• 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

Kodak films narrower than others?

Chadinko

Member
Allowing Ads
Joined
Feb 3, 2016
Messages
188
Location
Phoenix, AZ
Format
Multi Format
I've been making my own negative carriers for my 120 film (and 616, and other stuff too) for my scanner, and I've noticed that the Kodak films are about half a millimeter narrower than other films. Slightly less than that with the Delta 3200, but with Hp5 and Fomapan the difference is noticeable.

Has anyone else noticed this?
 

Neal

Subscriber
Allowing Ads
Joined
Dec 3, 2004
Messages
2,028
Location
Chicago, West Suburbs
Format
Multi Format
Dear Chadinko,

The target width for 120 film is 61mm. As it doesn't have to be registered to a position in the camera the way sprocket driven film is I'm sure there is variation from machine to machine. The last negative carrier I made for my enlarger can accommodate up to 63mm but I'm sure if you stay with 62mm you'll be fine. My little scribbled notes from when I made the negative carrier had measurements of 61.08mm on the low side and 61.28mm on the high. I have no correlation by manufacturer for you. You might be able to get away with 61-1/2mm but a little extra room can't hurt.

Good luck,

Neal Wydra
 

StoneNYC

Member
Allowing Ads
Joined
Aug 5, 2012
Messages
8,345
Location
Antarctica
Format
8x10 Format

They also curl more, so you may be experiencing the difference because of the film not laying as flat.
 

Tor-Einar Jarnbjo

Member
Allowing Ads
Joined
Mar 21, 2017
Messages
173
Location
Germany
Format
Medium Format
The physical dimensions of the 120 film are specified in the ISO 732 standard. The film itself shall be between 60.7mm and 61.7mm wide.
 
OP
OP

Chadinko

Member
Allowing Ads
Joined
Feb 3, 2016
Messages
188
Location
Phoenix, AZ
Format
Multi Format
They also curl more, so you may be experiencing the difference because of the film not laying as flat.

No... if I put two pieces of film under a sheet of glass they're very flat and still different in width. I'm thinking Tor-Einar's quote of the ISO standards makes sense; there's a little play there. Maybe Kodak's is narrower as a holdover from the failed attempt to co-opt the 120 format (as 620)? Hmmm.
 

MattKing

Moderator
Moderator
Allowing Ads
Joined
Apr 24, 2005
Messages
55,163
Location
Delta, BC Canada
Format
Medium Format
Maybe Kodak's is narrower as a holdover from the failed attempt to co-opt the 120 format (as 620)?
Don't think so, given that the film and backing paper is the same size for both 120 and 620.
 
OP
OP

Chadinko

Member
Allowing Ads
Joined
Feb 3, 2016
Messages
188
Location
Phoenix, AZ
Format
Multi Format
Don't think so, given that the film and backing paper is the same size for both 120 and 620.

Except the films in question are on the average, in my stash, about half a millimeter narrower than Ilford or Fomapan. Again, I haven't checked it against all the 120s I have, but the Kodak is noticeably narrower.
 

AgX

Member
Allowing Ads
Joined
Apr 5, 2007
Messages
29,972
Location
Germany
Format
Multi Format
We all know that Kodak had to slim down...
 

Gerald C Koch

Member
Allowing Ads
Joined
Jul 12, 2010
Messages
8,131
Location
Southern USA
Format
Multi Format
If film did not conform to the ISO specification it would have an adverse effect on using reels particularly SS ones.
 

Mr Bill

Member
Allowing Ads
Joined
Aug 22, 2006
Messages
1,524
Format
Multi Format
If film did not conform to the ISO specification it would have an adverse effect on using reels particularly SS ones.

Even more significant (?), depending who you are, is the effect on all the mini-lab printers out there. If the film guides are set too narrow, they'll scrape debris from the edges of the film; if set too wide, the film will wander. (Wandering film means that the photofinisher may scan off the edge of the image occasionally, so the solution is to "over-project" more at the printing stage.)

As I recall, the typical routine for such width specs is to give a dimension, setting tolerance as plus zero, minus = some acceptable value. So if the photofinisher sets film guides just over the spec, they will never get any film that "doesn't quite fit."
 

AgX

Member
Allowing Ads
Joined
Apr 5, 2007
Messages
29,972
Location
Germany
Format
Multi Format
A alternative is to use spring-loaded lateral guides.
 

Sirius Glass

Subscriber
Joined
Jan 18, 2007
Messages
50,814
Location
Southern California
Format
Multi Format
Kodak films are within the specifications. That is why they neither fall out of reels nor are they too wide for reels.
 

Mr Bill

Member
Allowing Ads
Joined
Aug 22, 2006
Messages
1,524
Format
Multi Format
A alternative is to use spring-loaded lateral guides.

Sure, but then edge-rubbing always happens, as opposed to intermittently. We used to use a spring-loaded setop, with rollers on both sides, where we needed to make sure that a sensor would "see" a precisely-placed alignment mark on the edge of the film. I guess it's feasible in the printing gate, but the idea of just adding a little clearance has a lot going for it.
 
Last edited:

David Lyga

Member
Allowing Ads
Joined
Nov 25, 2007
Messages
3,445
Location
Philadelphia
Format
35mm
Does anyone know the exact LENGTH of 120 film (not the paper backing) ? I would guess 810mm.
 

MattKing

Moderator
Moderator
Allowing Ads
Joined
Apr 24, 2005
Messages
55,163
Location
Delta, BC Canada
Format
Medium Format
Ask me next time I have a roll hanging to dry