• Welcome to Photrio!
    Registration is fast and free. Join today to unlock search, see fewer ads, and access all forum features.
    Click here to sign up

2 bulk loading questions

Wet Paterson reels, even if only slightly damp, in the bearings, are a pain, IMO, and a good reason to use steel, which is faster to load, also IMO.
 
I suspect the difference is that the stainless steel reels slide within the cannister during agitation while the Paterson reels are held in place by the center spindle and don't move much. I was quite amazed that the film developed and fixed properly. Other than the static marks, the film developed perfectly.
 
Wet Paterson reels, even if only slightly damp, in the bearings, are a pain, IMO, and a good reason to use steel, which is faster to load, also IMO.

Your opinion and mine differ here. For 35mm, there isn't much difference for me, but for 120, there's no question that a Paterson type plastic reel is easier to start and faster to load.
 
Wet Paterson reels, even if only slightly damp, in the bearings, are a pain, IMO, and a good reason to use steel, which is faster to load, also IMO.
Well, the Paterson tank was a gift from a very kind forum user and before that I had a Yankee Clipper that was... believe it or nor, somewhat easier to load for 35, though much harder to load for 120. No bearings.