I just hope that you do 127 BEFORE you do 126My Baby Rolleiflex 4x4 is hungry!!!!!!
I'm the opposite, I'd like them to do 126 before 127 because there are already options for new 127 film on the market
Hello APUG from FILM Ferrania (PART 2)
-
A
- Thread starter Sean
- Start date
Recent Classifieds
-
Free Mini Radio triggers: Light pix lab Flash Q
- Started by RoboRepublic
-
Want to Buy Kodak Polytoner
- Started by Guillaume Zuili
-
For Sale PLAUBEL MAKINA 67 GRIP
- Started by Guillaume Zuili
-
For Sale FS: Gundlach-Manhattan Hyperion Diffusion 7in f/4 Lens
- Started by B.S.Kumar
Forum statistics
- Status
I'm the opposite, I'd like them to do 126 before 127 because there are already options for new 127 film on the market
Besides, with 126 we could all relive this
[video=youtube;s4hkEahJCbc]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s4hkEahJCbc[/video]
[video=youtube;s4hkEahJCbc]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s4hkEahJCbc[/video]
Nothing like as sad as the E6 lab workers who don't have jobs any more.
Haha. That was terrific. I used to have one of those.
It would be much sadder if it was on its way to a Chinese Steel Mill at the bottom of a load of mixed scrap metal. WE have to trust that enough of the machine was packed away so that they can build a working unit when they are ready.
Of course we would also love if they were to be able to get a project team together and work with Foma or Adox.DE or someone else to pack SOME 126 film based on existing B&W stock. Although I do recall somewhat earlier in the thread that the actual Tooling for the 126 Cartridges was NOT located, although a CAD/CAN file does exist, so the expensive process of making a new mold would be needed before they could pack anything in 126 format.
I'm hoping to get my hands on fresh 126 chrome as well. My first slides were on 126, and I found that the square format had its advantages when it came to slides. Once one finds the right way to put one slide in the projector, all the other slides go in the same way, and since many screens are square, every slide can fill the whole screen.
Some years ago, I experimented with "the next best thing". I loaded Agfa Rapid cassettes with Velvia and shot them on my Isomat-Rapid. After three short rolls I ran out of Robot format mounts.
I still have a small stash of heat seal mounts for 126. My Minolta Autopak 500 and Kodak Instamatic Reflex will remain here waiting for Ferraniachrome 126.
126 got a bad rap it didn't deserve. The film plane flatness issue was overrated. One of the photography magazines of the day rigged a Leicaflex to a 126 holder and got good results. I remember being in a forum discussion with someone who said his pictures with normal lenses were okay, but using a 200mm lens "revealed" the lack of sharpness cause by the lack of a spring loaded pressure plate (the error is the fact that the film plane is actually less critical with a longer lens. If you want to set up a camera with an uncertain film plane for failure, you would use a very fast wide-angle lens wide open)
Even the base model Kodak Instamatics (100, 104, X-15) were decent, within their limitations. Fairly sharp if you disregard the corners and the subject is 5m away, and light leaks were unheard of.
OTOH, the cartridge made horizontal-travel focal plane shutters impossible, vertical FP shutters difficult, the square format not so perfectly suited for prints (as scenics look better in landscape mode and portraits better in portrait), and EK arguably poisoned the well by having a 2.8 triplet in its flagship 700/704/800/804 models (the German import 500 was a much better camera)
Some years ago, I experimented with "the next best thing". I loaded Agfa Rapid cassettes with Velvia and shot them on my Isomat-Rapid. After three short rolls I ran out of Robot format mounts.
I still have a small stash of heat seal mounts for 126. My Minolta Autopak 500 and Kodak Instamatic Reflex will remain here waiting for Ferraniachrome 126.
