Mamiya Press Pan

[Donald Qualls]

Fujica 645 series like the 645s w/ 60mm which could yield 16 24x67 cropped images.

Something not quite right here -- a masked 645 should give 16 24x42 (or, alternatively, 24x56-ish) negatives, which (IMO) is much less interesting than the 10 24x70 I'd get with 120 in a 6x7 back with a mask.

 

[sfphoto]

a masked 645 should give 16 24x42 (or, alternatively, 24x56-ish).

Yes I see my typo should have typed 57 not 67
.
Found these specs on-line:
645 = 42x57
Horizont = 24x58
X-Pan = 24x65

Some 35mm models w/ Pano setting crop to = 15x36

So the Fujica 645 series and Horizont/Widelux loose a bit of length but their small size, built in finder and amount of exposures per roll are attractive.

Image size comparison:
https://petapixel.com/assets/uploads/2020/02/comparison.jpg

 

[Donald Qualls]

I'll stick with my RB67. Just found a 3D printable frame mask for 24x70 to go with my 220 back and 135/120 adapters, and it ought to be trivial to print a drop-in frame mask for the viewfinder. Yes, the camera is big and heavy, but I can also shoot 6x4.5, 6x6, and 6x7 out of the same bag, same lenses and body -- and working on a way to be able to unload 35mm from the 220 back in the field without needing to stick my arms in a changing bag to rewind. One more lens, and I'll have the common X-Pan focal lengths roughly matched, too -- got 90 mm and 50 mm, just need to get a 65 mm.

And then I need to print a 6x12 back for my Speed Graphic (now that I have a Graflok back on it). A 90 mm Angulon on 6x12 is equivalent to, what, about 36 mm on a Horizont?

 

[reddesert]

Yes I see my typo should have typed 57 not 67
.
Found these specs on-line:
645 = 42x57
Horizont = 24x58
X-Pan = 24x65

Some 35mm models w/ Pano setting crop to = 15x36

So the Fujica 645 series and Horizont/Widelux loose a bit of length but their small size, built in finder and amount of exposures per roll are attractive.

Image size comparison:
https://petapixel.com/assets/uploads/2020/02/comparison.jpg

A 645 camera is great for shooting 6x4.5 (really about 55x44mm) on 120. The problem with trying to shoot adapted 35mm in it, is that the 35mm film runs across the short axis of the film gate, so you would get a 24x44mm image roughly. That's not much larger than the 24x36mm in a native 35mm camera. The exception is, I think, a 135-W back for the Bronica ETR that runs the film across the long axis, but it's now very rare and expensive.

Adapting 35mm in a natively 6x6, 6x7, or 6x9 camera is more effective, but of course you have to carry around a larger camera and lens.

A swing lens panoramic camera like the Horizon is an efficient way of getting a wide view, panoramic negative on 35mm film, but it comes with its own set of practical use issues. Swing lens and rectilinear cameras are complementary in some ways.

 

[Jeremy Mudd]

Thanks for that. I was about to comment about 35mm in a 645 camera after my own experience with my 645 Pro/TL. And before someone mentions there is a 35mm panoramic back set-up for the Pro/TL - yes, there is one and I have it - but it basically is a normal 35mm negative with a smaller film composing mask and a dark slide with a cut-out that gives a cropped version - much like the "panoramic" point and shoots that were popular in the 1990's. The film in that special 35mm back does actually run horizontally, but the back is made in a way that prevents it from being used or modified to make the full 55mm width possible.

I've shot panoramics in my RB67 for a long time with the 35mm adapter and mask. So I'm super familiar with that.

It seems like every time I talk about a camera that's pano specific someone always chimes in about just shooting larger and cropping in. That's fine if that's what you want to do but I really prefer to compose and shoot in the panoramic format. Hence my obsession and owning several panoramic specific cameras, and also giving this PressPan a good try. Not certain if I will keep this one long term though....

Jeremy

 

[Jeremy Mudd]

Here's a recent image from the PressPan. It's form factor does make it a lot easier for hiking around with it.

Jeremy

 

[sfphoto]

> Swing lens and rectilinear cameras are complementary in some ways

A 645 camera is great for shooting 6x4.5 (really about 55x44mm) on 120. The problem with trying to shoot adapted 35mm in it, is that the 35mm film runs across the short axis of the film gate, so you would get a 24x44mm image roughly. That's not much larger than the 24x36mm in a native 35mm camera. The exception is, I think, a 135-W back for the Bronica ETR that runs the film across the long axis, but it's now very rare and expensive.

