Old negatives 40mm x 40mm... likely 127 format?

[jay moussy]

Rummaging through in-laws' old family negatives, I found 40 x 40 mm ones.

I found a likely match on Wikipedia's film formats page:
127, 1+5⁄8 × 1+5⁄8 in, 12 exposures, 46 mm stock, "Vest Pocket"

Any other possible format, and what was the likely family cameras used (U.S.)?
Also, what followed as nearest image size format?

Note: I sort of like the size!

 

[Donald Qualls]

Yep, allowing for a couple mm of rebate on each edge, the square negative from 127 is 40-42 mm each way. There were slide mounts for this size, to fit a standard 2x2 (inch) projector.

Just to confuse matters, though, there were a number of cheap 120 cameras( as in fixed everything or Holga class -- original Diana was one of these, Holga may have been designed this way, too, 50 years ago) that were masked to 4x4 cm to allow 16 on a roll and make these "super slides" -- though why anyone would shoot slides in a camera like a Diana is a mystery to me.

If you have actual film edges, however, you probably have 127 film. Lots of cameras shot square in 127, from Brownie class (Starmite, Starflash) to professional or prosumer quality (Baby Rolleiflex, Yashica 44).

 

[jay moussy]

There are also a few 2 1/4 x 2 1/4 in there.
120 roll, I guess, or something more exotic like 117

In this shoe box, there are just about all the roll-film formats in use between 1915 to 2000!
I was trying to find some interesting things to contact-print or enlarge, but it is all about people's pictures...
@Donald Qualls as you often point out, the overall quality of the pictures taken with the simple cameras of the day is quite good.

 

[Donald Qualls]

There were at least two, possibly three different roll designations (different framing tracks and frame counts on the same width, same spool) that got rolled into three-format 120 as it existed by the late 1930s; hence why a 1938 Super Ikonta B uses the 6x9 track to start and gets 11 frames, or why almost all 645 red window cameras before 1950 had two windows on the 6x9 track. There was also a format just about halfway between 127 and 120 in width (129?), at least three roll formats wider than 120.

Paper backed roll film ran from 16mm, through 17.5 (HIT), 20-something, 35 (828 and a competing format the same width with different spools), 46, 51(ish), 62 (all eventually rolled into 120), 70 (116/616), 80+ (postcard, 118?), to as wide as 101 (4x5 on 122) and 126 (also 4x5, but potentially also 5x7 -- not called 126, I think it was 124, but there was a 126 roll format as well, decades before the drop-in cartridges). And of course it's inside 126 and 110 cartridges, plus a much less well known European cartridge format similar in size to 110.

 

[Donald Qualls]

If there are notches it might be 126 film (Instamatic) which was very common in the 70s (my 1st camera)

No, 126 cartridge film was 35mm wide. Same is true for 828, and they had the same single perf per frame as well -- 828 had 28x40 mm frames, 126 was 28x28 mm.

AFAIK, 127 was the only consumer film in 46 mm (though it's possible there were multiple designations for different frame sizes and roll lengths as was the case with films that got combined into 120). 127 originally had 8 frames, 4.5x6 cm, with double-window half frame cameras shooting 4.5x3 cm by the 1920s. The 4x4 square format was the last to arrive, AFAIK. There were 46 mm long roll (unbacked) cameras for school photos, still in service to the end of film for that market, but those were either a 4:5 or 4:3 frame, not square.

 

[Tel]

Kodak made a number of 127 point-and-shoot cameras. My first camera was a Brownie Starmite that shot 127. You can still get fresh 127 film, too. "The Frugal Photographer" in Canada is reloading portra and HP5 on 127 spools, and "Film for Classics" 127 is available from Freestyle, as is Rerapan. And Ilford always includes 46mm bulk film in its ULF sale, if you want to load it yourself. I'm still shooting 127--got some Yashica 44s, a couple of Primo Jr. cameras and a couple of Rollei Babies. 127 is in a nice space between 35mm and 120.

 

[Donald Qualls]

For square format, it's also easy to cut 120 -- and you'll get 16 frames on a roll, too, as well as a 16 mm strip left over. Doesn't work quite as well for full and half frame. The 6x6 framing numbers are in the right place if you cut the correct edge of the 120, but they're about half a centimeter too close together, giving frame overlaps if you don't mask the camera's film gate.