126 got a bad rap it didn't deserve. The film plane flatness issue was overrated. One of the photography magazines of the day rigged a Leicaflex to a 126 holder and got good results. I remember being in a forum discussion with someone who said his pictures with normal lenses were okay, but using a 200mm lens "revealed" the lack of sharpness cause by the lack of a spring loaded pressure plate (the error is the fact that the film plane is actually less critical with a longer lens. If you want to set up a camera with an uncertain film plane for failure, you would use a very fast wide-angle lens wide open)
Even the base model Kodak Instamatics (100, 104, X-15) were decent, within their limitations. Fairly sharp if you disregard the corners and the subject is 5m away, and light leaks were unheard of.
OTOH, the cartridge made horizontal-travel focal plane shutters impossible, vertical FP shutters difficult, the square format not so perfectly suited for prints (as scenics look better in landscape mode and portraits better in portrait), and EK arguably poisoned the well by having a 2.8 triplet in its flagship 700/704/800/804 models (the German import 500 was a much better camera)
Last edited by a moderator:
- Joined
- Mar 30, 2012
- Messages
- 1,259
- Format
- 35mm
I believe they have all the equipment for packaging it into 126 format, yes they lost the injection moulds etc for the 126 cartridges, but have the blueprints.
Even if they did not have the blueprints, it would still be easy enough for someone to draw these up and get the moulds CNC milled.
the chinese can probably make them for us really cheap if needbe.
And if Ferrania dont have the time or resources to convert 126 film (should be easy enough, because its essentially 35mm with different perfs) im sure, they would be able to work with lomography and sell it bulk to them, since they themselves are converting all kinds of films into 110 format etc. so 126 would be a no brainer for them.
I would love to try out my instamatic!
I was looking at all my fathers photos taken on a cheap 126 camera back in the 70's, so many light leaks. lol He laughed so much when i told him that people like this effect now and delibratley use cheap cameras for its effect and will use instagram to make these effects etc.
Since most birds are variations of black, gray, brown and white, is it worth it to shoot with Delta 3200 or should I stick to Kodak Portra 800, Kodak Vivid Color 400 and Kodak Ultra Color 400 with the tripod mounted f/8 500mm lens or the f/8 500mm lens with the 2XE extender [that is, accounting for the limitations and advantages of the optics]?
I have the Instamatic camera and set in the video. I reload my own used 126 carts and when I take that camera out, people go crazy. They really dig the flash cubes. Everyone wants to take a picture with the camera or get theirs taken.
You need good paper backing for any of the films that are packed in paper including sheet films. If you don't have that, you don't have a product.
PE
PE
If they've lost the dies for the cartridges, that could be a problem. The tolerances for the dimensions of that Kodapak are very tight in dozens of places.
Funny thought going through my head, is that many of us who aspire to use 126 again, already have empty cartridges and backing paper. Just a spool of film with the film and the backing having the right rectangular perforations on one side at the right interval could work.
Funny thought going through my head, is that many of us who aspire to use 126 again, already have empty cartridges and backing paper. Just a spool of film with the film and the backing having the right rectangular perforations on one side at the right interval could work.
- Joined
- Mar 30, 2012
- Messages
- 1,259
- Format
- 35mm
It should be OK, they have the blueprints and claim they would have had to make new dies anyway as the old ones were probably past it.
If only toolmaking was that simple.
I'd guess you have no experience of manufacturing industry.
- Joined
- Mar 30, 2012
- Messages
- 1,259
- Format
- 35mm
Should only be easier with todays technology.
Blueprints will contain all the measurements needed.
If someone was able to use those to make the old 126 canisters by hand, without the aid of CAD or cnc milling, then it will only be easier with today's CNC technology to produce an accurate canister.
I wish it was so simple. Just the cost of making a mold for the plastics is incredibly expensive
Yeah, I get the same from people about emulsion making and film coating. It's simple, right?
This is probably why the film is behind schedule!!! It isn't so simple.
PE
This is probably why the film is behind schedule!!! It isn't so simple.
PE
We have injection molds made at work all the time for both new products and new molds for old products. It's not THAT hard to reproduce a mold for an old product from blueprints. If they have a CAD file it shouldn't be a big deal. Mostly, molds are made in China these days.
However, made in China or not, molds are NOT cheap.
