Uses for 5 inch Panatomic-X aerial film

[nickandre]

I have a giant ol' roll of 5 inch Panatomic X aerial film. Looks like it's got little sprockets in the side.

My plan was to:

• Try 4x5 cuts for testing
• slit down to 120/220 roll film -- obviously the sprockets could be annoying, may have to leave them.

Any other fun uses? Are there any old roll film formats that would fit a 5 inch wide roll?

I should add that it's a _very_ thin base. Thinner than 120.

 

[mshchem]

Slit to make 122 roll film. 3 1/2 inch wide down the center. Spools and backing paper has hoarded.

 

[AgX]

Any other fun uses?

Upgrade your camera range with a motorized 4x5 camera...

 

[AgX]

On the more economical side: a large, panaramic pinhole camera

 

[MattKing]

It would be great for making unsharp masks for use during printing.
It could be used for inter-positives.

 

[Don_ih]

Well, I, for one, would love to have that to spool up and run through my postcard camera...

 

[nickandre]

Upgrade your camera range with a motorized 4x5 camera...

Are there any motorized 4x5 film backs? It would be very cool to adapt this film to a Graflok back, assuming I could find 5 inch wide film reels.

Slit to make 122 roll film. 3 1/2 inch wide down the center. Spools and backing paper has hoarded.

Are there any fun 122 cameras?

On the more economical side: a large, panaramic pinhole camera

That would be pretty fun. I'm pretty dead set on using it in the Hasselblad but by my count I'll get about 1,600 rolls of 220 film so I should have plenty of extra

 

[nickandre]

Well, I, for one, would love to have that to spool up and run through my postcard camera...

Got a link? If I run a clip test and this film isn't complete garbage I'd be willing to sell individual rolls in some fashion for a fee

Blew a hefty chunk of change on it so I've got my fingers crossed.

 

[Don_ih]

Got a link? If I run a clip test and this film isn't complete garbage I'd be willing to sell individual rolls in some fashion for a fee

Blew a hefty chunk of change on it so I've got my fingers crossed.

Mine's a Kodak 3A Postcard camera that takes 122 roll film - the negative size is 3.25 x 5.5 inches. The roll is around 4 inches wide. I'd certainly consider buying some spooled off your roll. I used that camera for the last postcard exchange one here - with cut down 5x7 film.

 

[nickandre]

Mine's a Kodak 3A Postcard camera that takes 122 roll film - the negative size is 3.25 x 5.5 inches. The roll is around 4 inches wide. I'd certainly consider buying some spooled off your roll. I used that camera for the last postcard exchange one here - with cut down 5x7 film.

Ah very cool. Lens any good? I feel like I had one of those cameras from my grandmother a while ago but couldn't find the film at the time (not to mention it was pretty falling apart). I ended up trying to get RA4 negatives printed in it but they were mediocre without the on-camera filtration.

Picked up some 122 spools and paper off the 'bay.

Also anyone experienced with slitting film? I have the requisite bolts, razor blades, and plexiglass. Not sure how well the plexiglass cutting will go. If not I may try wood. I have a ready-made 4x5 slicer courtesy of my friend so I'll be trying that first.

 

[Don_ih]

Lens any good?

The lens and shutter in mine are good.

 

[Patrick Robert James]

Ah very cool. Lens any good? I feel like I had one of those cameras from my grandmother a while ago but couldn't find the film at the time (not to mention it was pretty falling apart). I ended up trying to get RA4 negatives printed in it but they were mediocre without the on-camera filtration.

Picked up some 122 spools and paper off the 'bay.

Also anyone experienced with slitting film? I have the requisite bolts, razor blades, and plexiglass. Not sure how well the plexiglass cutting will go. If not I may try wood. I have a ready-made 4x5 slicer courtesy of my friend so I'll be trying that first.

I'd be curious to see what that ready-made 4x5 slicer looks like. I have a huge roll of 5" microfilm I wouldn't mind cutting down one of these days.

I've built a couple of slitters for Minox/16mm before. I wouldn't recommend the way I did it though. You could have someone 3d print a slitter for you or do it yourself if you have a 3d printer. I line my slitters with Ilford 120 backing paper which is super smooth. Keeps the scratches away.

 

[AgX]

Are there any motorized 4x5 film backs? It would be very cool to adapt this film to a Graflok back, assuming I could find 5 inch wide film reels.

