I didn’t think they made techpan in 70mm? But if they did then holy crap that’s an awesome find! The lowest speed, finest grain 70mm I can get my hands on is Aviphot 80 as FN-64, which while very fine grained, is nothing compared with techpan shot well. I’d absolutely love to get my hands on some to run through my RB67.Thank you for sharing. Great results!
I have a couple of 116 format folders, a 30 m roll of 70 mm Technical Pan but only a few backing papers left. They might be good for two or three reloads but then I will need to find a replacement.
How much of this "red Soviet paper" did you get and will you be able to buy it again once your stock is used up?
I heard of people using light-tight plastic sold in rolls for covering soil in green houses as an alternative to backing paper. Any thoughts on this? The material is cheap and readily available. It could be thinner and more stretchy than the paper, though. If "poly" in the specs means polyethylene the material should be fairly stable.
They did but unfortunately (for me) it is perforated.I didn’t think they made techpan in 70mm?
Oh man that would be perfect for me, I’m planning to buy a 70mm back for my RB and type 2 perf film is very hard to get fresh now. I can get 70mm width but perforations are not possible,They did but unfortunately (for me) it is perforated.
And here is a video on making 122 type film which you might find useful:
Just developed this roll, and it actually came out way better than I expected it would! It was treated no differently than any other 120 film, loaded and unloaded in daylight and used in a RB67. Almost no light leaks, which is pretty neat! Came out better than some factory packed film I’ve used.
Is this Soviet red paper made of the same or similar stuff to 120 roll backing paper? Given the problems Kodak Ilford and seemingly Foma have had with backing paper what will be interesting is whether in the longer run other paper creates issues
Or is it the case that provided there is no writing on the backing which seems to describe yours and there is no unknown film storage issues which also descríbes your situation then any paper as long as it is black and thick enough will do the job?
pentaxuser
Nice! Another thing this could be useful for: some red window advance 6x6 cameras have enough space to widen the film gate to 6x7. You'd just need to make marks for that negative with in the middle of the paper, where the numbers for 6x6 normally are.
I made some 220 leaders and trailers tonight, I cut them on my rototrim since the lengths are much shorter and the one join between lengths doesn’t need to be light tight… maybe I’ll get around to putting real film in it at some point, but I’m not really in the mood to go in the darkroom tonight. Too tired. But in theory this should work just as well if not better than the 120 I made.
...which limits usefulness for old folders, TLRs and box cameras with a film advance window, but not the 120 cameras with geared advance. I'm curious what percentage of 120 film is shot on cameras that require frame numbers? I've got many 120 cameras from 6x4.5 to 6x12, and the only camera with a film advance window is a wooden pinhole camera that I haven't used in years. I know many will probably want to argue this, but I wouldn't bat an eye if all 120 film stopped having any printing except the start arrow (which isn't close to the emulsion.)
No need to even put it on both sides, masking tape is essentially what is used at the factory. Just a single piece works fine. I have used it for every MF roll I’ve ever made and it works great.
I’ve been doing this for almost 3 years now, probably used around 20 rolls of 220 myself and sold something like 75, if it was an issue I would have heard of it by now.As the film goes around a sharp bend in a back like Hasselblad or Bronica, with no tape on the back, the film can peel away from the masking tape in 220. It can't happen in 120, really, but very easily in 220, since the film is more rigid than the tape.
You risk gumming up a back by not putting tape on the reverse of the 220 film.
Yeah, the new paper has a plastic coating to make it black and some sort of varnish to protect the film from the ink. And yet, I still hate it because it’s impossible to read.i just got some new kodak 120 tmax. i noticed the new backing paper feels like its got a plastic coating instead of the paper they were famous for bleeding onto the film.
Very curious to see the 127 paper I ordered from shanghai, the 220 paper from them is good stuff.Might as well update to.
The FK127 slitter worked fine. All I needed was the slitter, anyone with a little experience doing darkroom games doesn't need the whole kit. I can slit down 120 backing paper to 127 size now. I can even do an entire roll with the film if would want to. I now have a source of home made 127 backing paper. I just have to score a baby Rollie and I'll be set.
As I understand it, the red paper is similar to the 2-ply paper used by Kodak for a very long time, until the 1980’s iirc. The black part and red part are 2 separate paper stocks that have been laminated together to provide a light tight paper with a side that can be printed on. From what I can tell, the paper itself is pretty inert, you can get decent results from old film rolled in it from the 1990’s.
The problem, as you mentioned briefly, is the ink that is used to print on the backing paper. Most of the time the paper itself is fine, but the ink used can cause unwanted interactions with the emulsion. That problem I have yet to take on, but I was told that acrylic paint may be a good option, so long as the paint is allowed to dry for a few days, before rolling the film onto the paper.
I can slit down 120 backing paper to 127 size now. I can even do an entire roll with the film if would want to.
I've recut 120 to 127 (or 828) many times, even in room light (I just cut the roll, trim backing ends as needed, and respool to the correct spool -- this step in the dark, of course) The backing protects the film with only a very tiny fogged edge at the cut line. With the backing ends trimmed to appropriate length, a full 120 length strip will fit on the receiving spool, too (even for 828, though there's very little flange above the paper on the roll). The 120 number is usable for 4x4 or 828 (using the 6x4.5 track), giving 16 frames on a roll.
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?