Shanghai GP3 220 film is possibly too long for my old Nebro (Not Paterson after all) tank/reel

Sirius Glass

Subscriber
Joined
Jan 18, 2007
Messages
50,411
Location
Southern California
Format
Multi Format

I agree. I remove my film from the reels and put it in a separate container with the PhotoFlo solution.
 
OP
OP

Digital Wendy

Member
Joined
Feb 21, 2014
Messages
74
Location
Oxford UK
Format
Multi Format
I have learned a LOT here and I'm hugely grateful for all your input and advice.

1) I have now tried to feed this same film into the reel after development and in the light. It is amazing that I got as much film as I did into that reel! There is just too much friction in these old reels for this long, slightly softer film.
(Had not realised that my tanks and reels were quite that old - they are black bakelite and the larger one is a bit gritty [blush]. Been using it forever without giving it a thought)
2) Rounding the leading film corners DOES make a big difference and I shall add that to all future workflows.
3) Keeping photoflo out of tanks is a good tip. That one will be added to my list too.
4)Have now measured and this particular 'edition' of Shanghai 220 film is 159cm long. I have to assume that is standard . . .
5) No numbers or film marks as mentioned by @Maris above. Kinda works for me as I expose the full width of the film, but I'm happy with film markings too. (Youngster says it's cool to see that the images came from film!)
6) Have given both tanks a very thorough toothbrush scrub but they are still too gritty to take this film easily

At a first look the negatives look OK. I may need to slow my exposures even further, but that's do-able.
Bigger question is whether I want to buy a new tank and reel simply to use this film. I'm very used to my old tanks with the top twirler and side spouts. Nice and easy by the kitchen sink.
Lots to think about, as always.

Thank you all!
 
Last edited:

Don_ih

Member
Joined
Jan 24, 2021
Messages
7,858
Location
Ontario
Format
35mm RF
Digital Wendy said:
Have given both tanks a very thorough toothbrush scrub but they are still too gritty to take this film easily
Click to expand...

You can go buy some 600-grit sandpaper, tear it into strips that you fold over and run through the grooves of the spiral to cut down any grittiness. The surface of your reels have probably started to break down a bit, from getting wet and drying over and over and over. The sandpaper will polish it.
 

Donald Qualls

Subscriber
Joined
Jan 19, 2005
Messages
12,319
Location
North Carolina
Format
Multi Format
Digital Wendy said:
buy a new tank and reel simply to use this film.
Click to expand...

Assuming that's a Paterson System 4 or Super System 4 compatible, you could just buy a reel from Freestyle. The tank won't matter; it's the spiral plates where the problem lies.

And for whatever it's worth, I always Photo-Flo my film in the tank, on the reels -- but I also go over each plate with a toothbrush under warm running water after unloading the film, before setting it to dry, so there's never surfactant residue on the reel plates after drying. Even with my hard water, this hasn't caused any noticeable issues yet.
 
OP
OP

Digital Wendy

Member
Joined
Feb 21, 2014
Messages
74
Location
Oxford UK
Format
Multi Format

Umm - the problem arose when you first said 'most modern tanks'.
I tend to see anything younger than me as 'modern' but after some careful thought this one may date from the mid 1950's! Fear it may not be compatible with anything.
 
OP
OP

Digital Wendy

Member
Joined
Feb 21, 2014
Messages
74
Location
Oxford UK
Format
Multi Format

This is something I can try easily. I have jewellers polishing paper that may work well on ancient bakelite.
Will report back . . .
 

MattKing

Moderator
Moderator
Joined
Apr 24, 2005
Messages
53,249
Location
Delta, BC Canada
Format
Medium Format
OP
OP

Digital Wendy

Member
Joined
Feb 21, 2014
Messages
74
Location
Oxford UK
Format
Multi Format
MattKing said:
Check here and tell us what you have:
https://www.photomemorabilia.co.uk/Paterson/Developing_Tanks.html
Click to expand...

