220 film dimensions/specification (ISO732)

polyglot · Nov 22, 2012

Hi all,

I'm considering making a loader to slit 70mm film down and spool to 220 for use in my RZ. While Mamiya sells a 70mm back, the price (plus Adapter-G) is silly money - like $450 - and that's before I even get developing tanks/spirals.

Can anyone please tell me:
- are the spools the same diameter as 120, i.e. can I spool onto my huge collection of 120 spools?
- what is the official width and length of a 220 film?
- how long are the leader and trailer papers?
- how much overlap should there be between film and paper?

I could probably figure it out by inspection of a 120 roll but it'd be good to know the official numbers. Worst case I can spool to 120 I guess.

Alternative question: will a Linhof Cine-Rollex (being Graflok) mate cleanly to a Mamiya Adapter-G?

thanks...

scherbis · Nov 22, 2012

Do you already have the 70 mm film? If not where are you buying it from?

Jeff Bannow · Nov 22, 2012

Best thing would be to take apart a few 220 rolls. Should be easy to get the dimensions from that.

gorbas · Nov 22, 2012

You will need 70mm unperforated film for it. With perforated, inside distance between sprocket is 60mm. It's fine with 120/220 cameras but it's tricky for loading (in my case) Paterson reels and that 1 mm make difference. Last summer I made few rolls of 120 from 70mm and by my opinion it's not worth effort unless you have some special emulsion or you don't have anything smarter to do. Making 220 is even harder than 120. YMMV

StoneNYC · Nov 22, 2012

Guys guys guys... 70mm is the same size as 116... (polyglot I mentioned this in another thread you are reading).
So just buy an old rotary tank that accepts 116, no work measuring and cutting, it just fits...

~Stone

The Important Ones - Mamiya: 7 II, RZ67 Pro II / Canon: 1V, AE-1 / Kodak: No 1 Pocket Autographic, No 1A Pocket Autographic

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

StoneNYC · Nov 22, 2012

Sorry I didn't fully read... Well you can always spool it onto 116/616 spools and shoot old folders and box cameras that are 116/616 in size (like me).

Also you can get cheaper 70mm backs... I'll sell my hassleblad 70mm back for $150. I think I got my 70mm mamiya for $300, you kist have to be diligent in searching.

~Stone

The Important Ones - Mamiya: 7 II, RZ67 Pro II / Canon: 1V, AE-1 / Kodak: No 1 Pocket Autographic, No 1A Pocket Autographic

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

AgX · Nov 22, 2012

Polyglot wants to homebuild type 220 from 70mm film, that is why he is asking for specifications.

StoneNYC · Nov 22, 2012

Sounds insane, too much cutting lol

My only suggestion is they make a cloth cutter for people who make hook rugs, could find one with the 5mm distance blade and cut off the perf evenly on both sides, you just crank away and it feeds/pulls the cloth along as it cuts, not sure if it could be modified for film but it's possible.

~Stone

The Important Ones - Mamiya: 7 II, RZ67 Pro II / Canon: 1V, AE-1 / Kodak: No 1 Pocket Autographic, No 1A Pocket Autographic

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

MattKing · Nov 22, 2012

I think I can answer at least one of polyglot's questions .

The 120 and 220 spools are identical. If they weren't, you wouldn't be able to use the empty spool from a just exposed 220 roll as your next take-up spool.

And proceeding now to some guesses....

There is a small amount of excess film on each end of a 120 roll. If you double the length of a 120 roll, you will end up with twice the amount of that excess - I would guess that you only need that excess once

And as for the length of the leader and the trailer, you can probably use the same lengths of "leader and trailer as a roll of 120 has.

polyglot · Nov 22, 2012

So there isn't 61mm of useful film between the perforations? That kind of ruins the plan.

ic-racer · Nov 22, 2012

polyglot said:
So there isn't 61mm of useful film between the perforations? That kind of ruins the plan.

Just crop the perforations out. You only want to cut the film on one side anyway. Your aspect ratio may be more like 6x9 or a 35mm frame in the end. Nothing wrong with that.

If it were me (with my Horseman 6x9 system) I'd take the rool of 70mm and use a fine cut saw to cut the perforations off one end of the roll. How much? Well, you have the spools, just cut it to fit your spools. Then I'd just load it on the spools in the dark. How much film? I'd just fill the spool to the brim and keep them in the dark, like sheet film. The Horseman 220 backs are cheap now, so I'd get maybe 5 of them and just load them in the dark. Loading each back can't be any harder then loading 8 film holders in the dark. No leader paper, just attach the film to the spools in the dark with some tape. Since you are in the dark, as soon as you close the back you are 'good to go,' no need to look for a 'wind-up' mark before closing the back.