Adapting 35mm in a natively 6x6, 6x7, or 6x9 camera is more effective, but of course you have to carry around a larger camera and lens.

A swing lens panoramic camera like the Horizon is an efficient way of getting a wide view, panoramic negative on 35mm film, but it comes with its own set of practical use issues. Swing lens and rectilinear cameras are complementary in some ways.

@reddesert
I had mentioned earlier in this thread that for travel I like to take:
Fujica 645 w/ 60mm
Horizont 35mm (WDLX)
Does mean carrying 2 film sizes, I shoot CN in both. I have found CN material scans and converts to b&w very well.

As to PANO w/ 645 I would prefer 120 film cropped to 1x2.5 ratio as if allows for the simulation of rise/fall.
I personally would not want to use 35mm in a 6x45.

@Jeremy
Liking the shot of the woods - is this in Ohio?

 

[Donald Qualls]

It seems like every time I talk about a camera that's pano specific someone always chimes in about just shooting larger and cropping in.

You could say the same about 6x12 -- "just shoot 4x5 and crop" -- in fact, with a cut down dark slide, you could get two exposures close to 6x12 format on a single sheet.

The point, to me, is to force yourself to compose for a specific frame, and then have big enough film to give a good print/scan. I can shoot my RB67 with the 50mm lens, and get more than double the height of a standard 35mm frame to crop to -- but if I'm doing that, why bother? If I load 35mm film and mask to 24x70, I have to think in the format to get a good composition -- just like I have to think in square when I shoot my Reflex II or Brownie Hawkeye(s), or think in 4x5 with my Graphic View, Speed Graphic, or (at a slightly smaller size) the 6x7 back on my RB67.

Fill the frame -- whatever frame you've selected.

 

[Besk]

Not mentioned so far: The Mamiya "Flat top." This is the Mamiya Press which has had the top removed. Mine has the Graflok back. Using an adapter for 35mm film, it will produce panoramic images with any Mamiya Press lens.
I have a 50mm but so far have only used it with the 65mm and Horseman 6x9 back. A little heavy but very compact.

 

[Jeremy Mudd]

>

@Jeremy
Liking the shot of the woods - is this in Ohio?

Thanks! Yes - its on some private land in Ohio near Germantown. It was a family's hunting grounds until the son passed away from addiction - now its a bit of a shrine to him, others, and families that have lost loved ones.

Jeremy

 

[cayenne]

Here's a recent image from the PressPan. It's form factor does make it a lot easier for hiking around with it.

Jeremy

View attachment 276332

Awesome shot!!

I have a PressPan ready to be shipped to me…but, I had to ask Freeman to hold it for me.
I’m currently evacuated out of New Orleans due to Hurricane Ida….can’t wait to get things back to normal,down there with power, water, mail delivery, and internet…so I can get that camera in my hands!!

I’ve been anticipating it for so long…I love anything pano.

I have a HorizonT swing lens (the old Russian metal one), and a Shen Hao 6x17 view camera for pianos on MF.

but I’m dying to have the Presspan for portable, hand help rectilinear shooting when out and about….

cayenne

 

[Jeremy Mudd]

After an email exchange back and forth with Cayenne (above), I decided to dust off the Presspan this weekend to give it another go.

A few observations.

1. I think the parallax issue I mentioned before is still there, BUT, also some of it has to do with wearing glasses and leaving them on while looking thru the Press viewfinder with the panoramic mask on the other end of it. With glasses on, the end result definitely varies from what I see in the viewfinder, but with glasses off its not a great deal different. Probably not much of a deal on a normal Mamiya Press since you are seeing the whole 6x7 viewfinder, but with much of it masked off with only the sliver visible thru the center, this matters a lot. So note to future users - take off your glasses when framing up the image thru the finder.

2.Even though the issue above seems to be manageable, I think that the film plane or something else is off. I've never been too excited about the sharpness of the pics, they've always seemed to just not be as sharp as I've been accustomed to when shooting 35mm film - the same stock, usually Ektar - with adapters in the back of my RB67's. The ones from this weekend are no different.

