Respooling: anybody uses a tool like this one?

[jay moussy]

In this thread here on the forum, post #34 shows a handy tool, two spools on thin axles, on a small wood frame.

Anybody uses something similar?

I have yet to respool, and am concerned about even winding, tension.
I reckon in-camera respooling may be best...?

 

[StepheKoontz]

The main issue that is easily solved is "bunching up" of film where it is taped to the backing paper when you reroll it. I've found it's impossible to not have a lump where the film is taped down unless you untape the film and tape it back down when you get to that point. That's the only issue and I wouldn't bother with making any sort of tool as it won't resolve this issue either.

 

[Donald Qualls]

Note that the "bunching up" is only an issue during the reverse wind, where the film is wound tail-first onto what will be the supply spool. You can't reliably do that in a camera; if the film has any curl to it, the film tail will get caught when it separates from the backing on the reverse pass.

If you wound onto a 620 spool on the first pass, and didn't have slack when you recaptured the film tail on the reverse pass, you'll have little "bunch up" -- but getting no bunch-up is largely a matter of chance. I agree with @StepheKoontz that untaping and retaping the film start is the only reliable way to have the numbers count up (as designed) and get the roll to lie down tight on the spool. That said, I've never used a device that that in the OP -- when I respool, I do it from hand to hand, in a changing bag or on a darkroom counter. Much easier than loading 120 onto a developing reel, because I'm trying not to separate the paper from the film, rather than separate them and have the backing floating loose in the dark (and I haven't done it in a while, anyway, for 120/620; I have either one or no cameras that won't accept a carefully trimmed 120 supply -- the one that was worst about it had its supply caddy removed and now 120 just drops in).

 

[Alex Varas]

I do often 120 to 620 by hand in a dark bag.

 

[BrianShaw]

Ditto, and I find that if the spoils are always as close together as possible and tight then the chance of film bunching is really low.

The jig is a clever tool, though.

 

[JPD]

I agree with @StepheKoontz that untaping and retaping the film start is the only reliable way to have the numbers count up (as designed) and get the roll to lie down tight on the spool. That said, I've never used a device that that in the OP -- when I respool, I do it from hand to hand, in a changing bag or on a darkroom counter.

That's how I do it too, by hand, and untaping and retaping, in a darkroom. I don't own a changing bag, but I saw one in a catalog from the 1920's the other day. Interesting that they have been around for that long, and probably much longer than that (for loading and unloading glass plates).

 

[Donald Qualls]

As long as there have been dry plates, there has been the need to reload plate holders in the field -- hence, need for changing bags.

 

[jay moussy]

Ditto, and I find that if the spoils are always as close together as possible and tight then the chance of film bunching is really low.

The jig is a clever tool, though.

Yes, my interest in the tool idea was about (maybe) keeping the rewinding straight. and the spools very close to one another. I am overthinking it apparently.
Another thought: the context is about going to 620. The jig may be more helpful for 116?

 

[campy51]

I have re-spooled a couple but the last 2 or 3 I just clip the outer most rings and holding it vertically sanded down about half the thickness of both ends. I use a 620 spool as a gauge. It takes about 5 minutes and don't have to worry about the bump or getting dust on my film from the changing bag. Some say the dust from sanding will get in there but if light can't I don't know how dust can, but I am new to this so others will most likely explain why I shouldn't.

 

[Donald Qualls]

The jig may be more helpful for 116?

If you have 116 and need it on 616 spools, or vice versa, I don't know why you'd need such a jig, any more than moving 120 to a 620 spool. If you have a 116 camera and you're trying to roll 120 film into the backing paper, you have a more complicated job anyway -- you need to start rolling the tail of the 116 backing, stop at the (tactile marked) end point of 120 film (shorter than 116 -- so you have to also mark the backing so you can see through the red window that you're done), unroll the 120 enough to untape and capture the head end of the film (centered!) under the 116 backing, then roll, handling two spools and a roll of backing without tangling or dropping the whole mess on the floor, until you get to the end of the 120 film, which you tape, centered, on the 116 backing before rolling up the 116 leader and taping down or rubber banding the leader start.