When ready to process, load frame #1 on the reel first and run it to the center and just cut off any excess. No fancy measuring is needed for any of this unless you wind up with frame spacing issues (depending on how your back works). In that case a little trial and error to find out how much 'wind-on' is needed for the start of the roll before closing the back, or build up the take up reels with some tape to the desired starting diameter and just close the back after taping the film on the take-up spool.

If you are perfectionist and want the lens centered, you can measure how much the perorations extend into the image area, divide that by two and apply that much front rise, on a Horseman (load the perforations to the bottom of the frame). On the RZ load the perforations on the top and you get a little automatic 'front rise' for each image after you crop.

AgX · Nov 22, 2012

Fiddling around with a saw in the dark is different from drawing film through a splicer...

And not much mechanical saws have precision guides to move the film spool along.

ic-racer · Nov 22, 2012

AgX said:
Fiddling around with a saw in the dark is different from drawing film through a splicer...

And not much mechanical saws have precision guides to move the film spool along.

No "precision guides" just mark the roll, hold it in hand and saw. The margin of error is huge (millimeters) for my Horseman backs. I can do the cut by hand with the night-vision. I just cut a guitar saddle to 1/64" by hand yesterday. I'd use the same saw. I could probably do the cut in the dark by propping the saw up horizontal on a piece of appropriately sized wood.

Now the 'dust' may spoil the edge of the film, but I'm thinking of something like a 'surplus' or 'free' roll of 70mm that would be otherwise useless. Not something that cost $500

polyglot · Nov 22, 2012

Mark the roll, eh? A mark that I should look at, with the lights on? Or that I can't see in the dark with my fingers near a sawblade? Can't say I'm liking either option, and an RZ back is not going to deal well with film that is the wrong width and burrs all down one edge. It also means cutting one end off the metal spool that the film is held on, so there will be little metal burrs spread all through the film, not to mention stress-fogging.

Far easier to put a razor or two in a little channel/guide and pull the film through it as it's travelling from the large roll to the small. There are a number of film-slitting designs on the web and they're pretty simple; I could make one up to slit the film as it came off the 70mm roll.

StoneNYC · Nov 22, 2012

Polyglot, just invest in a back, save yourself the hassle. Ive been following the 70mm backs for a while on eBay, the SAME back is constantly re-listed, one was listed at $400 and I sent a private message as said "I've seen you re-list this 4 times, would you accept $100 with shipping?" And got my back for a fraction of the asking price.

You really only need 2 canisters, 4 if you are going crazy, and they still sell 15 foot Kodak rolls of 70mm for around $30, but it comes with a new canister so you get PRE-loaded film and a canister that's reusable. Not a bad deal.

I'm still not FULLY convinced about giving up 70mm but I'm getting there, however I spent a lot of time invested in gathering the components so I'm not sure I would sell very cheaply... So don't buy from me! Lol

~Stone

The Noteworthy Ones - Mamiya: 7 II, RZ67 Pro II / Canon: 1V, AE-1 / Kodak: No 1 Pocket Autographic, No 1A Pocket Autographic

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

polyglot · Nov 23, 2012

The problem is not the 70mm back ($160) but the adapter required to mount it on an RZ ($260). Note that I have an RZ, not an RB and not a 'blad.

StoneNYC · Nov 23, 2012

I have an RZ, my 70mm back came with the adapter plate... so they are out there

~Stone

The Noteworthy Ones - Mamiya: 7 II, RZ67 Pro II / Canon: 1V, AE-1 / Kodak: No 1 Pocket Autographic, No 1A Pocket Autographic

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

StoneNYC · Nov 23, 2012

Hmm I looked on eBay, I see what you mean, the plate adapter separate is more (from Europe) than I payed for both.

However the current RB 70mm backs have the suction cup, mine doesn't so I supposedly can't shoot as accurate in macro (suction cup adds more pressure to the plate to ultra flatten the plane of film) I've thought of buying one and then selling it just for the suction cup haha

~Stone

The Noteworthy Ones - Mamiya: 7 II, RZ67 Pro II / Canon: 1V, AE-1 / Kodak: No 1 Pocket Autographic, No 1A Pocket Autographic

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

polyglot · Nov 24, 2012

StoneNYC said:
Hmm I looked on eBay, I see what you mean, the plate adapter separate is more (from Europe) than I payed for both.

