It is more likely that George Eastman will rise from the dead after all there years.
220 film stands about as much chance of a comeback as Kodachrome, in the current climate I'm just thankful that film of any format is still being manufactured.
220 film stands about as much chance of a comeback as Kodachrome,
likelihood that the material and ink used by Shanghai for backing paper/leaders and tails would lead to wrapper offset issues with the existing Kodak/Ilford/Fuji emulsions.
With Shanghai confectioning new film in 220, the "no machines to roll it" argument becomes "not cost effective to pay for toll confectioning." Then they trot out "would cost too much for a minimum order of backing" -- which again apparently didn't stop Shanghai (who presumably own their own backing production).
The only sensible reasons not to bring back 220 in a couple popular emulsions (say, TMX and TMY2, or FP4+ and HP5+) are economic -- there wouldn't be enough demand (with the primary market, professional photographers, long since transitioned to digital) to pay for the (seemingly fairly modest) development costs to put the same emulsion cut the same width on the same spools with different edge numbers and backing (plus a different box, of course). Maybe a few more years into the "film resurgence". Or maybe Shanghai will find it doesn't make sense for them over a slightly longer term.
@Sirius Glass , if you don't like to hear about other people's pipe dreams, perhaps you shouldn't read this thread. Go find a pipe of your own instead.
BTW, while 220 was produced for almost fifty years (introduced 1965, last production around 2012, not counting Shanghai bringing it back), the last ten years of that was a time when film manufacturers were trying to figure out when to turn out the lights and how to do it without giving pink slips to the upper management.
Any suggestions?
Kodak has announced that they are hiring again and I just saw an Ilford ad promoting the fact that they are over the COVID era and producing again, so why no ask them to introduce 220 back into our analog lives again?
Isn’t that what Serious was saying?… the market didn't support the cost… Pretty sure it still doesn't.
Isn’t that what Serious was saying?
I haven't processed it yet, but the one roll of Shanghai GP3 220 I've shot so far ran as well as my (needs a little TLC) RH20 back would handle. I need to get my Mamiya 220 back put back together (with the replacement dark slide lock spring) and try it with that, which (with 35 mm) works perfectly. Sure wish I could get a good 320-400 film in 220, I prefer faster most of the time (because I'm more of a hand held shooter, and the RB67 doesn't have very fast lens options).
Addressing the ink used for roll film paper backing, has anyone heard of attempts to modify inkjet jet printers to spray a denser black for backing and, for example, white or yellow ink for printing up numbering for whatever format you need on a run of paper backing?
What qualities of 'plain paper' or vinyl or other polymer backing would be needed to print these special inks onto?
Why can no an existing makers inkjet printer be used to do this job?
Addressing the ink used for roll film paper backing, has anyone heard of attempts to modify inkjet jet printers to spray a denser black for backing and, for example, white or yellow ink for printing up numbering for whatever format you need on a run of paper backing?
What qualities of 'plain paper' or vinyl or other polymer backing would be needed to print these special inks onto?
Why can no an existing makers inkjet printer be used to do this job?
Kodak has announced that they are hiring again and I just saw an Ilford ad promoting the fact that they are over the COVID era and producing again, so why no ask them to introduce 220 back into our analog lives again?
Also, how about one or both of them compounding an inkjet backing ink, as a bulk item, as I suggest, for an existing series of printers, in self-service reusable ink reserves?
Today and tomorrow our tech runs quickly forward of the old era of the full on, full service products and films, of the past Golden age of analog photography, and I ask, in light of that and the rapid reexpansion of analog photography, albeit a smaller, pricer market, will we just sit on our hands and perpetrate a neo-troglodyte fueled "...failure of imagination... " , simply because to do so is easier, less expensive or are afraid to push photographic tech forward?
Think about it.
Cheers to all!
Isn’t that what Serious was saying?
My Stash of 220 Film by Nokton48, on Flickr
I LIKE Shanghai 220 a good decent IMO retro emulsion. Not expensive compared to other emulsions, we are lucky to have it available. Old school formulation runs good through my Mamiflexes and Blads
Why So Serious? LOL
220 Shanghai twenty rolls. by Nokton48, on Flickr
I don't see a reason to use black inkjet. It's overkill for the purpose. A roller or spray nozzle setup would be less complex, cheaper, faster, and more reliable.Addressing the ink used for roll film paper backing, has anyone heard of attempts to modify inkjet jet printers to spray a denser black for backing and, for example, white or yellow ink for printing up numbering for whatever format you need on a run of paper backing?
Great! You cornered the market and kept the hoarders away. Can I see you some under water swamp land?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?