Best way to cut 35mm film to 2 x 16mm film?

[cannotShootStraight]

Does anyone here know a convenient way to cut 35mm film to 2 x 16mm?
I know the match box construction but it wastes a lot of the film by cutting only 1 x 16mm.
Then there is the Camerhack cutter kit: https://www.camerhack.it/product/create-your-135-film-cutter-kit/
but as far as I can tell from the pictures it needs a second film can where the cut film is spooled into.

Anyone here who has experience in this process?

 

[xkaes]

The usable area on regular, perforated 35mm film is 24mm. You can only get one roll of 16mm film out of it.

With unperforated 35mm film you can get two 16mm rolls with 3mm left-over.

You can get two 16mm rolls out of perforated 35mm film, but you'll get BIG perforations in the image.

No matter what you do, you have to do it in the dark.

There are other slitters on EBAY & ETSY.

 

[cannotShootStraight]

The usable area on regular, perforated 35mm film is 24mm. You can only get one roll of 16mm film out of it.

Yes but the 16mm cameras I know (at least) don't use all of the 16mm, they may only use 10 or 12mm thus you can actually cut two strips from 24mm.

 

[xkaes]

You can put 12mm film in a 16mm camera, but it's going to sit on the bottom of the film cassette -- which is 16mm wide -- so you will end up with 3mm of blank film on one side (unexposed) and 9mm exposed where you should have 10mm. Depending on the camera and cassette you could tape/afix the 12mm roll to the take-up spool in the middle, but the film will most likely be off-set during the exposure. In the perfect world you would have 1mm of unexposed film on each side of the exposure, but the film is going to be a PITA in any enlarger/scanner film holder.
Seems like a lot of trouble to save a "nickel." If you want to go the economy route, get a GOATHILL 120 to 16mm slitter that produces FOUR 15.25mm rolls -- the 0.75mm difference is basically nothing compared to removing 4mm.

 

[Dustin McAmera]

The camerahack device, with the blade unit coloured yellow on their page, cuts a couple of mm from the middle of the film, leaving two strips, each with about 11mm of usable film plus one row of perforations. Or you can choose the other blade unit that gives you only one 16mm strip, with no perfs.

From their set, you would need the body, a crank and that blade unit: a little under 40 Euro. I made my own cutter to make 127 film from 120, years ago. I enjoyed doing it, and wouldn't have bought a cutter device if I had seen one; but if you don't enjoy that stuff then you need to cost your time, and bear in mind you will probably have to revisit your design. If you just want to jump in with something that more or less works, I don't think that camerahack thing is bad.

You will also need a black bag for the loading and putting the stuff into cassettes for your small camera, and you will need those cassettes.
I think you must get enough film for at least four cassettes from a 35mm film; you'll have to cut it for length in the black bag.

 

[cmacd123]

George Eastman insisted thet it would never be easy to convert 35mm film (which Might have been Nitrate ata the time) into 16mm which was only licensed to be made on Safety (Slow Burning) base.

Only exception that I know is a print film called 32/35 that allowed Labs to print two copies of a 16mm Print and process it in a regular 35mm Processor. BUT that was also licensed to only be made in Safety Base.

 

[xkaes]

The camerahack device, with the blade unit coloured yellow on their page, cuts a couple of mm from the middle of the film, leaving two strips, each with about 11mm of usable film plus one row of perforations.

That "row of perforations" from the edge of 35mm film is 6mm wide, cutting substantially into the "11mm of usable film".

 

[Dustin McAmera]

Maybe. The ISO standard for 135 film (the link is to a pdf of the 1979 version, since up-to-date standards at ISO cost a fortune) suggests the perforations actually occupy more like 5mm (dimensions C + E in the diagram in section 3.2)

https://cdn.standards.iteh.ai/samples/5471/7a0511be7f66486ea22ffd527fa3c945/ISO-1007-1979.pdf

The film they would have sold you for the Mec16SB has perforations on each side. The frame is 10mm tall, so those perfs can occupy up to 3mm on each side. So yes, I suppose you might lose 2mm in the perforated side of film cut from a 35mm roll.
But I don't know the camera; the OP may know better than me.

I don't know how the feed works on this camera; I know it's a push-pull thing, not a winder. Does it use the perforations to feed, or just grip the film?

 

[lamerko]

If the 35mm film has perforation, then you should choose the 1x16mm option. Note that the two cuts and the remaining 3mm strip are in the middle because it is difficult to cut along the perforation. The two resulting 16mm cutouts will be impractical, as the already small frame from the sub-miniature camera will be shrunk even further. Separately, when the light flux affects the perforation, light leaks will occur, which will further deteriorate the frame.

 

[xkaes]

All MEC 16mm cameras use the perforations to advance the film. That's true for many other 16mm cameras as well. That makes things more difficult. But in any event, cutting 2mm off of a 10mm image amount to a 20% reduction in the size of a tiny negative. Just a dumb idea. Get a Minox-film camera instead -- 8x11mm. THAT will save you so much money you'll be able to retire early.

 

[xkaes]

Separately, when the light flux affects the perforation, light leaks will occur, which will further deteriorate the frame.

I thought about bringing this up, but decided it's too crazy already. Along the same lines, if you are using any film that does not cover the entire film box you have extra light bouncing around causing trouble.

 

[btaylor]

I know next to nothing about these submini still cameras that use 16mm film, but wouldn’t buying a spool of 16mm single perf movie film do the trick?

 

[xkaes]

I know next to nothing about these submini still cameras that use 16mm film, but wouldn’t buying a spool of 16mm single perf movie film do the trick?

Of course, but there are limitations. Movie films come only in LONG rolls, which are not cheap, and with a 16mm camera could take years to get through. Plus most color movie film has a REMJET backing on the back which is difficult to remove. Third, the selection of B&W and COLOR film is not nearly as good as with 35mm and 120 -- so most people prefer to cut larger film down to size. This is not a problem if you do it right.

A good place to find out about your options is the SUBCLUB.

 

[cannotShootStraight]

Even though it is quite scary to insert two blades in complete darkness, this instruction manual worked quite well the first time:

Here’s how you can make 16mm film from a roll of 35mm

By Andrew Khludeyev What if you have a 16 mm camera and want to shoot with it? Join the club. I recently fixed my old Narciss camera, which is a particularly beautiful specimen from the Soviet and,…

kosmofoto.com

I just changed the blades to be 16mm from the left and right side of the matchbox, leaving a 3mm gap between the two cut strips.

I put the first roll of Ilford HP5 into my Mamiya 16 Automatic. My guess is the perforations will be in the image definitely but I wanted to find out how much they bother me.

The image of the Mamiya 16 automatic starts at 3mm from the bottom, the perforations of 35mm are 5mm high so I guess I'll lose 2mm of height.
So in the end I am going to have a 14x8mm image - is that correct?

Seems like a lot of trouble to save a "nickel."

It is not only a nickel, the options for 16mm film are very limited, as you have said already. 35mm has the best variety of films. Imagine using Portra, Delta 400, Gold, etc. on 16mm.

 

[xkaes]

It is not only a nickel, the options for 16mm film are very limited. 35mm has the best variety of films. Imagine using Portra, Delta 400, Gold, etc. on 16mm

Different strokes for different folks. Good luck with your Mamiya.

I don't sell my Minolta's short and use their two formats to the max -- 10x14mm and 12x17mm on 16mm unperforated film, which I usually get from 35mm perforated film. The unused portion of the 35mm film is used in my Minox-film cameras -- so no waste at all.

But don't sell 120 film short. All of the films you mentioned -- and dozens more (Ektar 100, Infrared, etc.) -- are available in 120, PLUS you can get FOUR rolls of 16mm film (15.25mm) out of 120. No need to worry about losing any of your images. Here's the 75 versions of 120 from B&H:

https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/buy/120-film/ci/39570

 

[cannotShootStraight]

120, PLUS you can get FOUR rolls of 16mm film (15.25mm)

Yes that's pretty amazing. I have seen the Goathill cutter on Etsy as well but because I am not living in the US the cutter will probably end up costing around 100$.
I'll post some images after I've developed the roll of Ilford HP5, maybe I buy it if I am not happy with the result, or I build something out of a larger matchbox using 4 blades.

used in my Minox-film cameras

Which one do you own? Going even smaller than 16mm is kinda seductive

 

[xkaes]

To get four rolls out of 120, you only need three blades.

FYI, you should check on ETSY for costs because shipping and the EU VAT varies quite a bit depending on where you live.

Plus ETSY has customer reviews!

 

[cannotShootStraight]

Wow I just spent an hour walking around taking photos only to find out in the dark that the film has come loose from the take-up spool after the first picture.
After respooling and making sure the film is properly fed into the take-up spool, I found that I couldn't wind past 3 or 4 frames after it got continuously harder to wind with each frame.

How can this be? As far as I know the Mamiya 16 can handle all kinds of 16mm film, perf and unperf.

 

[cannotShootStraight]

This is Ilford HP5.
8min D96, 10min Fixing.

It is pretty much as grainy as Kodak Double-X but the sharpness is better. Maybe D96 just sucks and makes everything grainy as hell.

 

[guangong]

I have a slitter that gives one 16mm strip and one Minox strip. Very well designed...no blades. Unfortunately, no longer available.

 

[Alan Edward Klein]

Why would anyone do this? Is there really a cost savings?

 

[Dustin McAmera]

The OP already said it's more about getting a decent choice of films. I do the same for 127 film.

 

[cannotShootStraight]

The OP already said it's more about getting a decent choice of films. I do the same for 127 film.

What kind of cutter are you using?

 

[xkaes]

I have a slitter that gives one 16mm strip and one Minox strip. Very well designed...no blades. Unfortunately, no longer available.

Goathill has these slitters -- using blades.

 

[xkaes]

How can this be? As far as I know the Mamiya 16 can handle all kinds of 16mm film, perf and unperf.

It can, but is your film 16mm wide? If not, it may be getting "screwed up" moving from one cassette to the other.