If you're starting from 70mm film, it's much easier, just like rolling 35mm into 828 backing. Cut correct length, roll up 116 tail to the end mark, capture the 70mm film end, roll to the other end of the 70mm strip, tape, and finish rolling up. Sprocket holes in the edges of your images, but WAY easier (got a 70mm film reel?).

I have re-spooled a couple but the last 2 or 3 I just clip the outer most rings and holding it vertically sanded down about half the thickness of both ends. I use a 620 spool as a gauge. It takes about 5 minutes and don't have to worry about the bump or getting dust on my film from the changing bag. Some say the dust from sanding will get in there but if light can't I don't know how dust can, but I am new to this so others will most likely explain why I shouldn't.

I don't sand my 120 when I clip it -- on the rare occasions when I can't make a roll fit due to the couple mm extra length, I respool. The sanding dust is plastic, and strongly inclined to pick up a static charge from the sanding friction; it will then stick to everything -- until it doesn't. That lets it get places it shouldn't (like inside the camera via the backing or spool), places where light can't go, and there's no practical way to get rid of all of it.

 

[campy51]

If you have 116 and need it on 616 spools, or vice versa, I don't know why you'd need such a jig, any more than moving 120 to a 620 spool. If you have a 116 camera and you're trying to roll 120 film into the backing paper, you have a more complicated job anyway -- you need to start rolling the tail of the 116 backing, stop at the (tactile marked) end point of 120 film (shorter than 116 -- so you have to also mark the backing so you can see through the red window that you're done), unroll the 120 enough to untape and capture the head end of the film (centered!) under the 116 backing, then roll, handling two spools and a roll of backing without tangling or dropping the whole mess on the floor, until you get to the end of the 120 film, which you tape, centered, on the 116 backing before rolling up the 116 leader and taping down or rubber banding the leader start.

If you're starting from 70mm film, it's much easier, just like rolling 35mm into 828 backing. Cut correct length, roll up 116 tail to the end mark, capture the 70mm film end, roll to the other end of the 70mm strip, tape, and finish rolling up. Sprocket holes in the edges of your images, but WAY easier (got a 70mm film reel?).



I don't sand my 120 when I clip it -- on the rare occasions when I can't make a roll fit due to the couple mm extra length, I respool. The sanding dust is plastic, and strongly inclined to pick up a static charge from the sanding friction; it will then stick to everything -- until it doesn't. That lets it get places it shouldn't (like inside the camera via the backing or spool), places where light can't go, and there's no practical way to get rid of all of it.

I make sure it's clean before putting it in the camera. I have to sand the ends or it's too tight for the Medalist II, never tried any other 620 camera.

 

[MattKing]

I use a Mamiya TLR (long straight film path) to run the film from the initial 120 feed spool on to a take-up 120 spool.
That leaves me with film wound all the way on to the 120 take-up spool and a 620 spool to roll the film back on to.
From that point, I either use a Mamiya 645 insert to hold the two spools - works like the jig - or I hold both spools in one palm and use my fingers to roll from the 120 to the 620 spool.
Always in a dark room, at night - changing bags are creations of the devil!

 

[Rick A]

If you are respooling 120 onto 620, first respool onto a spare 620 then onto the final 620. It reduces the chances of the film bunching at the tape on the final wind on.

 

[grat]

Out of curiosity, why has no one made a light-tight "daylight" re-spooling device? I realize it's probably not worth the effort to get one injection molded, but I was thinking a 3D printed design. Was somewhat surprised no one's made one yet.

 

[BrianShaw]

I’d guess that the market for such a device is very small.

 

[BAC1967]

I always spool 120 to 620 by hand keeping everything close and tight. The key is getting the loose tail end of the film started right. If you get to the end and there’s a big lump start over.

 

[Donald Qualls]

I make sure it's clean before putting it in the camera. I have to sand the ends or it's too tight for the Medalist II, never tried any other 620 camera.

