Two rolls per reel?

[BetterSense]

It's possible to spool two strips of film, back-to-back, on a stainless-steel developing reel. This has obvious advantages if you have a lot of film to develop, or you lack lots of reels and tank space. I did this once a long time ago, but every time I have the opportunity since, I always chicken out because I'm worried I will get uneven development or something. Has anyone routinely done the two-rolls-per-reel method, and did you find that you had to do anything different with agitation compared to using only one roll per reel?

 

[Sirius Glass]

The Jobo reels have clips on the reels to keep the two films in place. That is the only way that I have done that.

 

[Mike Wilde]

I have never tried back to back, but do run 120 end to end on Paterson reels.

I have a friend who shoots LF and is into wilderness image shooting and processing.

He processes 4x5 film in zip lock sandwich bags, back to back on cloudy nights. He calls it his 'shake and bake' method.

 

[Bob Carnie]

I think you are asking for whoopass , The Jobo reels can load two up, but they sometimes slip and a frame gets screwed on each roll.
For client work we do not do this , for personal we do.

 

[SFC]

I frequently run 2 120 rolls on my Patterson reels.

 

[K-G]

From what I have read, Eugene Smith used the back-to-back method frequently. Once you get the films on to the reel, development should not be a problem. I guess the fixer can be exhausted rather quickly as developer probably will be traped between the films and released into the fixer afterwards. Chemicals between the films may also be an issue if you wash the films still on the reel. Also check that you have a large enough volume of developer ( preferably not diluted ) to develop two films without beeing exhausted.
If you can get hold of two outdated rols, you can practice film loading in daylight.
Good luck !

Karl-Gustaf

 

[Monophoto]

This is an old newspaper photographer's trick. The objective was to have a way to process film as quickly as possible, and this cut the time in half. And it was often coupled with the use of 12-exposure 'press' rolls that allowed a photographer to dedicate an entire roll of negatives to one event (fire, accident, grip & grin, etc), which meant that there were often more rolls to process to get a day's worth of shooting. Since the idea was process and print in time for tomorrow morning's edition, and no one cared much about the archival properties of the negatives, it was perfectly OK.

I've done it once or twice, but I've always been concerned about two factors. One is exhaustion of the developer - after all, the method means that there is twice the surface area of emulsion to be processed. Using fresh developer in a one-shot sequence always seemed to work for me, but I would be very cautious about using partially used or replenished developer. The other concern was that it was difficult for liquids to get between the two strips of film. That's not a problem with development and fixing, but I was concerned about washing - I could envision a situation where enough chemical got between the layers, and didn't get rinsed out, to leave the back of the film contaminated. So I always manually rinsed each strip of film individually to make sure that the back was clean.

 

[scheimfluger_77]

I frequently run 2 120 rolls on my Patterson reels.

Yes these reels will do a 220 roll. I don't know about stainless steel. You are also supposed to be able to do 12 sheets in a 4x5 Combi Plan tank loading back to back, but I've not had the courage to try it. :eek:

 

[vpwphoto]

I HAVE DONE it on SS reals.

Make sure the reals are NOT BENT at all.

You will risk emulsion sticking together... I ruined perhaps 5% of the film area doing this now and then.
Sometimes the emulsion would stick during the fixing bath only.... I usually saved the film by re-fixing.

This was done during my student days or when I had 5 rolls on deadline going in a 4 roll tank.
Unless you are deadly good on loading a single roll, don't try it.
Unless I were on a deadline, I wouldn't do it again.
I did do 8 rolls of e-6 in a 4 roll tank once.

 

[herb]

Two rolls on a reel

Remember what Ghandi said: "there is more to life than increasing its speed"

 

[removed account4]

while it can be done
it might be more prudent just to process 1 roll / reel.
often times time spent photographing can't be replaced even if you go back over and over again ..

if you have tons of film, get more reels, and a deep tank (/ tupperware containers )
and load all your film in reels and on coat hangers. its easy to process 6 or 7 rolls ( even 10 ) of film at a time that way ...

you just have to get the hang(er) of how to agitate ...

good luck !
john

 

[hpulley]

I've never succeeded at two rolls per reel so I don't try anymore.

 

[MattKing]

I'd recommend that you just be patient and look for good used larger tanks and extra reels.

In fact, that is what I did .

 

[tomalophicon]

Tried it once, got white creamy negatives because the rolls overlapped.
Never again, but it can be done (so I've heard).

I bought a 5 roll Paterson tank.

 

[artonpaper]

That W. Eugene's Smiths trick. Must use stainless reals as far as know.

 

[2F/2F]

Press photographers used to do it all the time when they shot film.

I do it from time to time with 35mm if I have a lot of film to process.

I almost always do it with 120, or end to end on a 220 reel. That way the amount of chemistry per square inch (and thus the developing time) is pretty much the same when processing 120 and 35mm: 2 rolls per 500 mL/16 oz. And it cuts down on developer waste when processing 120 film.

I am talking about stainless reels, though. I doubt it can be done back to back on plastic reels, because there probably is not enough space for the thickness of two rolls to fit. But it can be done end to end.

I use the tape from one roll to stick one film to the other before rolling. Then it is just like rolling one roll of 220.

With color, you can just shoot 220 to begin with and not have to worry about such stuff. Unfortunately, 220 is gone in b/w, so two rolls per reel it is (unless I only have a single roll to process, and it cannot wait for another roll to go along with it).

I've screwed up frames when single rolling 35mm, but I am lucky that I have lost not one frame double rolling.

 

[K-G]

When developing 120 film with Paterson tanks, you can push the first film all the way in to the center and then start inserting the second. Stop when there are one or two inches left of the film so there won't be an overlap where the films meet. I have used this method for many years without problem.

Karl-Gustaf

 

[pcyco]

hallo

i do ilt like karl-gustaf
--
thomas

 

[cmacd123]

When developing 120 film with Paterson tanks, you can push the first film all the way in to the center and then start inserting the second.

The Jobo Reels actually come with a small red plastic gizmo to load two rolls of 120. You do the same thing, but when the first roll is in the center, place the red stopper in place and it will block the channel in the reel. Load the second roll and it will not go past the stopper.