Succumbed to the bulk loader thread

[eli griggs]

This is a good of example of what a small, 3-D printer can do for photographers that buy used.

But that's another thread.

 

[Donald Qualls]

This is a good of example of what a small, 3-D printer can do for photographers that buy used.

But that's another thread.

True -- but again, the loader will work fine without it, even if you don't get one in your next bulk roll.

 

[madNbad]

Currently, I doing the Rodinal 1-100 stand development trick to see what the mystery film is.

 

[Don_ih]

The centre spool comes with film - it's not part of the loader. The seller was a sucker, unfortunately....

 

[madNbad]

In this photo, it's the plastic piece that fits over the center spindle. The film core slides over that to keep the film aligned. It's the piece that is missing.

 

[madNbad]

Tried the mystery film in Rodinal 1-100 for one hour, took out a wet piece of film with no signs of development. I'll keep the rest of the roll for practice.

 

[Don_ih]

One ebay listing shows:

And that yellow spool would need to be removed to insert a bulk roll that comes with a centre spool - such as the black spool above. Easy to see how it would be lost (my Alden doesn't have it). But I don't remember the last time I got a bulk roll of film without a centre spool.

 

[Sirius Glass]

I used to buy 30 m of Ektachrome for summer trips to Europe until the film processors refused to return the cassettes. At that point it was no longer cost effective.

 

[eli griggs]

I loved Ektachrome and always always did the development my self or in a Professional lab like Charlotte's old Quality Chrome, on N. Tryon, but stopped shooting this film or any colour films in general, especially in light of the demise of Cibachrome and the theft of my colour darkroom in S.C. while in Charlotte NC


I liked loading my own from bulk loads and keeping my reusable cassettes, which included Ilford films which I felt were the best available at the time.

I used to buy 30 m of Ektachrome for summer trips to Europe until the film processors refused to return the cassettes. At that point it was no longer cost effective.

 

[Don_ih]

the theft of my colour darkroom

That sounds horrible.

 

[eli griggs]

The S.C. Trooper that took the report was about as disinterested in finding this stuff as a fish is in concrete grindstone manufacturing.

I knew with better than 95% confidence which neighbor took my kit, tipPed off by another neighbor, but nothing was done that I know of, even though a small rifle was part of their haul.

That water is long out to sea, but it did stop me from doing/enjoying colour work and I sold my colour meter later on.

 

[Cholentpot]

The S.C. Trooper that took the report was about as disinterested in finding this stuff as a fish is in concrete grindstone manufacturing.

I knew with better than 95% confidence which neighbor took my kit, tipPed off by another neighbor, but nothing was done that I know of, even though a small rifle was part of their haul.

That water is long out to sea, but it did stop me from doing/enjoying colour work and I sold my colour meter later on.

Should have reported a stolen rifle and made an offhand comment about some valuable photography equipment going missing too.

 

[madNbad]

Thanks for all the answers. Having not bought any bulk film in a long time, if the new spools only need to fit over the spindle that's great. Having obtained a free loader, with another arriving shortly, then I can take advantage of loading one with TMax 400 and the other with XX 5222, a winning situation however it started.

 

[Moose22]

Thanks for all the answers. Having not bought any bulk film in a long time, if the new spools only need to fit over the spindle that's great. Having obtained a free loader, with another arriving shortly, then I can take advantage of loading one with TMax 400 and the other with XX 5222, a winning situation however it started.

I got my hands on a second loader too, off of the craig's list. It has 60' of film in it! there's a sticker on the outside that says TriX, so maybe it is that. Seller has no clue. If it isn't I don't know how to tell what it is, so I am going to load a short roll then develop it like tri-x and see what happens.

Anyone want to take bets on whether it's any good? I'd expect it to be so old it's unusable, though the loader looks good. It is in its box, and there's not even dust on the box so...

 

[Donald Qualls]

Tri-X can spend decades in the loader and still be good. You might have some fog, and have to downrate your film speed to compensate, but otherwise, it should be fine. Another option is developing cold with benzotriazole; this can recover film that's too badly fogged to use otherwise.

 

[Moose22]

Good to know @Donald Qualls . Maybe I'll get something after all!

At the very least it might be fun to try and use. If it's old or fogged I get to experiment some -- always something new to learn. And if all else fails I'll do my standard and call the results "art" photos.

 

[Donald Qualls]

Or worst case, if you didn't overpay for the loader, you use the Tri-X for developer leader testing (drop in a clip to be sure it turns black at the right rate) and put something else into the loader (fresh roll of Tri-X, XP-2 Super, Foma 400, etc.).

 

[Moose22]

Or worst case, if you didn't overpay for the loader, you use the Tri-X for developer leader testing (drop in a clip to be sure it turns black at the right rate) and put something else into the loader (fresh roll of Tri-X, XP-2 Super, Foma 400, etc.).

