Film

[lollipop78]

I was just wondering if there was a place where film could be bought in bulks with a savings then going to a store and getting it. This may be a stupid question, sorry if it is. I am using 35mm, the speed varies since I am still trying and learning. Also which brands are better then others when using film? I have a Nikon N55. Thanks!!!

 

[Robert]

What kind of film do you want? Colour? B&W? I'm guessing you're not processing the film yourself.

Try:

www.freestylephoto.biz

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home


Dead Link Removed

 

[lollipop78]

I was looking for both coulor and black and white. Thank you I will try those links.

 

[Donald Miller]

Melinda,
Another source for black and white film is PhotoWarehouse.biz . They carry 125 and 400 ISO film (35mm) already loaded in canisters. Price varies with quantity purchased. Good luck.

 

[Robert]

The cheapest way to get B&W film is to buy a bulk loader and load it yourself. This isn't very hard but does add a few added problems. I'm not sure your Nikon lets you set your own film speed. Getting bulk loaded film processed may also be harder.

I like Agfa APX 100 B&W film. It is relatively cheap. Better then that it looks good to me. Supposedly the film Freestyle sells under thier own name is Ilford. I think that may be the story with Photowarehouse to.

 

[juan]

Don't overlook our list sponsors JandC Photo and Calumet - you can click on their links at the top of the page.

Bulk load film is less expensive, but I always found it harder to print when I used it at a newspaper. Fred Picker said it was movie film made with a thicker film base so that it could stand the motors in a movie camera. I just know that the 35mm bulk Tri-X at the newspaper felt thicker and exposed differently than the regular Tri-X. I would fear that, as Melinda is using commercial processing, the processor might not understand the extra exposure I found bulk film to require. I'd stick with the regular stuff.
juan

 

[lollipop78]

Thaks guys this gives me a lot to think about and a lot of words to look up. I can't wait till the day when I understand photo language.

 

[Robert]

Bulk load film is less expensive, but I always found it harder to print when I used it at a newspaper. Fred Picker said it was movie film made with a thicker film base so that it could stand the motors in a movie camera. I just know that the 35mm bulk Tri-X at the newspaper felt thicker and exposed differently than the regular Tri-X. I would fear that, as Melinda is using commercial processing, the processor might not understand the extra exposure I found bulk film to require. I'd stick with the regular stuff.
juan

Does movie film use the same perforations? Somebody [I want to say out of Seattle but I don't remember] supposedly used to sell movie film and then you needed to send it back to them for processing.

All I can say is that my times seem too short when printing. The only real downside I see is the frame numbering scheme.

 

[juan]

As I understand it, 35mm was originally movie film. At some point after it became popular for still cameras, the manufacturers made versions with a thinner film base. They had the same sprocket holes/perforations.

I remember the outfit in Seattle. I never used the film, but I remember it was something special - maybe you got both negatives and slides from it?
juan

 

[Jorge Oliveira]

Re bulk film:
I've never noticed any difference between 'original rolls' and bulk film purchased in manufacturer's packaging.
There are companies offering reloaded movie film. Never used one of these.

Jorge O

 

[Eric Rose]

It's Seattle Filmworks I think. The movie film sucks for serious use. Color bites, muddy contrast and grainy. Just perfect for those artsy street shots.

 

[Ed Sukach]

Bulk film sold by the "large" manufacturers - Kodak, Agfa, Fuji, Ilford ... lord knows how many others ... is the *same* stuff as is loaded into their 35mm cartidges that you buy and use all the time..

Do not confuse it with the re-spooled motion film stock that was (is?) sold by Seattle Film Works. Check the processing information on the box ... If it says "C-41" or, in the case of transparency film, "E-6", it is OK.

There are differences in 35mm film stocks. Motion Picture film is produced and sold, in LARGE quantities, something like 100,000 feet at a time. It is not as closely controlled as far as film speed, color balance, processing requirements, etc., and each batch that is shipped has its own specific information for exposure and processing. Additionally, it *commonly* has an additional layer on the backing, ususally some sort of carbon-black compound (to prevent light from penetrating the flm and bouncing around in the cameras) that MUST be removed as a first step in processing. To attempt to process the stuff in the usual one-hour machines is disastrous... the chemicals will become *hoplessly* contaminated and the machine interiors gunked up to beat hell.

Additionally, the proper chemistry is not the same - again produced and sold in LARGE lots ~ 500 lbs or so.

After each `session', the motion picture studios usually have unused "ends" left over. That is sometimes sold, and re-spooled into film cartridges and sold at *cheap* prices - but not really, when one considers that the people selling the stuff are the only ones that will process it.

It is true that when Oscar Barnack designed the first Leica that he used motion picture film. How many will recall that the proper name for what we call "35mm" is "Double Frame"? Motion picture cameras run the film vertically: Barnack's camera used the film horizontally - therefore, to get a landscape format, two (2) frames were exposed at a time.

I have "bulk loaded" a *bunch*, in the past. Now most of my work is done on 120 roll film, so it is no longer possible (yeah, I know, I could go to 70mm...).

It is not terribly difficult, and it *will* save a LOT of money.

Bulk film, and bulk film loaders, are readily available from Calumet, B&H....

 

[Aggie]

..