Have you ever bought a used bulk loader with anything other than Tri-X in it?

[J N]

I have bought 3-4 used bulk loaders over the years. All of them came with some film left inside. All of the film was Tri-X.

Anyone ever lucked out with a roll of Tech Pan or something color?

 

[mshchem]

I don't know what it was but it had remjet on it. It was nearly a full roll. 30 year old cine film I probably could have got 200 bucks for it on Ebay. I tossed it once I saw the remjet!

 

[Paul Howell]

I bought a fully loaded loader with a full roll of HP5 at an estate sale, that was in the 90s. I currently have a roll of Foma 100 in it.

 

[Sirius Glass]

I bulk loaded Ektachrome 100' rolls for many years. It made eighteen 36 exposure rolls.

 

[Kino]

One with Panatomic-X and one with HP4 back in the 1980's.

 

[chuckroast]

I've got two of them. One brand new, the other used. I used the "used" one for both Ultrafine 400 and APX 100. These loaders will be used for Double-X and Fomapan 200 when I run out of preloaded cartridges. I shoot very little 35mm, so it could be a while since I have tons of Efke, Tri-X, and Plus-X in factory cartridges to go through.

 

[J N]

In another thread I just resurrected, it appears I've found my long lost (probably too long) roll of Tech Pan 2415 in one of those Watson loaders that I hate.

 

[George Mann]

I bulk loaded Ektachrome 100' rolls for many years. It made eighteen 36 exposure rolls.

If only we could still purchase these!

 

[J N]

If only we could still purchase these!

I'm hopeful that my graduate photography professor friend still has a bulk roll of Fujichrome or Ektachrome in her school closet of highly expired things.

Last time in addition to some 669 she gave me a few boxes of QuickLoads. I love those things although developing 4x5 is not that awesome.

 

[BAC1967]

I‘ve bought a few bulk loaders with film, I think I found all of them at estate sales and garage sales. One has Tri-X, one had Panatomic-X and one has Eastman cine film, I think it’s Double X.

 

[Philippe-Georges]

Long time ago, when I was still shooting 35mm film, I found in the used one I bought for alms, an almost full roll of Colour (Slide?) Duplicating film.
There was a piece of masking tape on it mentioning "duplicating", but as, in all my juvenile stupidity, I opened the loader in broad day light, it was definitely ruined...

 

[brbo]

Last time I got bulk loaders with film inside (mostly I'm not that lucky and get them empty) it was some funky stuff that was obviously IR sensitive and had purple colour instead of green. Tossed that sh*t (3 x 100') and loaded it with some proper film - Foma, Aviphot and Eterna.

You guys always get Tri-X?! I must be the unluckiest person in the world...

 

[Anon Ymous]

I have bought several loaders, but the only one that had film in it had some old, badly fogged Tri-X.

 

[koraks]

One I got empty I think, the other had TMX in it. The TMX was perfectly fine; probably expired by about 20 years by the time I got it, and it performed wonderfully. It was about 60-75% of a 100ft roll, so I really lucked out on that one.

 

[Anon Ymous]

Last time I got bulk loaders with film inside (mostly I'm not that lucky and get them empty) it was some funky stuff that was obviously IR sensitive and had purple colour instead of green. Tossed that sh*t (3 x 100') and loaded it with some proper film - Foma, Aviphot and Eterna.

You guys always get Tri-X?! I must be the unluckiest person in the world...

Hahaha, good one...

 

[Buzz-01]

Just got one a few weeks ago with a few meters of Panatomic X in it. Unfortunately heavily fogged as apparently at some point in its history someone felt the need to take a peek inside... If I shoot 20 frames of the same composition, sometimes there's one usable...

 

[abruzzi]

got one with Delta 100 that was in very bad shape. it had been stored in a shed where the interior temps got over 150F in the summer. after a few rolls I pulled it but still have it around in case I want to practice loading

 

[ant!]

About a half roll of Foma 100, not too long expired and working fine...

 

[mshchem]

I have one from my friend's shop with very expired Ektachrome SW, horrible stuff, but it was free!!

 

[snusmumriken]

Nuffin' in mine.

 

[KinoGrafx]

Long time ago, when I was still shooting 35mm film, I found in the used one I bought for alms, an almost full roll of Colour (Slide?) Duplicating film.
There was a piece of masking tape on it mentioning "duplicating", but as, in all my juvenile stupidity, I opened the loader in broad day light, it was definitely ruined...

How funny- I got one loaded with E6 fuji duplicating film balanced for 3200k - It’s still sitting in there ‘cause I dont know what to do with it! Maybe call it “lomo blue” and sell it?

 

[JerseyDoug]

When I bought a Watson 100 on eBay a few years ago there was film in it. I loaded, exposed and developed a roll with Rodinal as if it was Tri-X. The negatives were very badly underexposed and there were no edge markings whatsoever. I tried treating it as Pan X for the next roll. The negatives were still underexposed but there was enough of an image to see that they were very contrasty. I gave the bulk roll to a friend and never heard anything more about it.

 

[Kino]

When I bought a Watson 100 on eBay a few years ago there was film in it. I loaded, exposed and developed a roll with Rodinal as if it was Tri-X. The negatives were very badly underexposed and there were no edge markings whatsoever. I tried treating it as Pan X for the next roll. The negatives were still underexposed but there was enough of an image to see that they were very contrasty. I gave the bulk roll to a friend and never heard anything more about it.

Might have been Kodalith...

 

[J N]

Here is an exposure from that >30 year old formerly long lost roll of Tech Pan 2415. EI 20, 9 min HC-110 Dil F. There was some fogging from an apparent light leak but I think I've got far enough into the bulk roll that it's mostly not, now.

Very contrasty and dense but I photographed it rather than use the flatbed. I might try stand developing it.

The negative is extremely dusty as I dropped it on the floor right before I photographed it and didn't feel like cleaning it. I'm pretty sure I'm going to move this to one of my Lloyd loaders as I'm also pretty sure this Watson loader leaks.

Seems perfectly usable. Has flaws but that's the whole idea, along with being a couple dozen free rolls of film.

 

[J N]

When I bought a Watson 100 on eBay a few years ago there was film in it. I loaded, exposed and developed a roll with Rodinal as if it was Tri-X. The negatives were very badly underexposed and there were no edge markings whatsoever. I tried treating it as Pan X for the next roll. The negatives were still underexposed but there was enough of an image to see that they were very contrasty. I gave the bulk roll to a friend and never heard anything more about it.

That was my experience with the above recently rediscovered roll of Tech Pan. When developed normally (for me) in Diafine, I got edge markings that were only just barely, barely visible, and images taken at EI 200+ were equally almost invisible. The easiest way to identify Tech Pan is that it's on a thin ESTAR (polyester) base that is obviously harder to tear than acetate.

I don't know if Tech Pan would be amenable to Diafine with more time in Part B or if it's just a non-starter. But I just bought more HC-110 anyway so I'm good.