220 B&W - What to do?

K-G · Oct 25, 2010

Some time ago I wrote about the possibility to make your own 220-rolls of b&w film if the film was available in bulk rolls. I sent a question to Mirko Böddecker at ADOX and Simon R Galley at Ilford/Harman about the possibility to supply such rolls. I have received an answer from Mirko that is a bit discouraging even if it seems possible to get the film. I have a feeling that I have to be carefull with the selection of motives for my three last rolls of txp-320 in 220 size. I enclose the corespondence with Mirko under the dotted line. Please excuse the cut and paste technique, but I could not find out how to link his answer directly to this reply. After all I am analog.
Best regards

Karl-Gustaf

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Re: B&W 120/220-type film in bulk rolls.
Originally Posted by K-G
Dear Mirko and Simon !
I am sending you this question as you are representatives at APUG for two of the most devoted B&W material suppliers, ADOX and ILFORD. Presently a thread is active on APUG concerning the availability of B&W film in 220 size. As I , and most other participants, understand, it is no longer possible to manufacture this type of film at a reasonable profit. I made a suggestion myself that if 120/220 type film would be available in long rolls ( like 100 feet rolls for 135 size film ) each user could roll up the 220 rolls him or herself.
I think empty spools and backing paper would be a minor problem in comparison to film availability. My question is if anyone of you could think of supplying a B&W film in long rolls and also what quantities would be necessary to realize such a product.
I would very much appreciate an answer from you and if it is no problem for you I would like to forward your answers to the APUG-thread.
Best regards from

Karl-Gustaf Hellqvist ,
Göteborg , Sweden

Dear Karl-Gustav,

thank you for your message.
As I am only logging into APUG when I have time this is not always the fastest way to contact me.
It is better to write a regular email to info@adox.de

Supplying 61,5mm slittings is no problem at all but I don´t share your enthusiasm about rolling 220 film yourself.
The film also needs a spacial back coating against microscratches from the pressure plate. This we cannot provide because 120 film does not have/need this.

Kind regards,

Mirko

Ektagraphic · Oct 25, 2010

Maybe they could coat something and talk Kodak or Fuji into rolling it for them or maybe the Agfa/Rollei have a 220 machine?

K-G · Oct 26, 2010

I don't think the demand for 220-size b&w film is strong enough to support an extra coating run as that would require quite a lot of film. As far as I know there are only two 220-packing machines in operation today, one at Kodak and one at Fuji. Ilford's obviously broke down a couple of years ago and from what I have read, it is beyond repair. I certainly hope I am wrong, but I have a feeling that I will have to start learning the best procedure for using 120-film in my Hasselblad A-24 back.
Best regards

Karl-Gustaf

Ektagraphic · Oct 26, 2010

You could always shoot color in your A-24...Did Agfa ever offer 220?

K-G · Oct 26, 2010

Thanks for your sugestion but nowadays I shoot more than 95% in b&w. Besides, if I would come with a 220 colour roll to my local lab, I am afraid that would create a caos.
I have never heard of any 220 film of any type from Agfa, but I am not quite sure.
I have tested loading an outdated 120-film in the A-24 back and when looking directly at the film emulsion side in the frame of the back , it seems like all 12 exposures are on the film. In due time I will make a real test to see what it looks like.
In the mean time, use whatever film is available to save the market.
Karl-Gustaf

AgX · Oct 26, 2010

Ektagraphic said:
...Did Agfa ever offer 220?

Agfa did offer films in type 220 until the sale of their consumer range.

Reinhold · Oct 26, 2010

I just finished processing the last nine rolls of my Ilford FP4+.
It was a sad day for me knowing that there's no more to be had...

Just in case, I have been saving the paper leaders and trailers.
(I believe Ilford calls them the "tops & tails")
They have the registration marks that determine where the film is taped onto the paper relative to the "start" mark.

I too have been thinking of begging Ilford to sell bulk film.
I've been sketching up some ideas for a simple tabletop spooler.

Now, if only we would get some hopeful words from Simon...

Reinhold

www.classicBWphoto.com

Simon R Galley · Oct 27, 2010

Dear All,

No hopeful words I am afraid.