3. There is some sort of light leak going on that leads to a bit of an appearance of fogging on the film in places. Still got that this weekend. It comes and goes depending on the different times I shoot (and assuming maybe the difference between sunny days and not so sunny days combined with how long I am out in the sun with it and time between shots). It's not a line or burst, but a fogginess that's not on every frame. It's not on the rebate area of the film, just in the area of the film gate, which leads me to believe its coming in somewhere around the 3D-printed lens mount. I've had the camera in the darkroom with an led penlight and can't find it. Not certain what's going on there. No expired film being used and don't have the issue with any of my rolls of Ektar in any other cameras.

Cayenne - I Hope you are back home now and have your camera!

Jeremy

An image from yesterday below. F/11, 1/250th on Ektar. Was at infinity focus but nothing is really very sharp. No fogginess on this image.

 

[reddesert]

2.Even though the issue above seems to be manageable, I think that the film plane or something else is off. I've never been too excited about the sharpness of the pics, they've always seemed to just not be as sharp as I've been accustomed to when shooting 35mm film - the same stock, usually Ektar - with adapters in the back of my RB67's. The ones from this weekend are no different.

Is it all over or different at the edges vs the center? Check the focus with a ground glass on the film rails. You might also sacrifice some film and take off the lens and look at the film in the gate to see if it is flat. Just a guess that since the film gate has been heavily modified, flatness could be an issue.

3. There is some sort of light leak going on that leads to a bit of an appearance of fogging on the film in places. Still got that this weekend. It comes and goes depending on the different times I shoot (and assuming maybe the difference between sunny days and not so sunny days combined with how long I am out in the sun with it and time between shots). It's not a line or burst, but a fogginess that's not on every frame. It's not on the rebate area of the film, just in the area of the film gate, which leads me to believe its coming in somewhere around the 3D-printed lens mount. I've had the camera in the darkroom with an led penlight and can't find it. Not certain what's going on there. No expired film being used and don't have the issue with any of my rolls of Ektar in any other cameras.

Some 3D printed materials aren't fully opaque. I understand there were issues with plastic lensboards for the Intrepid 4x5 camera that passed enough light to fog film. The lens mount for the Presspan looks pretty thick, which would help, but depending on the fill volume and material it might be an issue. It's also possible that the material is not opaque to very red or IR light and the film has just enough sensitivity to be fogged by sunlight passing through. Either of these would be basically impossible to detect with a penlight - you could do a test by leaving the camera out in the sun for a few frames both with and without some material covering the lens mount, although it is hard to isolate this kind of leak.

 

[Jeremy Mudd]

Is it all over or different at the edges vs the center? Check the focus with a ground glass on the film rails. You might also sacrifice some film and take off the lens and look at the film in the gate to see if it is flat. Just a guess that since the film gate has been heavily modified, flatness could be an issue.

Thanks for the ideas!

It's all over, unfortunately. The film does lie flat - the gate still retains the raised silver factory edge and with tension and the lens off, it looks pretty darn flat when viewed from the front and back. I need to do some measuring from the lens to the film plane next I think.

Here's an image from Jess's article that shows you what the back of the gate looks like.

Some 3D printed materials aren't fully opaque. I understand there were issues with plastic lensboards for the Intrepid 4x5 camera that passed enough light to fog film. The lens mount for the Presspan looks pretty thick, which would help, but depending on the fill volume and material it might be an issue. It's also possible that the material is not opaque to very red or IR light and the film has just enough sensitivity to be fogged by sunlight passing through. Either of these would be basically impossible to detect with a penlight - you could do a test by leaving the camera out in the sun for a few frames both with and without some material covering the lens mount, although it is hard to isolate this kind of leak.

That's something I haven't thought of and is entirely possible. I think I have a short-roll around here somewhere, I'll put that in the camera and leave it in bright light for a few frames here and there to see what happens. Thanks again - all input really helps here!

This is a camera I really wanted to like and maybe for that reason I'm putting in more time with it than I should.

Jeremy

 

[mshchem]

Is it all over or different at the edges vs the center? Check the focus with a ground glass on the film rails. You might also sacrifice some film and take off the lens and look at the film in the gate to see if it is flat. Just a guess that since the film gate has been heavily modified, flatness could be an issue.



