel. I cannot support Fotoimpex's recommendation for dumping Excel after a short time. however, caution is necessary, so I test for Excel activity before each development. I just act exactly like I have an Xtol.

 

[Tom Kershaw]

I use Fomadon Excel in a replenished mode, usually more than year from an original stock.

To confirm, Fomadon Excel can be used like for like as XTOL, i.e. self replenishing?

 

[petrk]

Hi Tom, I am not alone in this. I do use Excel replenished for third year now. In my experience yes, it is possible.
Edit: in my opinion, other copies of the original xtol can be used in this way too.

 

[Arcadia4]

To answer @pentaxuser post above yes i use Fomadon excel in 1+1 one shot basis with 135 or 120. I tend to process on a batch basis over a couple of evenings when i ve accumulated a few films to process, so i dont keep the stock longer than a month.

 

[Tom Taylor]

I just finished processing for alternative printing four 8x10 Fuji Acos negatives using Kodak Xtol developer which I mixed yesterday using distilled water and all four were uniformly thin including the rebates notwithstanding that the time in the developer was 22.5 minutes. The negatives were shot with different lens on different days using a Sekonic L758-dr light meter to determine exposure. The Kodak catalogue number is 105 8338 with a manufacture date of 2019/08/09 and expiration date of 2022-08.

 

[pentaxuser]

To answer @pentaxuser post above yes i use Fomadon excel in 1+1 one shot basis with 135 or 120. I tend to process on a batch basis over a couple of evenings when i ve accumulated a few films to process, so i dont keep the stock longer than a month.

Thanks for this. So that 4 x120 and 8 x135? Thus things look brighter already in terms of Excel use. We appear to have a conversation going now on whether Excel offers a genuine alternative to Xtol and in the crucial area of its longevity. I don't think its ability in terms of its Xtol developing properties, shall we say, has ever been in doubt. Simply it was its rather alarming short shelf life as stock that was worrying

I don't think your use of it as a one shot and in less than a month can cast much light on this. Not your fault of course. However we are gathering posts that strongly suggest it (a) last much longer than 4 weeks and can be used via the replenishment route

In the Xtol paper Kodak gives instructions on an Ilford kind of replenishment. I say Ilford simply because Microphen uses just such a method which is use and pour back into the 1L of stock adding increased development as the number of films developed increase.

What Kodak say about Xtol is that 1L is capable of developing 15 films per litre of stock with no increase in time over the first 5 films then an increase of 15 percent over normal dev time from films 6-10 then finally another 15 % from films 11-15. Now this is remarkable both in terms of the number of films and relatively modest dev time increase.

While Excel may not manage this kind of economy can anyone say if they have tried this method and if so did they use the Kodak times and at what point did they decide to dump the 1L stock as becoming too risky to use for their own peace of mind?

Thanks all and to any future user who cares to contribute

pentaxuser

 

[mshchem]

As part of my outreach to the contacts I have, I specifically requested permission to share the response. My practice is not to disclose emails unless I have that.
"Trade concern" could be something as stupid as there being packages out there with two bags of Part A and no Part B.
Who knows!
The Facebook announcement smacks of what happens when the last person in the public relations office before leaving for Christmas is asked to post something.
Grrr

 

[Craig]

Are the affected batches fairly new production? Those bags look nothing like then I ones I have in stock, and the catalogue number of the ones I have is 5160361.

 

[runswithsizzers]

I reported what I thought might be a development problem <here> Those results were from one of the batches of Xtol listed as having a "trade Concern"

In my case, the first roll from a fresh batch of Xtol developed normally, but a few days later a second roll was thin, with very thin rebates.

 

[Adrian Bacon]

https://www.facebook.com/kodakprofessional/posts/149270453656184

"If you have XTOL Catalog #1058338 with the following Date Codes: 2019/10/07, 2019/12/19, 2020/02/25, 2020/02/26, 2020/02/27, we are facing a trade concern with these batches and would like to get this taken care of for you.
Please email us at ProPaperChem@kodakalaris.com with your date code information and our team will respond with the proper next steps on this product.
We apologize for any inconvenience or confusion this may have caused and thank you for your understanding."

As much as I like XTOL and have a huge amount of time invested in working out development times for a bunch of films for replenished XTOL, having one recall is borderline unacceptable, more than once in a reasonably rapid succession is very troublesome. Maybe it's time to start evaluating Ilford DD for use in my lab. I really don't want to have to, but, I'm just not seeing XTOL as a reliable long term thing right now. For me, it *has* to be reliable.

 

[Tom Taylor]

I sent an email to Kodak at the address above and will post any reply here. In the meantime I'm going to try Ilford ID-11.

 

[Jon Buffington]

Good luck on a reply. I am awaiting well over a week for my reply to d76 issue (both batches I have bought this year are bad). All hear in my in box is crickets. Almost ordered XTOL last week with a bulk purchase from Freestyle but very glad I didn't now. Will see how there house brand d76 stuff works. Back to my NOS 25 year old bottle of hc110 until it runs out.

 

[wyofilm]

The Facebook announcement smacks of what happens when the last person in the public relations office before leaving for Christmas is asked to post something.

I think that you are right, which demonstrates a lack of professionalism. They are not serious.

 

[MattKing]

I think they are very serious.
I'm concerned that public relations is now coming from Sino Promise, not the former Kodak Alaris people.