Yep.

There's the possibility of acquiring a roll or three of Plus-X locally so I might just do that and be patient waiting for a back to appear. It's not like I'm going to run out of film next week

OzJohn · Nov 24, 2012

Noboby seems to have answered the question you asked: the dimensions of a 220 roll. Offhand, I don't know either but if you want to PM me a postal address I'll send you gratis a long expired, unexposed, unrefrigerated roll that you can experiment with. I don't think we can actually buy 220 film here in AU any more and AFAIK Portra is the only emulsion available in 220 anywhere. Good luck with the project. OzJohn

StoneNYC · Nov 24, 2012

polyglot said:
Yep.

There's the possibility of acquiring a roll or three of Plus-X locally so I might just do that and be patient waiting for a back to appear. It's not like I'm going to run out of film next week

I have two rolls of plus-x in my fridge and I just shot two rolls of it for a nude bourgeois scene last week waiting to develop, actually what developer do you suggest for that? Adinol?

~Stone

The Noteworthy Ones - Mamiya: 7 II, RZ67 Pro II / Canon: 1V, AE-1 / Kodak: No 1 Pocket Autographic, No 1A Pocket Autographic

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

StoneNYC · Nov 24, 2012

OzJohn said:
Noboby seems to have answered the question you asked: the dimensions of a 220 roll. Offhand, I don't know either but if you want to PM me a postal address I'll send you gratis a long expired, unexposed, unrefrigerated roll that you can experiment with. I don't think we can actually buy 220 film here in AU any more and AFAIK Portra is the only emulsion available in 220 anywhere. Good luck with the project. OzJohn

220 is the exact same size as 120 just twice as long on the length of film because the paper backing is absent from the film portion of the roll.

~Stone

The Noteworthy Ones - Mamiya: 7 II, RZ67 Pro II / Canon: 1V, AE-1 / Kodak: No 1 Pocket Autographic, No 1A Pocket Autographic

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

MattKing · Nov 24, 2012

StoneNYC said:
I have two rolls of plus-x in my fridge and I just shot two rolls of it for a nude bourgeois scene last week waiting to develop, actually what developer do you suggest for that? Adinol?

~Stone

The Noteworthy Ones - Mamiya: 7 II, RZ67 Pro II / Canon: 1V, AE-1 / Kodak: No 1 Pocket Autographic, No 1A Pocket Autographic

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Hmmm - "nude bourgeois"????

Does being middle class matter:munch:?

MattKing · Nov 24, 2012

StoneNYC said:
220 is the exact same size as 120 just twice as long on the length of film because the paper backing is absent from the film portion of the roll.

~Stone

The Noteworthy Ones - Mamiya: 7 II, RZ67 Pro II / Canon: 1V, AE-1 / Kodak: No 1 Pocket Autographic, No 1A Pocket Autographic

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Not quite - because there is only need for one set of film leader and trailer, not two.

StoneNYC · Nov 25, 2012

MattKing said:
Not quite - because there is only need for one set of film leader and trailer, not two.

I did say "the film part" as in the film is double the length not the film + leader/tail.

MattKing said:
Hmmm - "nude bourgeois"????

Does being middle class matter:munch:?

Haha well I don't know why I said that haha, I guess it was a very simple scene in a quaint old looking room that would have been from a middle class household, I haven't developed the plus-x obviously but here is a Pan F+ image from the set. I have more and I've already posted this a few times, I really need to pay for an account so I can just post in my own gallery haha, I'll get to it soon, in the mean time...

See, middle class nude haha

~Stone

The Noteworthy Ones - Mamiya: 7 II, RZ67 Pro II / Canon: 1V, AE-1 / Kodak: No 1 Pocket Autographic, No 1A Pocket Autographic

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

220 film dimensions/specification (ISO732)

polyglot

scherbis

Jeff Bannow

gorbas

StoneNYC

StoneNYC

AgX

StoneNYC

MattKing

Moderator

polyglot

ic-racer

AgX

ic-racer

polyglot

StoneNYC

polyglot

StoneNYC

StoneNYC

polyglot

OzJohn

StoneNYC

StoneNYC

MattKing

Moderator

MattKing

Moderator

StoneNYC

220 film dimensions/specification (ISO732)

Moderator

Moderator

Moderator

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency