APS developing with Paterson tank and reels?

[loccdor]

Hey there,

My Uncle gave me some old film he had forgotten about to develop... there's two 35mm and one APS-C. Is there any trick to use to develop an APS-C on a standard Paterson reel or tank? Or some other method I could use? I don't want to buy new equipment for one roll of film. I've never developed APS-C.

Thanks

 

[film4Me]

I don't think so. The minimum size a Paterson reel accepts is 35mm and as far as I'm aware, it can't be used for APS film without cutting and shutting and gluing together precisely the size of APS width.

My solution required a different brand reel (Nebro) where a groove could be filed in the main shank to bring the movable half of the reel closer in to exactly the APS width. The movable half has a spring clip that sits in the newly filed groove. It was easy to do, but first I needed a Nebro reel.

 

[armadsen]

If you have a 3D printer (or have access to one e.g. at the library) there are designs out there for APS reels for Patterson tanks.

 

[thinkbrown]

My solution for this the one time I processed some APS was using a piece of junk 35mm film as a substrate. I taped the APS film back to back onto the center of the 35mm and then loaded that as normal.

 

[film4Me]

My solution for this the one time I processed some APS was using a piece of junk 35mm film as a substrate. I taped the APS film back to back onto the center of the 35mm and then loaded that as normal.

I learn something everyday ... great idea.

 

[mshchem]

Be careful. APS film, once processed was put back into the original plastic cassette. There's some sort of code that tells you that state of the film in the cassette.

APS was the stupidest thing Kodak (and Fuji) ever did!

 

[MattKing]

APS was the stupidest thing Kodak (and Fuji) ever did!

There are so many other candidates for that honour!
Actually not that stupid - it was just that it was entirely based on an assumption that appeared reasonable then, but turned out to be wrong .

 

[mshchem]

There are so many other candidates for that honour!
Actually not that stupid - it was just that it was entirely based on an assumption that appeared reasonable then, but turned out to be wrong .

Like many things big organizations or governments try. Good article in the Friday edition of the New York Times, Meta, (Facebook) losing tens of billions on "the metaverse" and stupid headsets and creepy glasses with hidden cameras. It sounds so similar to Kodak, who in the 90's and early 20th century had vast income from film that was spent on projects like APS.

Ai, the next great thing, step right up, make sure your private retirement account gets in on it. Until it disappears.

I seem to have once again veered off the topic.

I like the idea of the attachment of the APS to a strip of already processed 35mm film. Back to back.

 

[koraks]

one APS-C

I've removed the "-C" from the thread title to avoid confusion with digital. The film system is called just "APS", the "-C" suffix is one particular recording format/aspect ratio which later became used as a reference for the popular digital sensor size.

 

[foc]

APS was the stupidest thing Kodak (and Fuji) ever did!

I would disagree with that statement. I believe APS was a step forward in the film cartridge - amateur market. Remember new film formats had been introduced every decade since the 1960s. (126 -1963, 110 - 1972, disc - 1982, APS - 1996)

It was a joint venture with, Kodak, Fuji, Canon, Minolta & Nikon. I think the drop in cartage loading was simple and easy for the point & shoot market. If a used cartridge was put into the camera it was rejected. Customer didn't have to handle negatives. There were 3 print formats, C, H, P. I could go on............

From a labs point of view, APS was easly handled for processing. Reprints from negatives were very easily handled compared to 35mm negatives. I remember very positive comments from customers with APS cameras back in the late 1990s and early 2000s.

The only negative comments I remember were customers thinking the returned processed negatives in the film cartridge was a "Free Replacement Film" and they couldn't understand why the camera wouldn't accept the film.

Sorry for going off topic.

 

[Paul Howell]

My wife had a Kodak 126 SLR, made in Germany, later she got a point and shoot 35mm then an APS. Of the three she liked the 35mm point and shoot best in terms of quaility, but the 126 cassette was fool proof, set the film speed. She a Vivitar with 35mm 3.5 lens loading was not easy as with 126 but still easy. The APS was the easiest to use but limited her options for development. The paper she worked for had a color film processor but did not have an APS cassette and a re-attacher so she had to take the film to a one hour film processing shop. Even for newsprint APS negatives were hard to print. In the end she returned to her point and shoot.

 

[MattKing]

I've removed the "-C" from the thread title to avoid confusion with digital. The film system is called just "APS", the "-C" suffix is one particular recording format/aspect ratio which later became used as a reference for the popular digital sensor size.

I don't disagree with the edit, but it is probably important to realize that the other motivation behind APS was the reasonable assumption behind it - that there would be a gradual transition from film to digital, and that it would make sense to have a common frame/sensor size - APS/APS-C - going forward.
Of course, that reasonable assumption turned out to be entirely wrong!
For a little while, there were both film and digital cameras that shared the same sensor/frame size, for which the same lens line was a perfect match.
I actually have a Canon EF lens that was designed for the APS film and early Canon APS C digital cameras - the 22-44mm zoom. It is a very handy and relly compact lens that performs well.
It actually does a decent job with full frame film as well .
The Canon EF-S line of lenses arrived shortly afterward.

 

[mshchem]

The whole storing negatives in the cassette is stupid. Producing a new and dopey design for shops to deal with was dumb. Etc. I warned friends about this when it came out, still especially ladies were mesmerized by the sleek little Canon Elph and similar products.
Companies burned through money when they should have been preparing for the next wave.

 

[LenB]

It was great for photofinishing equipment manufacturers. I worked for Kodak when it was introduced, then back to Noritsu. We sold lots of machines. It was an insanely busy time.

I had a camera because I kind of needed one for testing equipment. It was not what was promised. That's for sure.

 

[loccdor]

Thanks everyone! I'll try the tape-to-35mm method. I'm not expecting anything amazing with color negative from the 90s, but hopefully I can at least avoid uneven development. Noted: APS, not APS-C.

 

[tezzasmall]

I've never seen one, so have not opened a APS film to see what it looks like inside the cartridge, but may be the easiest way would be to just 'see-saw' the film in a tray of developer etc.?

Terry S
UK

 

[koraks]

'see-saw' the film

Have you tried see-sawing a 1m50 length of film (or however long your typical roll of APS would be)? It's not really convenient I can tell you. It's tricky enough in full light to make it pass through a tray; in the dark it would be nigh impossible.

 

[tezzasmall]

Have you tried see-sawing a 1m50 length of film (or however long your typical roll of APS would be)?

Surprisingly, after viewing a dozen and a half plus websites, I can't find the actual length of an APS film anywhere!!!?! I'll therefore take your word for it Koraks.

Maybe the secret to developing an APS film using the see-saw method is to stand on the second step of a stepladder, in the dark of course?

Terry S
UK

 

[film4Me]

My APS film after I joined the developed pieces together, end for end, is 1m long.

It's not a paper thin film, so see-sawing it would not be a good proposition IMO. If you don't have a reel for it, you might be better off finding a long tray, over a meter long and hold the film down in the chemicals for the specified times, with rubber gloves on.

You may be able to construct two trays using some sort of long narrow frame and laying some plastic sheet in it, drooping down so it holds the developer, and the other tray, the fixer. Wash the film under the tap in between the dev and fix. Don't turn any lights on by mistake of course.

 

[koraks]

Maybe the secret to developing an APS film using the see-saw method is to stand on the second step of a stepladder, in the dark of course?

Haha, that made me chuckle! I would suggest - on one foot, too!