actual negative dimensions

Arklatexian · Jan 22, 2018

jnanian said:
4x5 film is NOT 4"x5" ...
that was the size of the PLATE when
dry plates were sold.
when sheet film began to be sold
little metal septums were sold
to convert plate holders to sheet film holders.
film was about 1/16 smaller than the plate to fit in the holder ...

when plates stopped being popular, and film became king
it was still sold the same size... and photographers didn't have
to dump all the old film/plate holders to buy new different sized ones ...

this goes for other sheet film sizes too.

Well, that is one version! I have used 2 different 4x5 films and. neither were glass plates. One was the size of the sheet film that came from the manufacturer for you to put in your film holders. The other size came from film packs and were larger. The situation was the same for 2 1/4 x 3 1/4 films except there was a third size, those negatives that came from 120/620 roll film. Most enlarger manufacturers made negative holders in the different sizes. That was in the "golden age of photography that some of this group talks about.........Regards!

wiltw · Jan 22, 2018

To be precise

the Bronica ETRS image area is 42.5 x 55.1mm
the Mamiya 645 image area is 41.5 x 56mm,
the Pentax 645 image area is 41.5 x 56mm,
the Hassy image area is 56 x 56mm
the Mamiya RB67 image area is 56 x 69.5mm
my Regal 4x5 film holder exposes an image area of 96 x 120mm
my Kodak Readyload 4x5 holder exposes an image area of 92.5 x 118mm
my Polaroid 4x5 holder exposes an image area of 95 x 120mm

... Tmax sheetfilm measures 99.5mm(3.918") x 125.3mm(4.934") and Ilford HP5 measures 101.6 x 127mm, and Kodak Portra 160 measures 101.6 x 127mm, so 4x5 is only a figurative name

Barry Kirsten · Jan 22, 2018

Yikes! Hard to believe all this, and for what logical reason? Regarding the RB67, a camera I've long been interested in but never owned, is that the rollfilm negative sizing or the sheet film negative sizing?. If so it should rightly be sold as a 6x9 camera. I have several Fidelity 21/4x31/4 holders for the RB67 and the negative area of those is 54x79.

Dan Fromm · Jan 22, 2018

Barry, 56 x 69.5 isn't quite 56 x 79. There's no real 6x9 or 2x3 standard, gate lengths of commonly used 2x3/6.9 roll holders range from 78 mm (Graflex with pin rollers at the end of the gate) to 82 mm.

coa_lund · Jan 23, 2018

wiltw said:
To be precise

the Bronica ETRS image area is 42.5 x 55.1mm

the Mamiya 645 image area is 41.5 x 56mm,

the Pentax 645 image area is 41.5 x 56mm,

the Hassy image area is 56 x 56mm

the Mamiya RB67 image area is 56 x 69.5mm

my Regal 4x5 film holder exposes an image area of 96 x 120mm

my Kodak Readyload 4x5 holder exposes an image area of 92.5 x 118mm

my Polaroid 4x5 holder exposes an image area of 95 x 120mm

... Tmax sheetfilm measures 99.5mm(3.918") x 125.3mm(4.934") and Ilford HP5 measures 101.6 x 127mm, and Kodak Portra 160 measures 101.6 x 127mm, so 4x5 is only a figurative name

I have 6 Hasselblad 6x6 filmbacks, with year codes TH (62), TP (62) (bought new in 1964), UH (72), two UU (77) and one EE (99). The all have an image area of about 55x55 mm, not 56x56mm, wich is good since I then can get the black border when I scan with Nikkon Coolscan which scans 59.9 mm wide. As an example below an old image exposed in TH62861, when I remove the black borders thi image is 54.7x55.3 mm.

NJH · Jan 23, 2018

An interesting tidbit. People often said that 6x7 was ideal for common print formats, however as stated above the 55.1mm x 42.5mm of the Bronica ETRS system is very close to the 14x11 print ratio and therefore a pretty optimal film image size for what I believe would be a very nice enlargement size, not to big but big enough for many.

wiltw · Jan 28, 2018

coa_lund said:
I have 6 Hasselblad 6x6 filmbacks, with year codes TH (62), TP (62) (bought new in 1964), UH (72), two UU (77) and one EE (99). The all have an image area of about 55x55 mm, not 56x56mm, wich is good since I then can get the black border when I scan with Nikkon Coolscan which scans 59.9 mm wide. As an example below an old image exposed in TH62861, when I remove the black borders thi image is 54.7x55.3 mm.

Thx for the correction. In just reviewing the A12 user manual, Hasselblad says only "2-1/4 x 2-1/4 " which is 57mm x 57mm !
Then I referred to Ernst Wildi, who was a spokesperson for Hasselblad for many, many years, and a published author on the topic, who stated, "The exact image size is 54 x 54 mm, with 12 images on one roll of 120 fi lm and 24 on the 220 type. " but in his earlier book states, "55 x 55mm" Go figure.

In also looking up Bronica SQ, it says "55.6mm x 55.6mm"

Bud Hamblen · Jul 11, 2019

The Eastman Kodak Company's No. 2 Brownie, the camera that 120 film was first made for, took a 2-1/4 in. by 3-1/4 in. picture (57 mm by 83 mm)

RalphLambrecht · Jul 11, 2019

alanrockwood said:
What are the actual dimensions of 6x4.5 negatives?

I also wonder what the actual dimensions are for 6x6 format and 4x5 format.

Thanks.

Alan

It depends a little bit on the camera brand but, it is typical for a MF negative 6 by x to be 56mm in width.

ic-racer · Jul 12, 2019

alanrockwood said:
What are the actual dimensions of 6x4.5 negatives?

I also wonder what the actual dimensions are for 6x6 format and 4x5 format.

Thanks.

Alan

You have to measure it. There can be variability in the image frame between even cameras of the same type.

(389) Such markings, however, will remain on the negative
and any uncropped prints. Because these markings on inexpensive
cameras tend to be distributed in a random pattern unique to each
camera, they serve as identifiers for determining whether a
particular negative or uncropped photograph was originally
exposed in any particular camera.

(391) In order to determine the pattern of these camera
signatures the case of Lee Harvey Oswald's Imperial Reflex camera,
test photographs were made with it and then intentionally
underexposed in development to show the frame edge markings
better. (No special development method was necessary to bring out
the camera scratch mark pattern.)

(395) This analysis established that the Oswald backyard
pictures had been exposed in Oswald's Imperial Reflex camera.
Volume VI of the HOUSE SELECT COMMITTEE
ON ASSASSINATIONS

actual negative dimensions

Attachments

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency