Does it make sense to buy a film loader for bulk film?

[Bill Burk]

I think if you leave the gate open you only expose a outer layer or two of film. Don’t ask me how I know.

 

[koraks]

I think if you leave the gate open you only expose a outer layer or two of film. Don’t ask me how I know.

I have learned that the remjet backing of Vision3 film is very effective. I guess I know this because of the same unknown reason...

 

[lantau]

I like my Watson style loader better than the other. My version of the other type has no felt, btw. Only a light trap. So it would fog the first few cm inside the trap when opened in daylight.

That being said I did leave open the gate of the Watson style, once. It was a stupid thing to do. Like accidentally taking a step forward into the mud even though you didn't intend to.

Anyway, the light only penetrates a few windings, but in my case it did go down the side of the roll. That meant that for each 36exp roll I had a frame (and half of its neighbour frames) which was fogged in the bottom third. That lesson is burnt into my mind...

Bulk loaders are expensive on eBay, but with patience I was lucky to score mine at attractive prices. The Watson even was old new stock in sealed packaging, Made in U.S.A.

If loading without bulk loader it is advantageous to have film in a can. When needing to put down the bulk roll place it into the lid of the can, which will restrict how far the unwound portion can go. Without it I would be afraid that it could reach the edge of what you're working on, fall on the floor and make the entire roll unwind. I didn't try that myself, but I feel it could happen.

I started with 400ft Vision3 bulk rolls long before I bought my first 100ft b/w film roll. Using the lid of the can as a base made it really safe and easy to take off a good length to be transferred into the bulk loader.

 

[AgX]

If loading without bulk loader it is advantageous to have film in a can. When needing to put down the bulk roll place it into the lid of the can, which will restrict how far the unwound portion can go. Without it I would be afraid that it could reach the edge of what you're working on, fall on the floor and make the entire roll unwind. I didn't try that myself, but I feel it could happen.

See post #2

 

[Pioneer]

I think if you leave the gate open you only expose a outer layer or two of film. Don’t ask me how I know.

I'm pretty sure you're right but I have no idea how I know that.

Ahh, the adventures of using film...

like turning on the lights before putting the 4x5 film away in the box...

 

[KN4SMF]

The Lloyd's is the best.

 

[Sirius Glass]

The Lloyd's is the best.

+1

 

[alanrockwood]

Wasn't it Exacta that had a film cutter built into the camera?-----------------Eh! Just another piece of useless information

Yes, Exakta (sometimes spelled Exacta) had a film cutter built into the camera... just another one of the interesting quirks of the Exakta, along with left-handed operation, shutter speeds up to 12 seconds, and an astonishing array of lenses and accessories that were available in years past.

An Exakta VX iia was my first 35mm camera. Some people consider that model to be the high water mark for Exaktas. I had a love-hate relationship with it, until it finally broke. Over the decades I missed that old Exakta. I had a 58mm f/2 semi auto Biotar (a legendary lens), and a preset 90mm f/3.5 Tele-Xenar that was beautifully made. Fortunately there is ebay for anyone wanting an Exakta refill... of course, those old Exaktas don't always work when bought off the auction site.

As an aside, in my opinion the styling of the old Exaktas is the most beautiful 35mm cameras ever made. Also, some people don't agree, but to me the trapezoidal body fit my hand better than any other camera I have used.

 

[alanrockwood]

Over the years I have managed to acquire a pile of bulk loaders. I don't know how many because I haven't counted, but probably more than ten.

I have Lloyd, Watson (both the old model 66 and the new model 100), Alden, and a Telesar "computerized". I prefer the Lloyd because it is simpler to use and wastes less film, though as some other people have mentioned you can also operate the Watson and Alden to avoid wasting film if you do part of the loading in the dark. I haven't used the Telesar, so I can't comment on that one.

Out of the Alden and the Watson models, the Alden is the best built, and it has an extended counter so you know how much of the bulk roll you have used. (I think the Telesar also has an extended counter, but I don't remember for sure.) The old Watson model 66 comes next in quality, and the newer Watson model 100 comes in last, though functionally even the newer model works OK.

By the way, if you buy a bulk loader from ebay it will sometimes come with some expired film still loaded in the bulk loader, so the purchase can basically pay for itself immediately, provided the film is not too old.

Also, if you get a Lloyd bulk loader that is missing a handle, B&H lists a replacement on their website for about $7.

 

[alanrockwood]

The best camera to use if you have a bulk loader is a Canon Rebel film camera. The reason is that when you load the camera it unwinds the whole roll and counts how many frames that corresponds to. That gives two advantages. The first is that it doesn't matter how many shots you loaded into the cassettes. The camera keeps track of that for you, (up to a maximum of 36 shots.) The other advantage is that the Rebel film counter counts down, so you always know how many shots you have left on the roll, which is far more useful information than how many shots you have used.

 

[AgX]

However there is NO camera that shows you whether it is counting up or down, that always either has to b looked up in the manual or tested by transporting the film.

 

[Cholentpot]

The best camera to use if you have a bulk loader is a Canon Rebel film camera. The reason is that when you load the camera it unwinds the whole roll and counts how many frames that corresponds to. That gives two advantages. The first is that it doesn't matter how many shots you loaded into the cassettes. The camera keeps track of that for you, (up to a maximum of 36 shots.) The other advantage is that the Rebel film counter counts down, so you always know how many shots you have left on the roll, which is far more useful information than how many shots you have used.

I tend to over stuff my canisters and my Rebel will only allow me to shoot 36 even if there are 40 or more shots on the roll. It's also nice just in case someone opens the camera back your photos are safe.

I just ordered 100 feet of 16mm film. I'm going to have to load that stuff by hand.

 

[AgX]

Otherwise one may yield up to 42 exposures out of a selfloaded cassette and still even get them processed.

 

[alanrockwood]

I tend to over stuff my canisters and my Rebel will only allow me to shoot 36 even if there are 40 or more shots on the roll...

Yes, the 36 shot limit is a disadvantage of the Canon Rebel way of handling film. However, for me the advantages of the Rebel method outweigh the disadvantages.

 

[koraks]

I tend to over stuff my canisters and my Rebel will only allow me to shoot 36 even if there are 40 or more shots on the roll.

Most, if not all, autofocus Canons apparently exhibit this behavior. Too bad they don't go up to 36 if I happen to load a shorter bit of film! Would be nice if they were consistent all the way.

 

[Cholentpot]

Yes, the 36 shot limit is a disadvantage of the Canon Rebel way of handling film. However, for me the advantages of the Rebel method outweigh the disadvantages.

No back button focus kinda ruins the rebel series for me. On the other hand they are really light and quick, so a Rebel with a 50mm is smaller than some of my point and shoots.

Most, if not all, autofocus Canons apparently exhibit this behavior. Too bad they don't go up to 36 if I happen to load a shorter bit of film! Would be nice if they were consistent all the way.

EOS A2 and the Elan will keep chugging through the film past 40.

 

[koraks]

EOS A2 and the Elan will keep chugging through the film past 40.

Apparently the firmware was different in the non-US versions as at least my EOS5 (=A2) does not go past 36. I don't have an Elan to test, only an EOS50e (Elan II) and 30e (Elan7) and I'm quite sure the 50e doesn't go beyond 36 either and I'm 100% positive that the 30e doesn't. Neither does my EOS1 for that matter, or my T90.

 

[Cholentpot]

Apparently the firmware was different in the non-US versions as at least my EOS5 (=A2) does not go past 36. I don't have an Elan to test, only an EOS50e (Elan II) and 30e (Elan7) and I'm quite sure the 50e doesn't go beyond 36 either and I'm 100% positive that the 30e doesn't. Neither does my EOS1 for that matter, or my T90.

I have an Elan II. I shot up to 43 on my last roll. I'm unsure if it displayed past 39 though.

 

[AgX]

I too felt bothered by this behaviour of the T90 etc. But to be fair, can we really expect a manufacturer to assist us in a procedure that is very depending on what type of cassette we load, whether we can follow at what exposure beyond 36 were are exposing and how we get the excess film into our tanks and later into our files?

 

[Cholentpot]

I too felt bothered by this behaviour of the T90 etc. But to be fair, can we really expect a manufacturer to assist us in a procedure that is very depending on what type of cassette we load, whether we can follow at what exposure beyond 36 were are exposing and how we get the excess film into our tanks and later into our files?

I make it work...somehow or another that 46 exposure strip is getting. onto. that. gosh. darn. reel!

 

[Sirius Glass]

I make it work...somehow or another that 46 exposure strip is getting. onto. that. gosh. darn. reel!

A good way to get scratches on 35mm negatives.

 

[Cholentpot]

A good way to get scratches on 3mmm negatives.

At .03 cents a roll I'm not as picky as I once was. It does tend to rub some of the emulsion of the edges though. And it's super thick cine stock.

I'm more at risk of getting scratches from the recycled canisters that I'm using.

 

[RalphLambrecht]

Hey friends,


I am considering buying a film loader for 35mm bulk film but I can't find much information about it for some reason.

I am not only thinking about saving money when buying an often used film as a 30m roll but also about the possibiliy to make shorter film rolls (5-10 photos) for testing out cameras and experimenting with development.

I know you would loose film material when making shorter rolls but it just seems more comfortable then taking 10 shots on a normal roll of film and then cutting it off or even wasting a whole roll of film just for testing things out.
I am only using older cameras so the DX Code doesn't matter to me.


Is anyone of you using a film loader? How is it working? Is it easy to use?
How many times can you reuse the film container because I have read that you shouldn't use them more than five times. Is that true? That would mean buying new containers all the time.


Thanks in advance,

C.

easy enough to do but not worth it in my opinion unless you shoot a ton of it. Iprefer fresh cartridges from the manufacturer.

 

[AgX]

A good way to get scratches on 35mm negatives.

I have a nearly one winding outside a clear Jobo reel and get no scratches.

 

[Cholentpot]

I have a nearly one winding outside a clear Jobo reel and get no scratches.

Sometimes I leave a nice tail hanging out of the reel with no issues. I live dangerously.