Some 3D printed materials aren't fully opaque. I understand there were issues with plastic lensboards for the Intrepid 4x5 camera that passed enough light to fog film. The lens mount for the Presspan looks pretty thick, which would help, but depending on the fill volume and material it might be an issue. It's also possible that the material is not opaque to very red or IR light and the film has just enough sensitivity to be fogged by sunlight passing through. Either of these would be basically impossible to detect with a penlight - you could do a test by leaving the camera out in the sun for a few frames both with and without some material covering the lens mount, although it is hard to isolate this kind of leak.

I use IR goggles in my darkroom. Amber plastic bottles look clear in IR.

 

[reddesert]

Yes, there are a number of plastics that suffer this (not only 3D printed materials). At my work a common problem is light leaks from optoisolators. An optoisolator is a common electronic component that has an IR LED and phototransistor encased in the usual black plastic that integrated circuits are packaged in. That plastic is often not fully opaque to IR, it turns out, so if you have a detector sensitive to 700-800 nm in a dark environment, it picks up the glow.

 

[Jeremy Mudd]

I do shoot a lot of 720nm Infrared in digital and there are many substrates that the pigment does not show up in the image or are sometimes clear. Most of the time clothing shows up as white, even if it is black to the naked eye.

I think the inside of the 3D-printed lens mount is painted in a flat black, but who knows how thick that is or if it helps in any way other than keep the light from bouncing around when taking the image.

I'll try to spend some more time messing with it this weekend, but as far as 3D-Printed, light-weight 35mm pano options go, its beginning to look like my Goodman Zone with 35mm adapters in the RB67 back and a mask over the viewfinder is the better option. I've never had a problem with sharpness or fogging with it, after I worked thru the light leak issues from the screw holes and lens mount.

Jeremy

 

[cayenne]

Yes, there are a number of plastics that suffer this (not only 3D printed materials). At my work a common problem is light leaks from optoisolators. An optoisolator is a common electronic component that has an IR LED and phototransistor encased in the usual black plastic that integrated circuits are packaged in. That plastic is often not fully opaque to IR, it turns out, so if you have a detector sensitive to 700-800 nm in a dark environment, it picks up the glow.

I got this from Dora Goodman with reference to 3D printing the Zone camera, she uses something called Colorfabb nGen filament.

This is a polyester filament I believe...and it is used as that it apparently is FULLY opaque.

Just FYI.

cayenne

 

[cayenne]

After an email exchange back and forth with Cayenne (above), I decided to dust off the Presspan this weekend to give it another go.

<snip>

3. There is some sort of light leak going on that leads to a bit of an appearance of fogging on the film in places. Still got that this weekend. It comes and goes depending on the different times I shoot (and assuming maybe the difference between sunny days and not so sunny days combined with how long I am out in the sun with it and time between shots). It's not a line or burst, but a fogginess that's not on every frame. It's not on the rebate area of the film, just in the area of the film gate, which leads me to believe its coming in somewhere around the 3D-printed lens mount. I've had the camera in the darkroom with an led penlight and can't find it. Not certain what's going on there. No expired film being used and don't have the issue with any of my rolls of Ektar in any other cameras.

Cayenne - I Hope you are back home now and have your camera!

Jeremy

<snip>

View attachment 285762

Hi Jeremy,

I"m just back home after evacuating for Ida and getting things squared away. I should have my PressPan on its way this week.

I really hope mine doesn't have the problems you have...I REALLY want to like and use this camera!!! And I'm a bit of a noob, and don't have the skills to troubleshoot and try to fix mine.

I was wondering, if you contacted Freeman to ask about the problems you've encountered?

And please pardon what may be a stupid question....but with reference to #3 above..is there any possibility at all that this fogging is due to lens flare(s)? The periodic nature you described above made that pop into my head...and I've seen some flaring cause fogging, I had it hit me with a different camera and lens on almost the same shot where I bumped the tripod between shots and one had it and one didn't.

I'd mentioned on a post above the filament that Dora Goodman told me uses on the Zone cameras. I have friends printing this out for me and I got the same special order filament she uses. I wonder what filament Freeman uses?

Anyway, man, I hope you can get yours to working and I really hope mine comes in working as that I've been in GREAT anticipation of getting this unit and using it a LOT.

First job for one will be traveling around and documenting the damage Hurricane Ida left in her tracks.....

cayenne

 

[Jeremy Mudd]

Hi Jeremy,

I"m just back home after evacuating for Ida and getting things squared away. I should have my PressPan on its way this week.

I really hope mine doesn't have the problems you have...I REALLY want to like and use this camera!!! And I'm a bit of a noob, and don't have the skills to troubleshoot and try to fix mine.

I was wondering, if you contacted Freeman to ask about the problems you've encountered?

And please pardon what may be a stupid question....but with reference to #3 above..is there any possibility at all that this fogging is due to lens flare(s)? The periodic nature you described above made that pop into my head...and I've seen some flaring cause fogging, I had it hit me with a different camera and lens on almost the same shot where I bumped the tripod between shots and one had it and one didn't.

I'd mentioned on a post above the filament that Dora Goodman told me uses on the Zone cameras. I have friends printing this out for me and I got the same special order filament she uses. I wonder what filament Freeman uses?

Anyway, man, I hope you can get yours to working and I really hope mine comes in working as that I've been in GREAT anticipation of getting this unit and using it a LOT.

First job for one will be traveling around and documenting the damage Hurricane Ida left in her tracks.....

cayenne

Glad that you are back now!

So, to be fair I did not contact Freeman again after the first problem I had with the camera, which was a lot of plastic bits left on the left hand side of the gate which showed up in the film negative. I had to file it away. If you look at the image I posted above from Jess's article, you can see it on the one in the image as well.

He seems so busy with his 9-5 job, making these cameras, and also making stuff for hunting that replies from him take a great while. I decided to try to troubleshoot and work thru everything myself, knowing that 3D-printed cameras are DIY in nature, and one can't expect them to be perfect right out of the box. My Goodman Zone wasn't perfect either, although it is much closer to perfect now than the PressPan is or may ever be.

The fogging issues aren't due to lens flare - I bought the optional lens hood with it and use it when shooting, and have been careful not to shoot an uncoated lens into the sun.

I've got a roll of ACROS I in the Goodman Zone at the moment with it in the pinhole configuration. When that roll is finished, I'm going to put the Mamiya Press mount back on the Zone and pull the 50mm from the PressPan to mount back onto the Zone.

I think my days of messing with the PressPan are over. All that said I really wanted to like this camera. I guess some things just aren't meant to be.

Jeremy

 

[cayenne]

Glad that you are back now!

So, to be fair I did not contact Freeman again after the first problem I had with the camera, which was a lot of plastic bits left on the left hand side of the gate which showed up in the film negative. I had to file it away. If you look at the image I posted above from Jess's article, you can see it on the one in the image as well.

He seems so busy with his 9-5 job, making these cameras, and also making stuff for hunting that replies from him take a great while. I decided to try to troubleshoot and work thru everything myself, knowing that 3D-printed cameras are DIY in nature, and one can't expect them to be perfect right out of the box. My Goodman Zone wasn't perfect either, although it is much closer to perfect now than the PressPan is or may ever be.

The fogging issues aren't due to lens flare - I bought the optional lens hood with it and use it when shooting, and have been careful not to shoot an uncoated lens into the sun.

I've got a roll of ACROS I in the Goodman Zone at the moment with it in the pinhole configuration. When that roll is finished, I'm going to put the Mamiya Press mount back on the Zone and pull the 50mm from the PressPan to mount back onto the Zone.

I think my days of messing with the PressPan are over. All that said I really wanted to like this camera. I guess some things just aren't meant to be.

Jeremy

I'm still waiting on mine.
I sent my money almost a week ago....but like you said, he's very busy, I hope to get a tracking number soon.

I'm anxious to hear about and maybe see some images you capture with the Zone with the Mamiya 50 on it....doing panos with 35mm.

I have a friend that printed a Zone for me....I was considering buying a 2nd Mamiya Press 50mm and viewfinder to use with it along with the PressPan, rather than swap back and forth.

I'll wait till I shoot the PressPan before buying a 2nd Mamiya set up.

That all being said, I saw that Goodman now has out a NEW 6x12 Zone camera.

If my PressPan works like I want it to, I may give my Zone my friend printed to me...to my friend, and buy another spool of the special filament Dora recommended and print out the 6x12...et the lens set up for that and have that and the PP as my portable pano cameras.

I still also have the Shen Hao 6x17 view camera which is amazing....but not quite as portable as these two I'm talking about.

LOL...I guess you could say, I'm hooked on pano.....I also have a Russian HorizonT old metal swing lens camera in the mix too....so, you may see a trend here with me.


I do hate to see you have a waste of money on your PP. I do hope you'll at least consider sending him an email and see if he can offer any help.