With static-charged plastic sanding dust, "clean" is probably an illusion, but I agree, with the Medalist there are only two options: real 620 spool, or sanding/machining the ends of the 120. I've got a Reflex II, and I can make it work with just a diameter trim, even in cameras with tabs on the supply peg plates (like some Brownie Hawkeye examples). Same is true of all my other 620 box cameras except the Duaflex (all four models) and the Argus 75 -- the latter of which I modified by removing the film caddie on the supply side so the 120 just drops in. I'd probably do the same for the Duaflexes, if I shot them much. Still needs 620 for takeup, though.

Given Film Photography Project and B&H (and Freestyle?) selling pre-spooled 620 for less than twice the price of the same film on 120, it's tempting to suggest that's the easy way to go (and you get a spool, priced in). Worst case, that's an economical source of spare spools, since they spools themselves go for more on eBay than the price differential for 620 vs. 120 from those sources.

 

[ciniframe]

Respooled by hand a few times, very frustrating. Now my only use for 120 roll film is a couple of Kodak Tourist cameras. Since I do my own developing and can recover the 620 spools it was only necessary to grind out the feed chamber to take a 120 spool and leave the wind up side as is, taking up the film on a 620 spool.

 

[jay moussy]

It just came to me that modern-day Apple Computer and its multiple connector styles is not unlike Kodak and its film format tweaks.

As far as respooling, I will grab a 100 ISO film and practice, so if I goof (likely), I can make the roll a pinhole film strip donor.

 

[BrianShaw]

It might be better to waste a roll and do your first few practices in daylight. You’ll very quickly see how to ensure that the loose end of the film Can get aligned tightly... avoiding the need to re-tape.

 

[Donald Qualls]

It just came to me that modern-day Apple Computer and its multiple connector styles is not unlike Kodak and its film format tweaks.

The practice that got named "lock-in" when IBM tried to pull it with the PC in the late 1970s was already almost a century old before it got the name. Gillette is the first example I'm aware of. Safety razor blades (the really thin double edged ones) didn't always have the keyway shape in the center that they have now -- originally, that was a trademarked shape that prevented using other manufacturers' blades in your nice new Gillette safety razor. Eventually, that changed, and everyone was able to start making "master key" blades that would fit any razor -- but the practice continues in razors to the present; look at various brands of cartridge razors, where the only difference is the mating latch that connects the replaceable cartridge (expensive) to the (virtually free) handle. Buy a Schick, you have to use Shick cartridges. Buy a Venus, likewise for Venus cartridges.

Kodak learned it from Gillette, along with "sell the razor at a loss, and make your profit on the blades." They sold tens of millions of simple cameras at or just below actual cost -- and made their billions selling film to the users who were locked in by the 616 and 620 spool size. Others tried this -- I found a reference recently to a Pentacon K16 16mm camera, with a unique, proprietary film (center perfed, one perf between each frame, along with an aligned edge notch). Probably a good reason I've never heard of it until a few days ago. Lock-in only works if you already have market dominance.

 

[eli griggs]

A couple of things.

First, some folks have a difficult time with changing bags, so, if you're one of them, build a changing box, with two lint free sleeves from a dark pullover, and some blackout curtain fabric, lining the inside or out of the sleeves.

One, you can make the light tight box in an hour or two, and you can choose to make it small or larger enough to process 4" x 5" film in three or four Kodak hard rubber tanks on a table/countertop.

You can, of course, also respool or/and, cut new film into smaller formats with a specialized trimmer off Bay.

Two, instead of sanding spools, makes ng static dust and general trouble for your camera and film, make a small wood frame that will allow you to put a fresh spool between the two sides and has a strong handle crank, like on an oldwold well, to turn the spool with

Once this is made, take a good steel hand scrapping card wide enough to easily span the topwtop of the spool holder and little by little, saw two parallel slots to allow the level lower edge of the card to finally find the final, correct trim depth needed for the modified spools.

These metal scrapers have very sharp burr edges that will act as shearing tools and allow plastic to be removed in thin scrapings, as you spin the spool and press down (or use a tight spring to force down) on the top of the card until the full depth of cut is made and no more plastic can be trimmed away.

You'll have to put the correct angle burr on the card, but two wide edges can be given four cutting surfaces, between simple filing down the edges for fresh burrs to be made at the correct angles for best results.

