Frames that start and end between sprocket holes...

My Nikkormat does this too. Curved nail clippers work pretty well for the problem. Otherwise, as others have noted, they're a real PITA to sleeve in the print files w/o trimming. The nail clippers also work for trimming down 120 spools to fit into 620 cameras.

Have you ever looked at a film transport gear system?

Usually 3 or four gears involved and if one gear is put in with one tooth misaligned. That's all it takes.

See this thread too:

(there was a url link here which no longer exists)

(John, you hinted at fixed gears there.)

Rick A said:

Where the spacing lines end up is a matter of how you load the camera, nothing odd about it, the camera isn't doing anything to mess with you.

Click to expand...

gorbas said:

Rick A., sorry, way of loading film will not change it. Distance between frame gate and gears will.

Click to expand...

Rick is right! I have many stored rolls of film all shot with the same camera during my high school days (45 years ago) while on the yearbook and newspaper photography staffs, so I looked at my negative files from back then!

My film loading technique generally was the same (advance film on takeup reel until film sprocket holes were engaged with the drive sprockets near the top and bottom right edge of the frame opening...but there were times I was rushed) all done manually in the days before automatic load mechanisms were invented! More of the rolls had interframe spacing aligned with the space BETWEEN the holes, but there were also many rolls where the interframe space aligned to the HOLE.

Pure probability theory makes it more likely that the interframe aligns with HOLES a higher amount of the time than aligning with spaces, as the holes are bigger than the spaces.

I've noticed this ever since I learned some 30-odd years ago that Leicas were calibrated so that the frame line always falls between the sprocket holes. Never having owned a Leica, I was glad to discover that this was also true of my Canons (New F-1 and more recently an EOS 1N-RS).

It may not be a big issue, but better that it works out that way than not, no?

Generaly the higher end cameras get this right. Back in the days when foplks were doing multimedia slide shows, some of the slide mount makers actually made "Pin Registered" slide mounts (like these - https://www.gepe.com/website/index.asp?pageID=273 )which depended on the camera getting the perfs in the right place.

My Canon EOS 7n and 1N get this right, my canon rebel XS does not. My Pentax MX is always out, while the rest of the cameras vary. The deign of the rewind clutch will control if the sprocket can end up in a random position or if it can only latch where the sprocket hole will not fall on the frame line. To get a camera that is intended to get it right but does not adjusted is possible, but in most cases would require a fair amount of disassemble time.

BTW the 7N actually normally manages to not just get the image between the perfs, but if the end of the film is alligned with the red loading line, it gets the pre-printed frame number right in the middle of the frame, although I also dislike that it will not try to use frame 37. The rebel series Will try to use the entire roll, and often give me 38 shots with Foma film, and 36 or 37 with other brands. Foma seems to make their rolls just a bit longer than the minimum spec.

I do not have this problem with 120 film and 4"x5" film.

cmacd123 said:

Back in the days when foplks were doing multimedia slide shows, some of the slide mount makers actually made "Pin Registered" slide mounts (like these - https://www.gepe.com/website/index.asp?pageID=273 )which depended on the camera getting the perfs in the right place.

Click to expand...

Still do. As the rather new Diaspeed system:

(there was a url link here which no longer exists)

My recollection is that pin registered cameras were very specialized and very expensive. We used the punch.

My understanding is that "pin registered camera" means a camera with a punch intalled within the camera.

Out of curiosity, I just went and looked at a few 135 neg pages from different cameras. Predictably, the Leica negs are perfectly evenly spaced and have the inter-frame space aligned between perforations, the Nikkormat is almost as perfect (fractions of a millimetre) in even spacing and also always has the inter-frame space correct. The cheapest 135 that I use is a Olympus Mju-II and this has slightly less regular spacing than the Nikkormat, still well under a millimeter variation though, yet still always has the inter-frame spacing between the perforations.

I did shoot once with a plastic disposable camera, one of the 'waterproof' holiday things, but can't find the negs right now, oops, though it would certainly be interesting to find out how that performed.

It seems that perhaps there are some cameras out there which have been disassembled/reassembled incorrectly, in order for the relation between the frames and the perforations (or better to say, between the teeth of the drive shaft and the edge of the frame) to be out of adjustment? Then again, unless we are relying on the perforations for precise slide mounting, is this really any problem?!

AgX said:

My understanding is that "pin registered camera" means a camera with a punch intalled within the camera.

Click to expand...

Actually, most _Cameras_ with pin registarion are in the Movie business, where any variation on the frame spacing will cause the picture to vibrate up and down the screen. In some movie cameras their is a registration claw which grabs the perfs while the shutter is open, and retracts to let the pull down claw move the film to the next frame.

There are slide mounts that do use a registration punch to get the transparency in the right place. There are others ("weiss" is another brand) that use the perf in the film to locate the film.

There actually was a movie camera once that did punch holes in the film for each frame, but that took unperforated film and got around a patent.

cmacd123 said:

There actually was a movie camera once that did punch holes in the film for each frame, but that took unperforated film and got around a patent.

Click to expand...

There were still 35mm cameras which got a punch to ensure most precise frame-related positioning of the piece of film in a slide mount.

AgX said:

There were still 35mm cameras which got a punch to ensure most precise frame-related positioning of the piece of film in a slide mount.

Click to expand...

The one's I knew about were aftermarket modifications, like:

https://www.cameraquest.com/NF3Pin.htm

http://soverf2repair.webs.com/f2_pin_registered.htm

BrianShaw said:

My recollection is that pin registered cameras were very specialized and very expensive. We used the punch.

Click to expand...

https://www.gepe.com/website/index.asp?pageID=283

Yes, this is correct, many upscale cameras register the film properly. There is even an ISO or DIN Standard, specifying registration as well as the spacing and location of the sprocket holes. It is extremely important for the movie industry, but also for the photographic cameras. Wess mounts, GEPE and Diaspeed work with this Standard. For stereo slides, you can't be without it, alignment with slide mounts without registration is almost impossible. It also helps with pre-programmed slide shows.