Why are (some) bulk loaders expensive?

[Agulliver]

In the UK at least, the price of Kodak 100 foot loads means it is more expensive than buying 36 exposure cassettes. Ilford and Kentmere I still save by bulk loading.

I develop B&W film myself so there's no issue of labs returning the cassettes. Though if I ever get hold of any colour film to bulk load, my local friendly lab will happily return the cassettes anyway...as will the mail order labs I've used in the past - though they would charge for the postage.

There are all sorts of reasons pro and con bulk loading...in the end, comparatively few people have done it compared to the number of photographers out there. It must now be a real niche and in a way we're lucky it's still possible.

 

[mtnbkr]

I recall that Simon Galley (who at the time was part of Ilford Ownership and Management) once posted that is bulk film does not represent a saving, it did not make any sense.

I've run the numbers and using Kentmere 400 (a film I already use and like), it's a tiny bit cheaper than buying the same number of rolls preloaded. That's including the cost of the loader. That's for the first spool, the price improves as I add spools of film (at my current consumption, about 1 per year). Does it offset the hassle? Dunno. I'll be giving it a try once I burn through my current stash of film.

Chris

 

[Mr Flibble]

A Lloyd's has less wastage of film as in a Watson you have a full 3-4" that gets to be exposed to light every time. I had something get imbedded in the felt in my Legacy Pro and it did a job of scratching length wise on every roll I did that time. Expensive lesson learnt.

The economics of the Watson loader can be reduced by about an 1"-2" per roll if you don't mind faffing about with it in the dark.
I don't pull out the film to seat the cassette in the winding spot right away.
-I just attach the take-up spool / cartridge to the short bit of film sticking out of the loader.
-Than put it in the change bag / darkroom and seat the cartridge properly,
-close up the loader and take it out of the bag to wind it in the light.

But yeah, there's a reason why I switched to an AP Bobinquick

 

[JerseyDoug]

I recall that Simon Galley (who at the time was part of Ilford Ownership and Management) once posted that is bulk film does not represent a saving, it did not make any sense.

Some photographer, myself included, bulk load 35mm film mostly because we prefer to shoot shorter rolls. Even with all of the extra film lost to the additional heads and tails I get 40 12-exposure rolls from a 100 foot bulk roll. Using Kentmere 400 as an example that is less than $2 per roll compared with $6.75 for a 24-exposure roll that I would either develop before I finished shooting the whole roll or rush through shooting a lot of the roll to no good effect.

And just to complete the comparison if I was determined to shoot 12-exposure rolls and chose to do so with 120 film it would also be $6.75 per roll.

 

[BobUK]

The original poster said he could hopefully get a few decades use out of a new bulk loader.
Unfortunately I have already had my three score and ten, plus a bit. So buying one now would be a bit wasteful to me.
All of my bulk loading has been by hand with the only gadgets used being a couple of home-made, hand cranked winders.
I lost one, hence the second..
Before I made them I used to just wind the film into the cassettes by hand in a darkened room.

Winders have never been cheap, so I stuck to hand loading.
I always thought of the money saved by not using a bulk winder. It may not be such a great saving these days considering the prices of bulk film today.

 

[Agulliver]

I do prefer the Lloyds design to the Watson...I have two of each. I am certain that none is under 40 years old and one of the Watsons seems to date from the 1960s. What I can say is they all work as well as they ever did. I use them all. But if I get another, it will likely be the Lloyds design. I've not had any issues with the felt trap and I do like the smaller film wastage. I might try loading the cassette into the Watsons in a dark bag.

It does seem that these devices do last for decades. Unless I drop one on a stone floor I can't really see any of them ever ceasing to function on me.

 

[MattKing]

If they aren't made of Bakelite, they aren't truly old!
(at least they appear to be Bakelite)

 

[Ben Hutcherson]

I guess times have changed...

I have a box full of these things, including a few ancient bakelite ones sitting bagged in the freezer that came to me with good film in them(some old Velvia, etc). The old Bakelite ones I have look/work just like the Watson style, but are smaller so waste less film in daylight.

I don't think I've ever bought a 35mm one-I got my first one in 2006ish when I bought a camera(Canon T70) on Ebay and the seller asked if I wanted it. All the others along the way have been throw-ins when I was buying other stuff. At the camera store where I use to hang out all the time(the legendary Chuck Rubin's in Louisville, KY), Chuck use to give me any that came in that had film in them-or I should say he might have charged me a few bucks, but they'd usually come in with other darkroom odds and ends that I wanted and he'd throw them in. That was especially true if they didn't say what they had. I'd take them home, snip and develop to find out what was in them, and then label. More than once I film tested a camera for Chuck with film from a bulk loader he'd given me, so it all worked out. Most unmarked ones would have some sort of B&W film in them-if it was a film I was especially fond of(Plus-X, Pan-X, etc) I'd keep it for my own use, but if it was Tri-X or whatever else with too much base fog to want for serious use but little enough to still give an image, I always considered it prime stock for basic camera function testing(light tighness, frame spacing, major shutter issues, etc).

 

[Agulliver]

Yes, times have changed. I acquired my bulk loaders in the period 2000-2008....the prime time when amateur and pro photographers were clearing out their darkrooms and "upgrading to digital". I got them for a few pounds each. I also bought bricks of film of various flavours, because serious amateurs and pros were selling it off thinking they'd never use it. You could even buy recently expired bulk 100 foot loads of B&W film for a third or a quarter of the new price.

Now this stuff is in demand again. the bulk loaders, bulk film, developing tanks and even expired film fetch real money because people want them again.

In the same way I built up the bulk of my record collection in the late 80s and early 90s when people offloaded large collections to the record shops in order to "upgrade to CD". I own vinyl that now fetches eyewatering prices, sometimes two copies...one for home, one for the office.

Supply and demand.

 

[BAC1967]

Yes, times have changed. I acquired my bulk loaders in the period 2000-2008....the prime time when amateur and pro photographers were clearing out their darkrooms and "upgrading to digital". I got them for a few pounds each. I also bought bricks of film of various flavours, because serious amateurs and pros were selling it off thinking they'd never use it. You could even buy recently expired bulk 100 foot loads of B&W film for a third or a quarter of the new price.

Now this stuff is in demand again. the bulk loaders, bulk film, developing tanks and even expired film fetch real money because people want them again.

In the same way I built up the bulk of my record collection in the late 80s and early 90s when people offloaded large collections to the record shops in order to "upgrade to CD". I own vinyl that now fetches eyewatering prices, sometimes two copies...one for home, one for the office.

Supply and demand.

Same here with photo gear and vinyl, I was like a kid in a candy store, good times. I think I have 6 or 7 bulk loaders right now, all full of film.

 

[Marcelo Paniagua]

By the way, setting aside economics, bulk loading have two additional benefits that, for me, overcome economics:

a) I can load custom size rolls, which for me represent a saving, since I used what I need and not random images just to finish a 36 exp roll.
b) Storage, since it save my greatly reduced storage area on my freezer. I just have a loader instead of 24 rolls in boxes).

Those may not be considerations for other but are good benefits for me.

regards.

Marcelo