It was $30, including the film. Looks not "new" but by Japanese Ebay standards top mint. I already got an Alden that should be good, but I felt like it was a bargain not to be missed. I actually didn't know there was film in it until I saw it in person.

Even without the tri-x, it's a good deal. Whether it's usable film or 60' of test strips, the film is just a bonus. I actually intended to start with FP4 in that Alden. The roll and some ukranian cartridges are on their way.

 

[Donald Qualls]

I've use plastic cassettes for many years, as long as you occasionally brush the velvet (a sticky note folded over with the sticky out is a perfect dust trap for this) they're fine, and very easy to open and close -- but I bought a batch of the Ukrainian steel ones recently too (haven't tried them yet). I learned to bulk load in the early 1970s with Kodak metal snap-caps, and those were fine, as well -- but in those days, all (or almost all) 35 mm cassettes were reusable, as the industry hadn't yet started crimping the caps on (seemingly only to prevent cassette reuse, perhaps to protect mini-labs from getting B&W in color cassettes, leading to emulsion sloughing in the high processing temperature).

 

[Moose22]

Well, I did ten frames with the film that's in the new loader.

I got images, but it looks thin. I did a fresh roll of tri-x at the same time that looks great at first glance, so I had a control.

We'll see when the negatives are dry and I can get a look, but I didn't expect the best with free film! So, @Donald Qualls , when you say "downrate" to compensate, do you mean shot at 100 then dev as though I shot at 400? (6:45 or 7min in X-tol) or shoot at 100 dev at 100 (5:30 in xtol)? I'm assuming the former.

 

[Don_ih]

There are a few tactics for using old film. You can rate lower and develop normally (for box speed). You can rate even lower and develop for less time to fight age fog. You can rate lower and develop for more time than recommended but with benzo in the developer to fight age fog.

I discovered, when using up old film from a bulk loader, that the first rolls I wound off it were much slower than the film closer to the core. I think the film in the middle was preserved by the film on the outside. That was tmax100, though - which is the best film to find in a bulk loader (because it doesn't seem to lose any speed even when it's 20 years past its date).

 

[Moose22]

There are a few tactics for using old film. You can rate lower and develop normally (for box speed). You can rate even lower and develop for less time to fight age fog. You can rate lower and develop for more time than recommended but with benzo in the developer to fight age fog.

I discovered, when using up old film from a bulk loader, that the first rolls I wound off it were much slower than the film closer to the core. I think the film in the middle was preserved by the film on the outside. That was tmax100, though - which is the best film to find in a bulk loader (because it doesn't seem to lose any speed even when it's 20 years past its date).

Cool, thanks. I have a plan now.

I've just exposed 10 frames metered for 100. I think I'll wind another short and shoot half at 50 half at 200. I'll dev them at 400 (7 minutes in xtol). I'll see what it looks like and go from there. More fun experimenting!

I think I might have underdeveloped that first roll a bit. I looked at the wrong line on massive dev chart. Doh! I should have done another minute. But the control still came out pretty good, just a little lower in contrast than I expect from tri-x, it's a very big difference compared to the old film, way closer to what I expect even with the time a little short. Tri-x is pretty cool film.

 

[MattKing]

When you do your test, be sure to photograph something like a card which indicates where you have switched the setting on the meter. It can say something like "next 6 frames metered at 50". Otherwise, it can be hard to keep track of things.
And when you are doing this, avoid using film that lacks frame numbers!

 

[Moose22]

When you do your test, be sure to photograph something like a card which indicates where you have switched the setting on the meter. It can say something like "next 6 frames metered at 50". Otherwise, it can be hard to keep track of things.
And when you are doing this, avoid using film that lacks frame numbers!

I just photographed my fist with 1 finger for 100 and 2 fingers for 200 and none for 50. As for film and frame numbers... it's found film. I get what I get. I suppose I could use the F6, it can be rigged to write stuff between frames and I can pull the exif data down. But I didn't do that today.

Anyway, I just photographed a finger because I didn't realize I should mark frames it until I had the camera in hand, and I was in a hurry. The sun was shining and I had important going outside and enjoying my day off to do.

I wasn't particularly scientific beyond exposing a few frames at each ISO to have something to soup at home tonight. I'll make a target and do fancy crap like that later, though. Good idea to keep it straight and have a known something to take a photo of. If it's worth saving this film I can narrow down a good ISO and developing time that way.

What's hanging in the shower right now looks a lot better than the underdeveloped/underexposed first attempt. I'll see how fogged the film might be before bedtime when it is dry.

 

[Moose22]

hah -- metered at 100, developed like 400 in xtol

It's a little noisier than a fresh roll of tri-x, but it is usable.