Firstly we have not made 220 film for over 5 years, we have been very open as to our reasons for not replacing the original machine : The demand for 220 is very, very small but we would obviously like to supply it, but as always its very much more complicated, you just cannot make it 'by hand' as this would introduce too many QC threats to the film, it is a very delicate and controlled process. Ultimately a 220 film now would cost a great deal more to make ( and sell ) than 2 x 120 films. Sorry.

Simon ILFORD Photo / HARMAN technology Limited :

RobertV · Oct 27, 2010

or maybe the Agfa/Rollei have a 220 machine?

Confectioning (roll film) is (normally) done by Efke and/or Foma. They can only handle 120 roll films too.
They could made a confectioning "by hand" but then these films would be much more expensive and like Harman/Ilford already said you are running in all kinds of Q.C. issues.

Sorry.

Aurelien · Oct 27, 2010

The best for you, manufacturers, would be to share a 220 finishing machine. One for everybody : Ilford, Kodak, Fuji, Foma and Efke. But I am a dreamer.

lxdude · Oct 27, 2010

Even better would be for them all to have their own, brand new.

bblhed · Oct 27, 2010

I just heard an interview with someone from Kodak and they said Kodak will take special orders if you are willing to plunk down enough cash to purchase an automobile. That's right if you are willing to plunk down $15,000+ US dollars and they have the film stock to make it from, they will make you film in any format they have ever produced. I can't process 220 with my current setup, so 220 B&W isn't that appealing to me.

It can't hurt to call them and ask, then get a bunch of people together and place an order.

K-G · Oct 28, 2010

Simon R Galley said:
Dear All,

No hopeful words I am afraid.

Firstly we have not made 220 film for over 5 years, we have been very open as to our reasons for not replacing the original machine : The demand for 220 is very, very small but we would obviously like to supply it, but as always its very much more complicated, you just cannot make it 'by hand' as this would introduce too many QC threats to the film, it is a very delicate and controlled process. Ultimately a 220 film now would cost a great deal more to make ( and sell ) than 2 x 120 films. Sorry.

Simon ILFORD Photo / HARMAN technology Limited :

Thank you for answering, Simon. I see the problems you would face if you were about to make ready 220-rolls by hand or by machine. Do you share Mirko's opinion ( se my post from oct. 25 ) that the lack of a back coating is a major problem for rolling 220-film from bulk rolls of 120-film ( if they were available ). If the right type of film could be available, I don't see that the quality problems would be much worse than when you load 135-film into casettes from bulk rolls. Perhaps a litle more complicated, but 220-size b&w film users are a patient breed.
Best regards
Karl-Gustaf

clayne · Oct 30, 2010

How many frames of 6x6 (w/ backing paper) can be spooled onto a 120 spool until the circumference meets the outside of the spool (or just under)?

The reason I ask is if it would be possible to have an 18 frame 120 format? This is the core issue that people are struggling with (too little shots per roll) and may provide a suitable compromise.

michaelbsc · Oct 31, 2010

I doubt you could get 18. But most who want 220 have a camera back that has a mechanical advance and lockout at 24 frames. Many of them also wind poorly with film that has backing paper. So an 18 exposure roll of 120 with backing paper isn't a very desirable alternative. It wouldn't work well on the 220 back designed for no backing paper, and a 120 back would lock out at 12 frames.
Be great for red window cameras, however.

michaelbsc · Oct 31, 2010

I doubt you could get 18. But most who want 220 have a camera back that has a mechanical advance and lockout at 24 frames. Many of them also wind poorly with film that has backing paper. So an 18 exposure roll of 120 with backing paper isn't a very desirable alternative. It wouldn't work well on the 220 back designed for no backing paper, and a 120 back would lock out at 12 frames.
Be great for red window cameras, however.

Ektagraphic · Nov 1, 2010

Isn't 70mm film the same as 120 but just as a bulk roll? What if a place like freestyle came out with a bulk loader for 70mm film and they also sold the start and end papers so we could bulk load from 70mm film to make 220?

michaelbsc · Nov 1, 2010

Ektagraphic said:
Isn't 70mm film the same as 120 but just as a bulk roll? What if a place like freestyle came out with a bulk loader for 70mm film and they also sold the start and end papers so we could bulk load from 70mm film to make 220?

