• Welcome to Photrio!
    Registration is fast and free. Join today to unlock search, see fewer ads, and access all forum features.
    Click here to sign up

How many 120 rolls would you carry?

Palantiri7

Member
Allowing Ads
Joined
Jan 11, 2006
Messages
131
Format
Large Format
Hiya folks,

I'm in the process of planning a month-long trip to Chile. I haven't decided on which part of the country to concentrate on yet, though. Anyway, I will be using my Rollei MF system for this trip and I am a bit stumped as to how many rolls of 120 film to carry. I usually use an 8x10 camera so, thus, I have been sort of conditioned in making each picture count. I plan to, if possible, buy all my film before I set off. I was curious as to how many rolls of 120 film you would take on this trip, or a similar trip. Thank you all!
 
I went to Iceland for 10 days and shot 55 rolls.

I went to Oaxaca for 30 days and shot 65 rolls.

If doing your trip, I would plan on 60-70 rolls. This allows 2 rolls a day.
 
Thank you, David: that's very interesting. Great blog, btw.
 
When I travel I will carry about 100 to 120 rolls black and white film in 120/220 rolls in various film speeds. 20-30 rolls of Tri-X 320 in 220s, 20 rolls of Tri-X 320 in 120s, 30-40 rolls of Plus-X, 15-20 rolls of Delta 3200 and 20 rolls of Ilford Pan F+. I use zip lock bags and double wrap each type of film in their own plastic bags with a label. When the film has been exposed I put them all in one plastic bag, double wrapped.

Good luck
 
thanks rory.

Is your trip a photo trip or is it a vacation that will include a nice camera?

If a photo trip, really think about how much you might shoot. Probably 2-3 rolls a day.

I'd probably go with the 60 rolls I recommended.
 
When traveling to shoot I take 70-100 rolls of 120 for each week and shoot 35 to 70 on average. Nothing is worse than running out of film, some places turnout to be far more photogenic than expected and others disappoint. I bracket and shoot everything from multiple angles so 1 subject can easily use up a roll. I also tend to be very selective about film for subject or type of light which tends to force me to bring more film.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
This will be a, primarily, photography trip. My first bit of agonizing was to decide whether I'd do a large format / 35mm combo, or a LF / MF combo. I ditched the LF idea owing to the weight (I'm very small, and I can't handle too much slogging with 30lbs of gear), and general hassle of LF logistics. I also ditched the 35mm idea in order to standardize on one system for both handheld, and tripod shots.

It will be kind of hard for me to invoke some discipline in shooting as I'm a little island-dweller about to be stunned by a grand landscape.

Oh, fantastic photographs from Iceland, David!!
 
Yes, Jd, I know what you mean. If I run out of film, things will be grim. There are camera shops in Santiago, but I prefer the good old B&H approach. We'll see.
 
Well, it's your call. Take 100 rolls. Also consider the processing afterwards.

When I went to Oaxaca, I have 200 rolls of film with me and as I said, I shot 65 rolls.

(thanks for the compliment)
 
A lot will depend on how much you like to press the shutter button. I always have at least 2 rolls of each type of film I shoot (50, 100, 400iso B&W, and 100iso color, all 120) and then several extra of my most used films. So, I rarely embark anywhere without at least 8-10 rolls for the smallest day outings. When I am going on holidays, I plan on 3 rolls a day for a minimum although I have never shoot that many on a regular basis; this allows me to shoot 5 rolls one day, 1 the next and still be okay on average. Consider the expense of the trip (flights, hotels, food, time) and the film is one of the cheapest aspects of traveling; I personally would hate to miss shots because I was conserving film given what it cost me to get there in the first place.

The problem with buying film on your trip is: (1) will they have 120 film (it is getting harder to find without sometimes going to multiple stores which takes valuable time) and (2) will they have your particular preference for film (or just 800iso unrefrigerated generic film)? The problem with taking film is: (1) I still don't trust airport scanners and some airports refuse to allow the X-ray bags to be used and (2) many airlines now have weight limitations which prevent you from taking as much gear as you want.
 
Beware buying 120 film in Chile is extremely difficult. It is available but you'll be constantly told it isn't imported, by most Photo stores.

If you're in Santiago then a lab/store called Photonew has a small amount of 120 Ilford and uji B&W film on the shelf but they said they can get more in about 24 hours. There are a lot of small photo shops located in an arcade near the Catholic University which stock almost exclusively Ilford B&W films & some Foma but none sell 120.

