2 bulk loading questions

[eli griggs]

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.

 

[Wallendo]

That's incredible. I once struggled to get a commercial 36 exposure roll fully into a slightly wet paterson reel, to where it had only 3 or 4 inches outside the guides. It somehow came in contact with and stuck to the film on the outermost layer within the guide and there were undeveloped regions on both.

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.

 

[Donald Qualls]

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.

 

[RLangham]

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.