Not exactly. 120 film is 61.5mm, not 70mm. So one would be obliged to slit it before rolling. Can you do it? Sure. Is it a PITA? Sure.

Is it a viable alternative to someone who wants 220? Not in my mind. The whole idea behind 220 in the first place was convenience for professional photographers, and this process doesn't seem very convenient.

I realize people who are shooting "events" professionally go through a lot of film. But for my usage pattern one reason I like 6x9 so much is that I don't have to figure out who to burn up enough shots to get the film out of the camera. I thought the old 12 and 20 rolls in 135 were plenty. But that's very, very style dependent. After all, some camera bodies have film back that let you put a whole long roll in them.

Michael

2F/2F · Nov 1, 2010

What sort of back would the 18-shot rolls be shot in? There also is not a whole lot more room on a 120 spool.

For those used to shooting 220, I think that carrying an increased number of pre-loaded 120 backs is the best answer, unfortunately.

michaelbsc · Nov 1, 2010

2F/2F said:
What sort of back would the 18-shot rolls be shot in? There also is not a whole lot more room on a 120 spool.

For those used to shooting 220, I think that carrying an increased number of pre-loaded 120 backs is the best answer, unfortunately.

That was my point. About the only thing that a roll of 18 would work with, if you could even get that much on the roll, would be be a red window.

Brac · Nov 22, 2010

K-G said:
I have never heard of any 220 film of any type from Agfa, but I am not quite sure.
Karl-Gustaf

For some years there were one or two of Agfa's professional colour films available in 220. However they may have been made and/or finished for Agfa by someone else. For example when Agfa's reversal films changed over to the E6 process, the first 120 rollfilms were made for them in Japan, but packed in Germany (according to the boxes). Until shortly before the closure of their film business Konica-Minolta made some of their professional colour films in 220, and going back much earlier even Orwo in the former East Germany made films in 220. However times have changed, and it seems clear that no-one now is going to introduce new 220 films in black & white. Nor, despite some people's suggestions, is this a film that can be made as a "cottage industry" production. So perhaps now is the time to accept that and move on. It will at least mean that Simon at Ilford doesn't have to answer the same question on apug every 6 months or so! :confused:

benjiboy · Nov 22, 2010

I've just read all the posts on this thread and it strikes me that all the wishful thinking, hand wringing and hair tearing in the World isn't going to to make it commercially viable for the manufacturers to make monochrome 220 film in a digital era, film makers exist to make a profit for their shareholders, not to enhance the art and science of photography, sometimes we just have to accept things as they are and bow to the inevitable, and be content with the fact that they are making film at all .

michaelbsc · Nov 22, 2010

benjiboy said:
I've just read all the posts on this thread and it strikes me that all the wishful thinking, hand wringing and hair tearing in the World isn't going to to make it commercially viable for the manufacturers to make monochrome 220 film in a digital era, film makers exist to make a profit for their shareholders, not to enhance the art and science of photography, sometimes we just have to accept things as they are and bow to the inevitable, and be content with the fact that they are making film at all .

HERETIC!

Oh! Wait. Wrong congregation.

hpulley · Nov 22, 2010

Dumb question from a 135/126/110 shooter: are there any 220 only camera bodies? I thought most MF could take 120 or 220 backs. No 60mm wide bulk film? Rare as hen's teeth? I know I wish I could still get B&W 126 but it seems all I can get is color or try to bulk load my own.

michaelbsc · Nov 23, 2010

hpulley said:
Dumb question from a 135/126/110 shooter: are there any 220 only camera bodies? I thought most MF could take 120 or 220 backs. No 60mm wide bulk film? Rare as hen's teeth? I know I wish I could still get B&W 126 but it seems all I can get is color or try to bulk load my own.

There are a few, but not many. One of the old Yashica Mat models is supposedly 220 only, but I doubt they sold many. I have never seen one.

I cannot think of anything else that is 220 only.

220 B&W - What to do?

Advertiser

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency