Carrying 120 rolls safely...

[Paul Green]

+1 for the lowepro film organiser.

 

[Ian David]

I carry all my exposed 120 rolls in one of the black plastic bags that Ilford paper comes in. These bags are very tough, light-tight in case one of your rolls unspools (which has never happened to me), lightweight, and cost nothing.

Ian

 

[Trask]

Here's a suggestion that tastes good: you can buy mini-M&Ms in a plastic flip-top tube container that holds two rolls of 120 film. These come in various colors (though the candies are the same regardless of tube color) so you could actually color-code your film by buying appropriate colors.

 

[perkeleellinen]

I have a few of these little hard cases which where designed for six rolls of 35mm film, but can accommodate four rolls of 120 or a combination of both, they turn up on ebay from time to time:

Nicest bit about them is that they are curved like a hip flask so they fit well in a pocket.

 

[mikebarger]

Has anyone ever damaged a roll of 120 carrying it loose in a bag or backpack?

 

[2F/2F]

If you cut the bottom off of one plastic 35mm film canister, and then cram that into another one, you have a custom 120/220 film canister.

I use pockets, bags, car doors, etc., and never had any damage. I do like the little tubes that com with Adox film, though. Adox CHS and Efke are the same thing, so if you want to use the Efke, get the Adox instead, since it comes with the canister. Those things are pricey when you buy them separately!

 

[Fotogeorge]

If you cut the bottom off of one plastic 35mm film canister, and then cram that into another one, you have a custom 120/220 film canister.

I use pockets, bags, car doors, etc., and never had any damage. I do like the little tubes that com with Adox film, though. Adox CHS and Efke are the same thing, so if you want to use the Efke, get the Adox instead, since it comes with the canister. Those things are pricey when you buy them separately!

I use the plastic M&M candies tube packages for shot rolls of film. The come in single and double length. They even have a snap cover. They are a perfect fit for 120/220 film rolls.

 

[tkamiya]

I'm happy to know I'm not the only one who thought about "film safety." If we don't obsess about every little thing, it wouldn't be a hobby would it?

Thank you VERY much about the suggestion of pill bottles!!

 

[Q.G.]

Has anyone ever damaged a roll of 120 carrying it loose in a bag or backpack?

I haven't.

So i only worry about where to put them all.

 

[Poisson Du Jour]

I haven't.

So i only worry about where to put them all.

Gosh. I would be more worried about light leaks during the often hurried load / unload process than storing them after exposure. And prey tell, what's this business of "banging around too much and getting damaged"?? :confused: Fresh films are not accorded any particularly snazzy treatment: they join the torch, dish sponge and Swiss Army knife in my rucksack. Exposed films from my trusty pinhole camera running 120 are stored in the small pocket built into the muff of my sleeping bag (holds 6 rolls). If I for some reason forget where I put them, there will be absolutely no mistakin' come bed time!

 

[Q.G.]

Gosh. I would be more worried about light leaks during the often hurried load / unload process than storing them after exposure. [...]

I wouldn't.
I can't remember the last time (which must have been the first time too) i had light spilling onto the film due to sloppy loading.
But with my bags well filled with equipment, i have to hunt for space to put film. And that's my only worry.
What i do when i want to take more film than i can cram in the equipment bag, is attach another bag, or rather that "film organizer" pouch mentioned earlier, to the bag. (It's not the name of the thing: any other large enough clip on bag/pouch would do too, but this one is about right for the job.) That takes care of almost everything. 'Almost', because it too only holds a finite amount of film.


I can't see myself even considering spending those amounts of money mentioned in the thread on 'film protectors'. On extra space, yes. But not on protectors.
Nor would i want to also have to find space for the containers (and Pelican cases???).

 

[Tom Taylor]

I remember reading recently where Ansel Adams said that a box of exposed 8x10 negatives shot while on a trip to Alaska were accidentally dropped into a lake. The box they were in was not waterproof and although it was quickly recovered most of the negatives were damaged beyond use. The famous image of Mt. McKinley was one of the survivors. He remarked that he "learned the hard way" to use a waterproof box to protect his negatives. That's one reason why I use the Otter Box and the Pelican; the other is to protect the film from physical damage. Considering that they will last a lifetime, they provide cheap insurance - $33 + tax was the cost for both cases which together will hold 15 rolls of film.

 

[Q.G.]

I would then rather get a large Pelican case, that not only protects film, but also the expensive equipment.



Oh, and the film would then go wherever there is room for it in the case, with no extra protection.