Basically this is a hand lathe, with a double cutter/trimmer, which is all you need to avoid putting abrasive sand and powdered plastic dust plus static anywhere bear your film, camera, etc

There are as many way of doing this as you can come up with, but this is my suggestion to start with.

Cheers and Good Health to all.

 

[Sirius Glass]

A couple of things.

First, some folks have a difficult time with changing bags, so, if you're one of them, build a changing box, with two lint free sleeves from a dark pullover, and some blackout curtain fabric, lining the inside or out of the sleeves.

One, you can make the light tight box in an hour or two, and you can choose to make it small or larger enough to process 4" x 5" film in three or four Kodak hard rubber tanks on a table/countertop.

You can, of course, also respool or/and, cut new film into smaller formats with a specialized trimmer off Bay.

Two, instead of sanding spools, makes ng static dust and general trouble for your camera and film, make a small wood frame that will allow you to put a fresh spool between the two sides and has a strong handle crank, like on an oldwold well, to turn the spool with

Once this is made, take a good steel hand scrapping card wide enough to easily span the topwtop of the spool holder and little by little, saw two parallel slots to allow the level lower edge of the card to finally find the final, correct trim depth needed for the modified spools.

These metal scrapers have very sharp burr edges that will act as shearing tools and allow plastic to be removed in thin scrapings, as you spin the spool and press down (or use a tight spring to force down) on the top of the card until the full depth of cut is made and no more plastic can be trimmed away.

You'll have to put the correct angle burr on the card, but two wide edges can be given four cutting surfaces, between simple filing down the edges for fresh burrs to be made at the correct angles for best results.

Basically this is a hand lathe, with a double cutter/trimmer, which is all you need to avoid putting abrasive sand and powdered plastic dust plus static anywhere bear your film, camera, etc

There are as many way of doing this as you can come up with, but this is my suggestion to start with.

Cheers and Good Health to all.

For those with more money than time

https://www.freestylephoto.biz/25001-Photoflex-Changing-Room

 

[Grim Tuesday]

I like Matt's idea of using a Mamiya TLR and a SLR insert as a jig. Clever. Koni Omega backs are cheap and plentiful and would work for this as well.

 

[eli griggs]

Yes, I use a very large Calumet "Changing Room" for away trips where I don't have a darkroom, but what I had in mind was more in line with the 'instant street photography boxes, street and tourist and club photographers use in many 'third world' nations such a (no slight intended) India or Pakistan, etc, and from which your photograph is taken, the film unloaded/changed in the box, where you have, for example a monobath line, and a built in contact enlarger (sometimes simply solar) , to make you a print or prints with the negative on the spot.

A small version would do well at changing out films from holders, or jammed cameras, and loading into daylight tanks, and a larger version, maybe with folding table legs.

With tanks like I discussed, which should be much cheaper than Nikkor or Hewes 4x5 or larger round tanks, film can be processed without the need of a dedicated darkroom, and examined, printed and shared by other than analog devices.

While I'm on the topic of boxes, a tall partially folding box, with a small non-folding back section, to contain the enlarger and acordeon sides forward of the enlarger, to allow the standing space to be pushed in when no in use, could also be made to contain a small enlarger, (such as the Durst M600, or an Omega B or Leitz Valloy), a timer, red or amber safe light and several vertical 'trays' for paper chemistry, without running water, so prints contact printed and up to say, 11x14in. images can be made, in the corner of a medium bedroom or other indoor or shed location.

Of course, those with more money than time will have no need for such 'inventiveness', unless they do it for fun, or as a gift to someone, but young and old beginners, especially in this period of Wuhan 19 and layoffs, etc, as well as experienced photographer might find they have plenty of need and time to undertake variations of what I'm speaking to, possibly to include salvaging plywood, 2x4in., black roofing felt/paper, or dark stage curtains, stainless steel table tops, etc, and use these to compensate for much of the needed materials.

No nearly everything in photography and darkroom work, chemistry, (think Caffenol film developer, citric acid or white vinegar stop baths, or simple hypo from pool supply houses) needs to be bought at photography vendors stores, virtual or physical, and the sooner folks learn that, the more enjoyable ventures in photography can be.

Go ahead and see for yourself.

IMO.