Long time ago Linhof built a 4x5 camera with motordrive.

 

[nosmok]

Re 122 film cameras: The Ansco 3A's came with a huge variety of lenses; I have one with a 6-3/8" f/6.8 Goerz Dagor that is the best of the lot that I've seen. Bonus is that they are frequently cheaper than their Kodak brethren when they show up on evilBay.

 

[nickandre]

I'd be curious to see what that ready-made 4x5 slicer looks like. I have a huge roll of 5" microfilm I wouldn't mind cutting down one of these days.

I've built a couple of slitters for Minox/16mm before. I wouldn't recommend the way I did it though. You could have someone 3d print a slitter for you or do it yourself if you have a 3d printer. I line my slitters with Ilford 120 backing paper which is super smooth. Keeps the scratches away.

It's a 3D printed job which he sized for a random PCB he had laying around (lol electrical engineers). Basically the film fits neatly in the slot and you run a razor blade adjacent to the PCB. With X-ray film he says he has to do two passes but with the absurdly thin aerial film base it looks like I'll be able to do a one pass method. The hard part is this reel is absolutely massive.

Yeah now that you mention it the "stacking plexiglass" method seems like a generally inane way to go given 3D printers... long as they have holes you can make different ones to bolt together for different sized film.

 

[nickandre]

Wow this film is amazing. How does it have no base fog after 26 years???

 

[nickandre]

Wow I see what people mean about Panatomic X lol. Looks like this roll should last me until the end of time.

 

[BAC1967]

Wow this film is amazing. How does it have no base fog after 26 years???

View attachment 306838

26 years is almost brand new for Panatomic-X. I shot this a few weeks ago with Panatomic-X expired in 1963.

1955 Chevrolet Truck by Bryan Chernick, on Flickr

 

[OrientPoint]

Isn't the Aerecon variant on Panatomic X a totally different film that the "classic" version sold as 35mm and 120?

 

[MarkS]

Although Kodak's aerial films may share names with their standard camera films, they are not the same emulsions. The aerial films were designed for higher contrast (and greater resolving power) than the standard films.
That doesn't mean that the aerial films are not usable by ground-level photographers, they are; BUT careful testing will be required to get the best from them.

 

[nickandre]

Although Kodak's aerial films may share names with their standard camera films, they are not the same emulsions. The aerial films were designed for higher contrast (and greater resolving power) than the standard films.
That doesn't mean that the aerial films are not usable by ground-level photographers, they are; BUT careful testing will be required to get the best from them.

Maybe I should grab some expired 120 to compare. It definitely has some punch to it by cursory glance but perhaps some developer twiddling might be in order.

 

[MattKing]

The spectral sensitivity might also differ.

 

[nickandre]

The spectral sensitivity might also differ.

It definitely does; the aerial version specifies increased red sensitivity.

 

[Kodachromeguy]

Long time ago Linhof built a 4x5 camera with motordrive.

Yes, Linhof sold the Aero-Technika in the 1970s and later. They offered a vacuum motorized back.

1972/73​

The Aero Technika, a large format aerial camera system was developed: use of 126 mm rollfilm, motorized transport of 150 frames in one cassette with vacuum technique for exact film flatness. Interchangeable lenses from 90 to 250 mm with focusing facilities. The Aero Technika was regularly used in space by American or European missions delivering superb photos.

 

[laser]

Panatomic-X Aerecon II Film was made for aerial photography. "Panatomic" is a brand name, the emulsion has no relationship to Panatomic-X FX/ 5040/6040/ in 135, 120 or sheet film.

This roll was made for a military aerial application. Probably fixed wing. Satellite films were never perforated.


Support is 2.5 mil Estar compared to 120-size that is 3.2 mil acetate

Design speed is around 32

Spectral sensitivity is pan with extended red to may be 680nm. Little sensitivity at 700nm.

The design gamma is 1.3 to 2.2 while pictorial films are designed for lower contrast .41-.56

If you want to attempt pictorial photography try HC-110 1:63 . Scanning might yield results that with Photoshop adjustment will make usable. Printing the negatives on AgX paper will probably be too contrasty for full range quality. If you print for the highlights you will lose shadow detail.

Fog should be low. It is not very sensitive to cosmic radiation.

Bob Shanebrook
www.makingKODAKfilm.com