Found B&W negs: What format?

Max Power · Mar 26, 2005

I found some negatives from Expo '67 in a box of extra 'stuff' that came with the complete darkroom setup I bought last year. Can anyone help me identify the format, please? (Pure curiosity BTW ).

The negative strips themselves are about 3.5cm wide with a single row of large sprocket holes on the bottom; these sprocket holes are spaced at about 3.2cm apart. The frames themselves are all 3cm square and there are 12 frames to a roll. The only text on the strips is 'Kodak Safety Film' which runs along the bottom between the sprocket holes.

The frames are surprisingly good, and would probably print very nicely. They are quite sharp and have excellent contrast. Some of the frames clearly show buildings and scenes from Expo '67 in Montreal and they actually came in a negative envelope with the Expo '67 symbol on it.

So, anyone have an idea?

Cheers,
Kent

Dave Parker · Mar 26, 2005

sounds like 126 or 127 format, which was quite common back then, even Rollei made a mini SL66 type camera to take shots with that type of film.

Dave

Neal · Mar 26, 2005

Dear Kent,

This sounds like 126 instamatic film. Extremely popular during that time. Heck, I took a bunch of photos with a Hawkeye instamatic at Expo '67. Of course, I was 12 years old and I thought that turning the camera 45 degrees made every shot look "cool".<g>

Neal Wydra

Woolliscroft · Mar 26, 2005

Ah my first ever camera, a Kodak Instamatic, with 126 film. I got it for Christmas when I was about 8. I actually still have it and I am told you can still get the film. My god it was bad, but it lit the fire.

David.

David A. Goldfarb · Mar 26, 2005

I agree that it's 126. My parents had a 126 Instamatic too around then.

bobfowler · Mar 26, 2005

Sounds like 126 to me as well. The image size should be 28x28mm.

ras351 · Mar 26, 2005

As others have mentioned this is 126 format. I remember the film came in a huge plastic cartridge which included the take-up spool. I still have a Kodak Instamatic somewhere - took many a blurry and off centre photo with it. FWIW 127 film is slightly wider and doesn't have any sprocket holes - like miniature 120/620.

joeyk49 · Mar 26, 2005

With the flash cube of course...

If only my parents had thought of a 35mm or a tlr back then... the photos (even though they were snaps) would have been sooooo much better.

Ho hum... the photographic images of my youth, lost in mediocrity...

Hopefully my children won't suffer the same fate...

Max Power · Mar 27, 2005

Brilliant!

Thanks everyone. I'm quite surprised by the quality of the negs though. Assuming that the photog had little or no control over the materials and process, its amazing that they show so little grain and are as sharp and contrasty as they are.

Kent

JHannon · Mar 27, 2005

What an interesting find! I would love to see the images if you decide to print them. I remember the radio ads for Expo 67 when I was a kid but did not get to go.

Regards,
John

ElrodCod · Mar 27, 2005

The 126 cartridge was (IMO) one of Old Yeller's better ideas. It was easy to load and unload, didn't have to be rewound, and could be developed on the same reels as 35mm. Sadly,it was dropped in favor of the similar but much smaller 110 cartridge.

PaulH · Mar 27, 2005

I have an old Kodak Instamatic Reflex (SLR) made in Germany with a Scneider Xenar lens on it. If I remember correctly it to pretty good pictures.

Max Power · Mar 27, 2005

I think that I will actually print some of them, just for the fun of it. I would like to post some of the prints, but I haven't come around to actually buying a scanner yet, so...

Kent

127 · Mar 28, 2005

126 film is still made by Ferrania.

Ian

argon · Mar 28, 2005

joeyk49 said:
With the flash cube of course...

No...you want the models with the "pop up" flash housing for AG-1 bulbs that always got stuck and couldn't "pop up" for very long...which didn't matter because the AAA batteries that powered the flash would rot out in their compartment long before the flash housing got stuck!

These were the cameras that those of us who have worked in mini-labs or photo-finishing recognize when we'd get a 12 shot roll of film with a Christmas tree on the first frame and next year's Christmas tree on the 12th frame.

I've got one in the basement that had "auto-wind" by virtue of a tab connected to a strap that wound the clockwork that made the "auto-wind" work...and that was about as reliable as the "pop up" flash.

Never forget the progression that made Kodak famous: 620 (instead of the 120 that everyone else in the world was using) followed by 127 followed by 126 followed by 110 followed by the disc film...every one was a "major improvement" over the previous format and every one was a dud. I thought for sure that it was the kiss of death for digital when Kodak announced that they were going into it full speed ahead!

best

argon

127 · Mar 28, 2005

argon said:
620 (instead of the 120 that everyone else in the world was using) followed by 127 followed by 126 followed by 110 followed by the disc film...every one was a "major improvement" over the previous format and every one was a dud.

Including 127 in that list is a bit misleading...

It was introduced in 1912, and is still available today (though kodak dropped it in '95). It's hardly a predecursor to 620, as that was introduced in 1932.

126 is actually a sucssor to 828 (bantam) - a totally sound idea: 35mm without the holes.

Ian

Brac · Mar 28, 2005

127 said:
Including 127 in that list is a bit misleading...

It was introduced in 1912, and is still available today (though kodak dropped it in '95). It's hardly a predecursor to 620, as that was introduced in 1932.

126 is actually a sucssor to 828 (bantam) - a totally sound idea: 35mm without the holes.

Ian

I agree with you but also I don't think any of the formats mentioned, apart from disc, could be regarded as a dud as they all had their day and apart from disc, film is still available for all of them with varying degrees of difficulty in finding it.

The idea behind 620 was to use a slimmer spool to give a slimmer camera which was of significance in the 30's when many amateurs (for whom this size was aimed at) used folding rollfilm cameras. Kodak dominated that market to quite a degree but some other manufacturers made cameras for the 620 film; when box cameras and folding cameras bit the dust in the late 50's/early 60's so did demand for that film.

Both 126 & 110 were a roaring success, mainly for simple cameras and indeed new cameras in the latter size were available until very recently which meant they were made in that size for well over 25 years. They faded away because manufacturers started making available lots of very cheap & very simple 35mm cameras with easy loading and producing better quality because of the larger neg size.

You can still get a lot of fun out of using cameras in all these sizes and you can pick them up cheap!

Found B&W negs: What format?

Moderator

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency