Mystery b&w film format (~11 x 6+ cm)

I'm sorting though family negatives of various sizes. I've identified at least three film formats (126, 127, 120/220) but one has me stumped. It's a very wide aspect ratio negative. The negatives are trimmed, so I presume it's roll film. I thought it might be 616 film, but the dimensions are slightly different.

The film measures about 4 3/8 x 2 1/2+ inches (11 cm x 6+ cm). The long dimension (11 cm) is defined by the image edge. But note that I added "+" to short dimension because the short dimension of the film is trimmed, so it’s possible the original film was actually wider than 2 1/2" (6 cm). One is marked Kodak Safety Film but most are unmarked. While I think some images are camera originals, some appear to be reproductions (photos of prints), further complicating identification. The image quality is not as good as the 120/220 medium format negatives; I'm not sure if that's a function of the film or the camera.



Any ideas? What camera might have been used with this film?

It might be roll film size 130; see: https://camerapedia.fandom.com/wiki/130_film

2-7/8 x 4-7/8 image size. It's the only obsolete roll film size I could find that is wider than 2-1/2 inches but less than 3 inches wide.

voceumana said:

It might be roll film size 130; see: https://camerapedia.fandom.com/wiki/130_film

2-7/8 x 4-7/8 image size. It's the only obsolete roll film size I could find that is wider than 2-1/2 inches but less than 3 inches wide.

Click to expand...

Hmmm... That's a possibility. But the image size long dimension on all of my negatives is 4-3/8 (11 cm) maximum. That's the actual defined image border (not trimmed). And the physical film never exceeds 4-1/2 inches long. I suppose it's possible the camera used would create an image smaller than 4-7/8 inches, but I'm not sure.

Might be 118. This format was the same width as 122 "postcard" but only 4 1/4 long on 3 1/4 width. Possible the frame were cropped with scissors to get them to fit in a negative sleeve...

Donald Qualls said:

Might be 118. This format was the same width as 122 "postcard" but only 4 1/4 long on 3 1/4 width.

Click to expand...

That's another possibility. I had dismissed 118 earlier because the images are longer than 4-1/4, but perhaps that's just a naming/sizing convention.

Possible the frame were cropped with scissors to get them to fit in a negative sleeve...

Click to expand...

Yes, that's almost certainly the case. The negatives fit into the sleeves almost perfectly, if a bit snug. The compositions are very odd, so a good portion of the image likely was sacrificed.

Could also be from an autographic version of a 124 Postcard camera. The Autographic note slot takes space from the image area, so a 5 1/2" negative might wind up as 4 7/8". That would be a "3A" if you're looking for the cameras that might have made those.

Any camera can have a smaller film gate than what the film was designed for to give a smaller image, and copy images can, of course, vary immensely.

Thanks to both of you. Both 130 and 118 are plausible, but without an untrimmed sample, this might just have to remain a mystery (I'll just call it "postcard type" film).