It's more a problem of cost of the tooling rather than obtaining the tool. An industrial mold for 126 would probably be in the area of $100K but nearly indestructible. There are molding processes that can be used for lower quantity production but I don't know much about them.
However, made in China or not, molds are NOT cheap.
It's more a problem of cost of the tooling rather than obtaining the tool. An industrial mold for 126 would probably be in the area of $100K but nearly indestructible. There are molding processes that can be used for lower quantity production but I don't know much about them.
No, it isn't. Sometimes as I read these comments it occurs to me that if we believed them, then all of us would still be living in caves, as everything in the world would be impossible.
I'm fairly certain that with the full expertise and might of the modern industrial world brought to bear on the task of replicating a plastic film cartridge (that had already been successfully done previously) such a task would likely not to be classified as a miracle undertaking.
Jeez... we have startup companies these days who are designing and building cargo and human-rated rockets and spacecraft from scratch. And all of those button and switch caps in those spacecraft weren't carved by hand from ivory, you know. But a 126 plastic film cartridge is now beyond us?
I think not...
Ken
Say that the molds for 126 can be made, the paper can be found, and the film can be made, would there be enough market to make it economically feasible? Just because you want it, that is not enough to make it happen. Go back and look at the dreaded Kodachrome will be deleted thread where the Kodachomanistas wanted to make Kodachrome in grandma's barn. Like that happened.
Presumably the blueprints or the files show what the finished Cartridge parts look like. To make a mould you have to know how the actuall plastic flows, (so that their are not any Void areas where the material is too thn or missing. You have to know where it will shrink as it cools, so you can make the cavety just enogh bigger than the finished size so the plastic will shrink to the exact size you need.
These parts have some critical dimensions, but have to be cheep as they are only used once, so no machining of the finished parts is allowed. they have to pop out of the mould and be ready to use with just a tumble in Walnut shells to get the Mould flash off.
Now on the plus side their are some very skilled manufacturing staff in places like Italy, But yes a 100K dollar investment might be needed to make a small (3-6 cavity) mould for the two halves of the cartridge, and some more to make the fancy Mould (four movable parts) for the take up spool.
I am not sure if the requirements for 126 backing paper is all that much different than for regualr roll film. So if they are running down a suplier so they can make 120, that suplier can also probably make 126 paper with only a few thousand dollars of additional tooling expense. Only thing I don’t remember is if 126 Paper had the perforations to match the film, if so the precision required goes up a couple of orders of magnitude.
The chances of seeing 126 would have been MUCH greater if the Original tools had turned up, although they probably were 12-25 cavity items where the moulding plant would probably take more time setting them up than in running to make the new normal production run of a couple of thousand units. (it is possible that the cartridges were made by the Spanish Folks we know as AP photoplast, but they seem to have become invisible on the market.)
In loading Super 8 Film, some of the small suppliers still buy their super 8 cartridges from Kodak. Those have about 6 parts, plus a metal piece. Since Kodak no longer makes 126, they proably no longer can provide the empty cartridges.
Last edited by a moderator:
Ahh... But the original assertion was only that by applying new more modern manufacturing techniques that the task of creating new cartridges might, all other things being assumed equal, be easier to accomplish than in the past.
Whether or not such an undertaking is economically desirable is another thing. If it is not, then by definition all other things were not equal to begin with. But that is a different argument.
Everyone pause for a moment right now wherever you are and look around you. How many injection molded things can you count without you even needing to move an inch, and that are within direct eyesight?
It's a lot, isn't it?
Some of them are complex and expensive (like my laptop here), while others are dog poop simple (I see some brightly colored plastic paper clips in a plastic cup). And the most amazing thing of all about them is... none of those injection molded things were impossible to make, and they are all contemporary products. Somebody somewhere must know how to do it.
So I have a hard time dumping 126 plastic film cartridges into the same category as woolly mammoths and Neanderthals.
Ken
Both Do able and Desirable are to be considered.
- Status
| Photrio.com contains affiliate links to products. We may receive a commission for purchases made through these links. To read our full affiliate disclosure statement please click Here. |
PHOTRIO PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:  |