Chile is a very long thin country and the 2 areas really worth visiting are at the two ends of the country in the north & south, but you need to fly, it's also worth going to Peru for a short trip to Lima and Machu Piccu, and if you have time Lake Titicaca. The local airline TACA is extremely good, modern, very efficient.. You will have to check the weight restriction on baggage if your taking internal flights as this is often lower than on long haul international flights

The Tourist information office in Santiago isn't very helpful, there isn't much information printed in English at all, everything is in Spanish and they aren't geared up to foreign visitors. Very few people speak English but everyone is helpful & friendly. Peru is very different, information is published in a wide variety of languages. So do your research before you leave.

Ian
 
Brilliant advice, everybody! I'm nixing Peru on this trip for another occasion, as I'll be packing in Easter Island in addition to, probably, North Chile.
 
Turn down your speakers before clicking on that "Photonew" link!
 
Last five day trip with 120 I shot 30 rolls. I took 60. It works out to shooting 6 rolls a day, but my camera only makes 4 exposures per roll. Had I been getting 12 on a roll, that would have been more like 2 rolls per day, but I suspect I would have shot twice as much with 12 on 120, so I would personally plan on 2-4 rolls per day, so call it 3. It depends a lot on your shooting style.
 
That's close to my average use I would guess 6 rolls of 120 a day at the most. Like Jason I'm mainly shooting 6x17 so 4 on a roll.

One benefit of using LF is you learn which images will work and don't shoot unless you're sure the image is worthwhile, that filters down to 120 & 35mm shooting as well and means you waste less film. As the OP is an LF shooter I guess he'll be similar.

Ian
 
As a side note:

If you're not limited to 120 and if you happen to like Tri-X 320 (I know I do), then bring some 220 as well. Double the frames, takes up the same space (if that is at all an issue).
 
I was only planning on taking 20 rolls (at 15 frames/roll) for my upcoming trip, but reading all this is making me re-think. I think I'll go with 30-40 now. I'm not trigger happy, and it's not a photography trip (though there's going to be a lot of time and opportunity to take shots), but I definitely better go with more rather than less.
 
I don't know if you are looking for suggestions about where to go in Chile for photography but if you are I would have a few small ones for you.

Firstly, as someone said already, the extreme south is the place to go for spectacular ice/mountain landscapes. When I was there, I took the advice of a local and only went about 2/3 of the way down. This was a bad idea. You should fly right down to the southern tip if you can.

Secondly, Santiago is not a particularly interesting city visually. Valparaiso which is not too far away from there, is much better. It's got a fabulous faded grandeur about it. I only got to spend an afternoon there but wanted to stay for weeks. People in Santiago might tell you that it is grotty and dangerous but I would take this with a pinch of salt.

Have a great trip!
 
Valparaiso is well worth visiting, the old part above the port and the funicular railways, particularly Pablo Neruda's house. All 3 of Neruda's houses are open to the public but no cameras allowed.

Ian
 
A lot depends on the type of photography too. Travel/People/places/street tends to consume a lot more film than landscape shooting in my experience.

In Kabul, sometimes I shoot one roll of 120 in a couple of hours. Other times I have shot eight rolls in an hour and a half if a lot is happening and I have diverse goals.

I am about to head to India for just over 2 weeks. Planning on taking about 100 rolls of 120. TriX400 & Delta 100 as staples (with some delta 3200 and a few rolls of Velvia thrown in), but poss also some Foma 200 and Delta 400 depending on how some recent test rolls look. I am intrigued to see how Foma 200 looks combined with very old world scenery.
 
A lot depends on the type of photography too. Travel/People/places/street tends to consume a lot more film than landscape shooting in my experience.

In Kabul, sometimes I shoot one roll of 120 in a couple of hours. Other times I have shot eight rolls in an hour and a half if a lot is happening and I have diverse goals.

I am about to head to India for just over 2 weeks. Planning on taking about 100 rolls of 120. TriX400 & Delta 100 as staples (with some delta 3200 and a few rolls of Velvia thrown in), but poss also some Foma 200 and Delta 400 depending on how some recent test rolls look. I am intrigued to see how Foma 200 looks combined with very old world scenery.
 
100 rolls of 120 is a pretty significant amount of film to carry and process. Does your camera shoot 220, and is there a film you like that comes that way? I've occasionally come back from a trip with around 40-50 rolls of 120, and it's a bit of a slog, even with my largest tank, which holds 6 MF reels. Even if it means having to buy another back, I think it would be worth it to cut your film processing time in half.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register