Now I'm embarrased.
Have taken it apart for a thorough scrub and find I truly have not even been taking enough notice of it to get the brand right. Been using it without a second thought - one of those things that 'just works'.
It's a battered Johnson/Nebro 'Universal' film tank. Like this picture, but without the shine. Like the Paterson 'Major'. Has the nice spring in the bottom and side spout is handy.

Science museum says it's 1959 at the latest .
Perhaps it's time to send it into retirement as a plant pot. Think I've thrown the box away already (could no longer stand the smell ).
The reel is 92mm wide so I don't think a new Paterson reel will fit.
 
Last edited:

Donald Qualls

Subscriber
Joined
Jan 19, 2005
Messages
12,319
Location
North Carolina
Format
Multi Format
Digital Wendy said:
The reel is 92mm wide so I don't think a new Paterson will fit.
Click to expand...

Not only is a modern Paterson reel bigger, I think the core is a different diameter, too.

You can usually find Paterson "2-reel" tanks on eBay for hardly anything -- just make sure the photos include that core piece; it's part of the light trap. Or you can get a new one (which won't include a reel) for twenty bucks or so from the usual vendors. The "2-reel" is misleading; it's big enough for two reels set to 35 mm spacing, which just nicely fits one reel set for 120/220. You need a "3-reel" to develop with two 120 reels at once.

Different people have different opinions about whether the System 4 (still available as Universal, IIRC) or latest Super System 4 (with larger diameter "Tupperware" style inversion cap) is better; I have 1, 2, and 3-reel sizes of the "Super" and I love them. All use the same reels, but the cores don't interchange (different heights) between System 4 and Super System 4. They won't do 116, but they will do 127 and can be fairly easily modified to handle 16 mm/110.
 
OP
OP

Digital Wendy

Member
Joined
Feb 21, 2014
Messages
74
Location
Oxford UK
Format
Multi Format

Thank you . Time for some shopping.
 

Bayliss

Member
Joined
Dec 22, 2021
Messages
47
Location
London
Format
Medium Format
Don Heisz said:
Many people find it hard to fully rinse off the reels - that it leaves the reels sticky.
Click to expand...

Ah I see - I've never noticed that myself but it is possible I don't use enough, despite the wetting-agent I do still get the occasional water spot
 

MattKing

Moderator
Moderator
Joined
Apr 24, 2005
Messages
53,249
Location
Delta, BC Canada
Format
Medium Format
Digital Wendy said:
Perhaps it's time to send it into retirement as a plant pot.
Click to expand...

If it is otherwise working well for you for other sizes of film, why?
For plastic reels, I recommend the current Paterson Super System 4 tanks with the AP/Samigon/Arista Premium compatible reels - the ones with the wider flanges.
 

eli griggs

Member
Joined
Nov 15, 2005
Messages
3,856
Location
NC
Format
Multi Format
For Photoflo residue, try a final soak of the reels with some Everclear white liquor, 90 - 95% in the last water rinse, it won't take much and it's free of Isopropyl or denatured additives, so in fact, safe.

An ounce in a three or four reel tank will do a number of rolls and you might want to save it for future use, the alcohol will kill nasties before they get a grip on your rinse bath.

IMO.
 
OP
OP

Digital Wendy

Member
Joined
Feb 21, 2014
Messages
74
Location
Oxford UK
Format
Multi Format
MattKing said:
If it is otherwise working well for you for other sizes of film, why?
For plastic reels, I recommend the current Paterson Super System 4 tanks with the AP/Samigon/Arista Premium compatible reels - the ones with the wider flanges.
Click to expand...

Thank you!
 

pentaxuser

Member
Joined
May 9, 2005
Messages
20,016
Location
Daventry, No
Format
35mm
So have we established that the reel is OK to accept the new Shanghai 220 film's length and that the problem lies in the need to get rid of the OP's current reels stickiness?

