220 Roll from Hell

[clayne]

Noticed something interesting last night while trying to spool a roll of 220 TXP onto a Hewes reel: no matter what, after getting to a certain part of the film, it would refuse to spool correctly and reliably bind up at the same part every time. So aside from my cussing at inanimate objects, I had to figure out how to process this roll as I wasn't quite sure what was on it - which made ripping it out of the bag not really an option.

I had just spooled and developed the same type of film (TXP, 220 format) about 30 minutes before that and I knew for a fact that the reels were without issue. So after getting to the point of no return with the roll I decided to just cut out a section at the point where it kept binding and spool the remainder onto the other reel. This option proved successful and I was able to develop my now heavily fingerprinted and buckled chop-shop roll. However, while hanging both up to dry I noticed that I had actually cut the roll right near the last frame - with the rest of the roll being entirely blank.

It then occurred to me that I had yanked the roll early because it had been sitting in the camera for a few months and I was collecting all my "spare change" rolls to process out of the way. The actual camera was a C330, which has a straight path for the film and take-up spool (no 90deg bend). The only thing I can think of is that having the same portion of film sitting straight for a few months resulted in some kind of strengthening in that area and hence when I got to the section while spooling it wasn't too cooperative in crowning into the reel - instead reliably buckling and jamming up the works.

Anyone ever experience similar?

 

[railwayman3]

FWIW, I've observed kinking in 120 films which have been left part-used for a long time in a camera which uses a 90deg bend in the film path, so maybe there is a similar flattening effect against the pressure plate.

I tend to leave my exposed films for a day-or-two before processing anyway, which seems to avoid any problems (and likewise removes the reverse curl from 35mm films where, as in my Pentaxes, the camera winds the film emulsion out.)

 

[markbarendt]

I have noticed that my freshly home-rolled 35mm film is easier to get on the reels than film that has been in a cassette for a long time.

 

[dpurdy]

If I get a kink in a roll I take it off and start it from the other end. Before I had the good old larger size 220 reels I found the tighter newer ones impossible to load so I would find the middle of the roll and cut it and then load it onto 2 120 rolls. With a Rolleiflex set to 220 you have an extra large space between frame 12 and 13 and I could usually hit it.
Dennis

 

[mike c]

If I get a kink in a roll I take it off and start it from the other end. Before I had the good old larger size 220 reels I found the tighter newer ones impossible to load so I would find the middle of the roll and cut it and then load it onto 2 120 rolls. With a Rolleiflex set to 220 you have an extra large space between frame 12 and 13 and I could usually hit it.
Dennis

Dennis that is exaly what I.v been doing lately.Now I use a 120 real and load it,and when I come to the end of the reel I cut it and put the other half on another reel.Ends up around frame 12 or 13 gets the cut. Mark knows the other method I use to use.

Mike

 

[clayne]

Cool. Good to hear it wasn't just me. Bad to hear it's another thing I have to worry about. I find 120 much easier to spool than 220, but 220 isn't the end of the world. 135 doesn't even garner a thought as it's so fast with Hewes reels.

 

[mike c]

The hardest part in loading 220 on 220 reals for me is trying to keep the film aligned with the spool in the dark,I hate that crinkling sound knowing that I've added another crescent moon to a frame!

 

[hidesert]

I find that 220 goes on easier if you don't use the spring clamp to attach the end to the reel. Somehow that allows it to align itself better as you wind it on.