Gauging interest: New 122 Film (HP5+)

[Thesnowman21]

I'm considering a somewhat insane project, and I'm looking to gauge interest. I'm researching buying an 8" x 100ft roll of HP5 in Ilford's ULF program, and cutting it down into fresh 122 film, rolling it onto 3d printed spools with homemade backing paper, and selling most of the rolls in a limited run (likely on Ebay). I'm still in the very early stages of planning this, but I'm estimating based on rough material cost that the price would be $20-25 per 6 exposure roll, which I know is a lot, but it would be fresh HP5, not 50+ years expired, 400 iso, and the film would be big enough to take advantage of the size of these cameras. I would hope to get the rolls out in December.

Let me know if you would be interested in something like that. Again, I'm very early in the process, so no guarantee it'll happen, but the large roll of film would be quite expensive on my end, so I want to know I wouldn't just be eating that cost. Also, if anyone has any ideas or advice, it'd probably be good to hear that too.

I'm not super familiar with the rules of Photrio, so I just want to be clear that I am not selling or advertising any product in this post, nor am I asking for crowdfunding. That being said, I have no intention to break the rules and apologize if this post is a violation of them. Like I said, I'm new to Photrio.

Thank You

 

[koraks]

I'm not super familiar with the rules of Photrio, so I just want to be clear that I am not selling or advertising any product in this post, nor am I asking for crowdfunding. That being said, I have no intention to break the rules and apologize if this post is a violation of them.

We have reviewed your post and decided it can be published in its present place. Thank you for your patience while your thread was under review, and good luck with your endeavor!

 

[BrianShaw]

I'm interested; if not very interested. Looking forward to hearing about feasibility and the other important details, like cost. But I'm interested. Have you considered FP4+? For me the slower film is more usable than HP5+

 

[blee1996]

I might also be interested in FP4+ in 122 roll. Right now I have the last few rolls of Verichrome Pan in 122 size, for Kodak 3A Autographic and an Al-Vista 3B panorama camera. It would be nice to have some fresh film.

 

[Wolfram Malukker]

The only issues here not addressed is getting spools. 3D printing is fine, but the thin flanges need to be checked for light-tightness. Many of the thinner spool flanges are not light tight when 3D printed. Backing paper and film is not difficult to get, it just requires someone to put in the effort as you describe.

Would 400ISO film be appropriate for the limited shutter speeds of most 122 cameras? Would 100ISO not be more appropriate?

 

[Thesnowman21]

I have some test spools I made that appear to be light tight, although I am planning on painting the flanges anyway.

As for film choice, I was looking at HP5 because I thought it was the only ULF film wide enough to support 122, but now that I'm looking at the list again there is FP4 in the 10" x 100ft. size, which would work, so I'll be shifting my focus to that.

In the meantime, I'll be buying some expired military film (that is much cheaper) to test my process before I invest in the ULF roll. From what I've read, that stuff is about iso 6. If I'm successful, I'll hopefully have rolls of that available by July. This film stock being cheaper would mean that the $20-25 that I estimated for a 122 roll of hp5 would go way down for this, maybe more like $10-15 (rough estimate) for 6 exposures.

 

[Steve Goldstein]

Not owning a camera that requires 122 film I have no horse in the race, but I just wanted to remind you that both Kodak and Ilford have had troubles with transfer from the backing paper onto the film in the past. Making suitable backing paper in this size may prove to be a formidable challenge.

 

[Trask]

I too have a Kodak 3A (model C) so perhaps would want a couple of rolls -- thank goodness I have a take-up spool. I would, however, have to figure out how to develop the film -- maybe in my JOBO tank?

 

[Thesnowman21]

This gentleman made his own backing paper and seems to have had success.

If you want to develop 122 film, there is an etsy store called FilmStuffLab (I'm not affiliated with them in any way) that sells 3d printed developing reels in many sizes for Patterson and JOBO tanks. I've purchased twice from them already, and the reels are great.

 

[MattKing]

The modern film emulsions - like FP4+ or HP5+ - have a very high propensity toward chemically interacting with paper and ink. Colour films too.
If someone is attempting to make backing paper equipped film with much older emulsions, like some of the Foma films, there appears to be less trouble.
It also may be the case that if you are manufacturing the film and backing paper sandwich just a short time before it is exposed and you are ensuring that the film is developed promptly after exposure, the resulting minimalized time that the emulsion and the backing paper are pressed against each other may allow you to get away with it.

 

[mshchem]

I have approximately 5 spools and backing paper from old, Verichrome rolls. As much as I'd like to say heck yeah, I probably wouldn't mess with it. I even have a letter press that would print backs. A friend has done this has zinc die cuts, type height, of many of the old Azo etc backs.
Probably be easier for me to put a 5x7 back on my Deardorff, but too lazy to do that either. Real photo post cards contact printed are amazing.

 

[mshchem]

Can a computer guru tell me why when I click on the above video it tells me to sign in? Sign in to what? Is this Google or YouTube?

 

[Thesnowman21]

My understanding is that acrylic paint is inert, and that's what's going to be in contact with the film.

The video is just YouTube, I don't know why it would want you to sign in.

 

[BrianShaw]

My understanding is that acrylic paint is inert, and that's what's going to be in contact with the film.

The video is just YouTube, I don't know why it would want you to sign in.

The link didnt work for me either until I clicked it 3 times. A search on YouTube app for “122 backing paper” reveals tgat video and a couple of other on same/similar topic.

Thanks for posting the link!

 

[Thesnowman21]

For anyone else who wants to watch the video, its titled "Lets make a postcard Ep01: 122 film frame counter numbers", and its on YouTube.

 

[qqphot]

My feeling is that almost every camera that used 122 film will have a very slow shutter and be better suited to very slow films. But the good part is you can now get bulk FP4+ from the ULF sale, so maybe that would make more sense?

 

[Thesnowman21]

Yeah, I'm planning to do that eventually. I'm only using the expired film to make sure my process works. It would suck to spend hundreds on a nice big roll of FP4 only to find out the 3d printed spools aren't light tight, or my film cutter doesn't work, or the backing paper reacts with the film, etc.

 

[MattKing]

My understanding is that acrylic paint is inert, and that's what's going to be in contact with the film.

Good luck with that .
The film manufacturers - particularly Kodak - spent fortunes trying just about everything to deal with the issue.

 

[Wolfram Malukker]

It is a combination of the film, the ink, and the paper that matters. Different papers will work differently with different inks on different films. It is difficult to find an ink and paper combination that works with all films.

I currently have a long-running test batch of 120 film in my desk drawer, that seems to work perfectly fine for up to two years so far, with commercially available backing paper that I have bought in 8" wide rolls.

 

[koraks]

This gentleman made his own backing paper and seems to have had success.

How long did he store the rolled-up film and under what conditions?
I'm sure the 'acrylic on generic paper' approach will seem to work initially. The question is how the film behaves after months or a few years on a shelf. If you're making film for yourself, you can just make as much as you need and use it up quickly. But in your case, as you're looking to sell it, it's a different ballgame and someone out there is bound to keep some rolls sitting under adverse conditions for a bit too long and may (probably, will) end up with mottled images.

What @Wolfram Malukker describes above is a kind of very informal PAT (Photographic Activity Test) which is the way this should ideally be handled: verify the approach works. This, of course, creates a very long lead-time for the project as technically you couldn't proceed before finishing that testing. I assume that won't be feasible, so you'd have to accelerate the testing (esp. higher temperature) and then hope it's still somewhat representative for a real-world scenario.

I agree that the backing paper is a tough one to tackle here, although I'm sure it won't be much of a problem for the film that's used up quickly after manufacture.

 

[Don_ih]

I have a postcard camera I use. FP4+ would be a better choice for film speed, that's certain. Mine has a good shutter but it's too slow to handle iso400 in the sun.

I've reused backing paper but it was very fragile. It frayed at the edges originally when it was wound on the take-up spool and some of that turned into rips when it was unwound. I had to tape it to reuse it.

I've mostly used the camera with sheets of 5x7. Would Ilford make a roll of the appropriate width during the ULF? Cutting down an 8" roll wouldn't be fun.