Thanks

pentaxuser
 

MattKing

Moderator
Moderator
Joined
Apr 24, 2005
Messages
53,249
Location
Delta, BC Canada
Format
Medium Format
pentaxuser said:
So have we established that the reel is OK to accept the new Shanghai 220 film's length and that the problem lies in the need to get rid of the OP's current reels stickiness?

Thanks

pentaxuser
Click to expand...

No - the 60 year old and relatively unusual, non-Paterson reel is probably not designed for film as long as 220.
 

Maris

Member
Joined
Jan 17, 2006
Messages
1,576
Location
Noosa, Australia
Format
Multi Format
Here's what the new Shanghai GP# 220 format packaging includes:
 

Attachments

  • Shanghai GP3 Packaging.jpg
    1.6 MB · Views: 59

Roger Cole

Member
Joined
Jan 20, 2011
Messages
6,069
Location
Atlanta GA
Format
Multi Format
Serious slightly related question: I see some other threads mentioning it too. Is the fascination with this stuff simply that it is, as far as I know, the only film available today in 220? I have a few rolls of frozen Astia in 220 that I'm looking forward to shooting and finding out if keeping them in the freezer all this time has kept them looking as good as I know Astia looked, but I'm just not particularly motivated to shoot a different film just to get more shots. I do recall some years ago reading that this film was nearly identical to old, classic Plus-X and if that were true THAT would get me very interested. I really liked Plus-X. FP4+ has been my replacement but I'd prefer Plus-X. But what Maris said about the true film speed would seem to mean that it's not similar at all.

Don't get me wrong; I understand that for some people having twice as many shots on a roll could be a real advantage. It just isn't for the way I shoot.
 
OP
OP

Digital Wendy

Member
Joined
Feb 21, 2014
Messages
74
Location
Oxford UK
Format
Multi Format
Roger Cole said:
Don't get me wrong; I understand that for some people having twice as many shots on a roll could be a real advantage. It just isn't for the way I shoot.
Click to expand...

Twice as many shots on a roll IS a real advantage to me. I'm using it in a fiddly Graflex '51' roll film holder and 220 might give me 15 shots per load/roll.
 
Last edited:

AgX

Member
Joined
Apr 5, 2007
Messages
29,973
Location
Germany
Format
Multi Format
Digital Wendy said:
I have learned a LOT here and I'm hugely grateful for all your input and advice.


3) Keeping photoflo out of tanks is a good tip. That one will be added to my list too.
Click to expand...

We had discussions whether such apart bath makes sense on the alleged "wetting-agent build-up".
In this respect it makes no sense to me.

However, having the film fall out of the reel into a wetting-agent bath is a alternative way of getting the film off the reel for hanging.
 

dynachrome

Member
Joined
Sep 16, 2006
Messages
1,764
Format
35mm
Many years ago I had a frustrating experience trying to load a roll of 220 HP-5 (not HP-5+) into a Peterson reel. If my memory is correct on this, the film base of 220 HP-5 was even thinner than that of 220 TXP or 220 PXP. I finally gave up. I took out the reel, wound the film into a roll, took out the spool and leader and tail, made sure the center column was in place and closed the tank with the film inside. The next day I bought a Brooks stainless steel narrow spaced 220 reel. It was much easier. I developed the film in a 16 oz. stainless steel tank and tge film looked good. Improper loading of HP-5 220 could result in bends which caused white half moon shaped marks.

Years later I found a stainless steel Nikor wide spaced tank and reel set for 220. This was much easier to load than the narrow spaced Brooks reel. More solution is required but that didn't bother me. I now have more of the wide spaced sets from Nikor and Kindermann. I have three 220 rolls of the GP-3 film to try out. I will not be using any of my Paterson reels to develop them. I also have four rolls of the film on 120 size to experiment with. Two days ago I received seven stainless steel reels form an eBay seller. They are all in good condition. They were $2 each: 3 wide spaced 220 reels, one narrow spaced 220 reel and three 120 reels. The stuff is out there.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn more…