Want to Buy A few rolls of any 220 black and white film

[Gram Nylén]

Hello! I am looking to buy 2-4 rolls of any black and white film (or films) in 220 to test a camera and say that I have shot 220. Any expiration date is fine as long as the film hasn't been stored inside a microwave or locomotive boiler. I am located in California.
Thanks,
Gram

 

[Donald Qualls]

Have you checked the usual sources (Amazon, Freestyle, B&H, etc.) for Shanghai GP-3? Fresh film packaged in 220.

 

[nanthor]

Hi Gram, Bob here. I am currently in Michigan but should be back in Illinois by tomorrow. Will check through my film and see if I have any 220, if I do I can send it to you just for postage. Remind me though! Bob.

 

[Gram Nylén]

Hi Gram, Bob here. I am currently in Michigan but should be back in Illinois by tomorrow. Will check through my film and see if I have any 220, if I do I can send it to you just for postage. Remind me though! Bob.

That would be greatly appreciated, I'll remind you tomorrow. Thanks!

 

[MCB18]

I can sell you a few if you want, but seems like others have you covered.

 

[chuckroast]

Hello! I am looking to buy 2-4 rolls of any black and white film (or films) in 220 to test a camera and say that I have shot 220. Any expiration date is fine as long as the film hasn't been stored inside a microwave or locomotive boiler. I am located in California.
Thanks,
Gram

Shanghai GP3 is available new in 220 on eBay.

 

[MCB18]

Shanghai GP3 is available new in 220 on eBay.

I would stay away from that. QC is supposedly super bad, and the paper isn’t the correct size/thickness. When someone says that they would rather use film made by someone in their basement darkroom over a mass produced product (actual feedback I’ve received, not gonna lie, that made me happy), you know that you have really messed it up.

 

[chuckroast]

I would stay away from that. QC is supposedly super bad, and the paper isn’t the correct size/thickness. When someone says that they would rather use film made by someone in their basement darkroom over a mass produced product (actual feedback I’ve received, not gonna lie, that made me happy), you know that you have really messed it up.

I have shot it in both 120, 220, and 4x5 without any issues. The bad reputation, I think, comes from the old Shanghai which was marvelous film but had terrible production issues with dust, among other things. A few years ago, a company bought the rights to Shangai, as I understand it, and brought it into the modern age of quality control.

That said, it's not my favorite film, but the OP wanted a chance to try 220 and that's a relatively easy on-ramp. What I wish they had done was bring back the older Shanghai emulsions properly quality controlled. They had a look to them that was reminiscent of classic films from the 1950s and 1960s.

I have a lot of frozen older Kodak 220 and - depending on age - I've noticed some mechanical issues with the film. For example, some of the old Tri-X shows horizontal marks in the first couple of frames, no matter what camera I load them in. I suspect this is just age taking its toll on the packaging because the remaining frames look fine.

 

[chuckroast]

It's worth mentioning that the film transport has to be set up for 220 for the thickness to be right. 220 film has only a paper leader and trailer, no backing paper behind the film itself like 120 does, and thus has different dimensions. That's to make the film - which is twice as long - fit on a standard spool, and to make sure the frame counter works correctly.

You either need a 220-specific back (Hasselblad, Mamiya 645, Graflex) OR you have to change the pressure plate and - possibly - a camera setting (Yashica TLR, Mamiya TLR, Fuji GA/GW series cameras). This ensures that the film is held properly in place for the 220 packaging and dimensions.

The other issue is processing. It's doubtful the OP will find anyone still processing 220 (not impossible, but unlikely). That means you need a 220 reel and, perhaps, a tank (both of which are much larger than a 120 system). I use a 220 Nikor reel, but I process it in an open tank in the dark - three tanks, actually, to be precise .

 

[MattKing]

A couple of points.
220 film is the same as 120 film, in that it relies on the film rails, not the pressure plate, to set the focus plane. The pressure plate for 120 does provide slightly less pressure than the pressure plate for 220, so there is a greater chance that there may be film flatness issues.
In days of yore, when Mamiya America maintained a user forum for their film cameras - 6x4.5, 6x6 and 6x7 - they included advice on using 120 in 220 cameras or vice versa. Essentially the advice was that the films would give good results, but the backs/inserts would experience more wear if 120 was used in high volumes in 220 backs/inserts. The major disincentive for low volume users was/is the challenge with frame counters.
As for processing, all the 120 processors around here still do 220. And Paterson 120 reels are already sized for 220 - or two 120 rolls on the same reel, if you are like me.

 

[chuckroast]

A couple of points.
220 film is the same as 120 film, in that it relies on the film rails, not the pressure plate, to set the focus plane. The pressure plate for 120 does provide slightly less pressure than the pressure plate for 220, so there is a greater chance that there may be film flatness issues.
In days of yore, when Mamiya America maintained a user forum for their film cameras - 6x4.5, 6x6 and 6x7 - they included advice on using 120 in 220 cameras or vice versa. Essentially the advice was that the films would give good results, but the backs/inserts would experience more wear if 120 was used in high volumes in 220 backs/inserts. The major disincentive for low volume users was/is the challenge with frame counters.
As for processing, all the 120 processors around here still do 220. And Paterson 120 reels are already sized for 220 - or two 120 rolls on the same reel, if you are like me.

I'd forgotten all about the adjustable plastic reels as I've not used them myself in forever. Good to know that there are those still processing MF film. I work entirely in monochrome and develop and print everything myself so I was unaware of the availability of 3rd party processing.

 

[Gram Nylén]

A couple of points.
220 film is the same as 120 film, in that it relies on the film rails, not the pressure plate, to set the focus plane. The pressure plate for 120 does provide slightly less pressure than the pressure plate for 220, so there is a greater chance that there may be film flatness issues.
In days of yore, when Mamiya America maintained a user forum for their film cameras - 6x4.5, 6x6 and 6x7 - they included advice on using 120 in 220 cameras or vice versa. Essentially the advice was that the films would give good results, but the backs/inserts would experience more wear if 120 was used in high volumes in 220 backs/inserts. The major disincentive for low volume users was/is the challenge with frame counters.
As for processing, all the 120 processors around here still do 220. And Paterson 120 reels are already sized for 220 - or two 120 rolls on the same reel, if you are like me.

Thanks for the info!

 

[Kodachromeguy]

I would stay away from that. QC is supposedly super bad, and the paper isn’t the correct size/thickness. When someone says that they would rather use film made by someone in their basement darkroom over a mass produced product (actual feedback I’ve received, not gonna lie, that made me happy), you know that you have really messed it up.

On what dates or reports is this warning about Shanghai 220 based? Have you used it?

 

[MCB18]

On what dates or reports is this warning about Shanghai 220 based? Have you used it?

I have not personally used it, but I know 4-5 people that have, and who said that they have had a multitude of issues with it. The most recent of these bad experiences was not even a month ago.

If I am not mistaken, there is a long thread on here somewhere about it.

The other issue is processing. It's doubtful the OP will find anyone still processing 220 (not impossible, but unlikely). That means you need a 220 reel and, perhaps, a tank (both of which are much larger than a 120 system). I use a 220 Nikor reel, but I process it in an open tank in the dark - three tanks, actually, to be precise .

FYI, this is not true. I have a few nice Hewes reels for standard sized tanks that take 220, and I know other brands are more companies that make them. The Hewes reels work very well, but I’d imagine a cheaper 220 reel would work well enough for a few rolls. I’m

 

[chuckroast]

I have not personally used it, but I know 4-5 people that have, and who said that they have had a multitude of issues with it. The most recent of these bad experiences was not even a month ago.

If I am not mistaken, there is a long thread on here somewhere about it.



FYI, this is not true. I have a few nice Hewes reels for standard sized tanks that take 220, and I know other brands are more companies that make them. The Hewes reels work very well, but I’d imagine a cheaper 220 reel would work well enough for a few rolls. I’m

Interesting. I'd never heard of these before. The only 220 reels I've ever used are the Nikor and they require a larger tank (if you are going to daylight process). Of course, the adjustable plastic reels also will work - at least some of them - as another poster pointed out. Do you find that getting 220 to fit in a normal diameter reel puts the film wrap layers so close together that they don't get great agitation, or is that never an issue?

 

[MCB18]

Interesting. I'd never heard of these before. The only 220 reels I've ever used are the Nikor and they require a larger tank (if you are going to daylight process). Of course, the adjustable plastic reels also will work - at least some of them - as another poster pointed out. Do you find that getting 220 to fit in a normal diameter reel puts the film wrap layers so close together that they don't get great agitation, or is that never an issue?

They work very well, like giant 35mm reels, because that’s basically what they are. Extremely easy to load, but I would imagine that you need to be carful to not bend the spools, otherwise loading almost certainly becomes very hard.

 

[Kodachromeguy]

so I was unaware of the availability of 3rd party processing.

Dwayne's Photo in Parsons, Kansas, offers 220 processing for E-6, and B&W. Their web page shows that service. Praus Productions in Rochester will also do 220 in some emulsions.

 

[chuckroast]

Dwayne's Photo in Parsons, Kansas, offers 220 processing for E-6, and B&W. Their web page shows that service. Praus Productions in Rochester will also do 220 in some emulsions.

My last interaction with Dwayne's with 120 C-41 was ... uhm ... underwhelming

 

[AnselMortensen]

North Coast Photo Services in Carlsbad, CA does 220.
So does Oscar's Photo Lab in SF.

 

[nanthor]

Hi Gram

 

[Ben Hutcherson]

Re: Processing

A roll of 220 film is more or less the same length as 135-36. What this means is that it fits just fine on adjustable width plastic reels that can handle 35mm, and stainless steel 220 reels are available with about the same "density" as 35mm reels.

I admit to not having a lot of hands-on experience with commercial processors, but I don't recall seeing a minilab that can handle 120 film that can't also handle 220. Remember, again, the length is about the same as 35mm, so a lab that can handle 120 width and 35mm length can process it.

I have a decent stash of both B&W and E6 in 220, as well as some scattered C-41 here and there. I've never had issues having it processed at my usual places. In the past I switched between a local camera store for C-41, and the remnants of an old pro lab(that's still kicking around on a small scale) for the E6. I've also sent it off to Dwayne's. After relocating to St. Louis, I've confirmed that the camera store that usually does C41 for me can handle 220(and they list it on their price list).

 

[corposant]

Gram - I have some C-41 220 if you’re interested.