Looking forward to seeing your Zone shots!!!

cayenne

 

[Jeremy Mudd]

I do hate to see you have a waste of money on your PP. I do hope you'll at least consider sending him an email and see if he can offer any help.

Looking forward to seeing your Zone shots!!!

cayenne

If I didn't have higher standards, the PressPan may be OK, but as it is I can't help thinking its an ongoing waste of my time. Communication with Freeman was so bad in the past, that I just don't want to mess with it. Dealing with the stress and anger, and even if I did get a timely response, having to pack something up and deal with trying to get a refund, isn't worth it for the amount of money spent. My time is worth a lot, and I've already wasted so much time with it that the opportunity cost of that far outweighs the amount of actual money I spent on it.

The only upside I can find here is that because I wanted the PressPan, I bought the Mamiya Press 50mm lens and finder, and because Freeman took so long to get back on my initial response and then I didn't feel good about actually receiving the PressPan, I bought the Goodman Zone which took the same lens as a way to at least put the lens to good use.

I have shot panoramas on 35mm with the Zone, here are a few:

The other advantage to the Zone is that if I want to shoot 6x7 I can:

And then it can shoot pinhole as well, by removing the Mamiya lens and putting the pinhole board on the front instead:

So its not a totally wasted experience. I hope you have a better one than I did. Good luck!


Jeremy

 

[cayenne]

If I didn't have higher standards, the PressPan may be OK, but as it is I can't help thinking its an ongoing waste of my time. Communication with Freeman was so bad in the past, that I just don't want to mess with it. Dealing with the stress and anger, and even if I did get a timely response, having to pack something up and deal with trying to get a refund, isn't worth it for the amount of money spent. My time is worth a lot, and I've already wasted so much time with it that the opportunity cost of that far outweighs the amount of actual money I spent on it.

The only upside I can find here is that because I wanted the PressPan, I bought the Mamiya Press 50mm lens and finder, and because Freeman took so long to get back on my initial response and then I didn't feel good about actually receiving the PressPan, I bought the Goodman Zone which took the same lens as a way to at least put the lens to good use.

I have shot panoramas on 35mm with the Zone, here are a few:

View attachment 286769

View attachment 286770

View attachment 286771

The other advantage to the Zone is that if I want to shoot 6x7 I can:

View attachment 286772


And then it can shoot pinhole as well, by removing the Mamiya lens and putting the pinhole board on the front instead:

View attachment 286773


So its not a totally wasted experience. I hope you have a better one than I did. Good luck!


Jeremy

WoW!!

Those are awesome Jeremy!! Thanks for all the feedback....on both the PP and the Zone.

I'm going to play with the Zone too....more I think now that we've spoken than before. I think I might try to use the printed 6x6 film back in the files and try that with 35mm panos....and use that to be able (I think) to reside the film back into the canister without having to use a dark bag/tent.

Again, thanks for the picture examples, really looks great and makes me excited about shooting both of these.

cayenne

 

[Jeremy Mudd]

You're welcome!

I've never had the 6x6 printed back in my hands, but it looks like it was designed to fit the 120 roll fairly snug. If that's the case, I'm not certain how well the 35mm cartridge will fit in the area if there isn't room for the flaring out of the film opening. Personally I think you are better off with a RB67 220 6x7 back and a dark bag, or just shoot the whole roll and then pull it out in your darkroom before developing.

Or, as some do, use a used 35mm canister with a bit of film leader left as your take-up spool, and tape that to the start of the new film, and spool the shot film into the canister. The drawback there is the last shot - you won't know its your last shot until you shoot it, and then it won't crank anymore into the take-up canister and you'll have that last shot lost/exposed when you open the back in daylight.

Jeremy

 

[Donald Qualls]

The drawback there is the last shot - you won't know its your last shot until you shoot it, and then it won't crank anymore into the take-up canister and you'll have that last shot lost/exposed when you open the back in daylight

I've considered how I might install a film cutter in the RB67 220 back I'm slowly converting to permanent 35mm use (slowly because my spare time is both sparse and poorly managed). Being able to cut the film between the supply cassette and counter drive roller would allow winding the film on through into the takeup cassette, then moving the previous supply cassette (with protruding tail) to the takeup side to reload in daylight. A supply of precut cine leaders and a pair of scissors (to cut off the leader trim on commercially rolled 35mm) would be all you'd need to literally shoot all day.