220 film dimensions/specification (ISO732)

Discussion in 'Medium Format Cameras and Accessories' started by polyglot, Nov 22, 2012.

  1. polyglot

    polyglot Member

    Messages:
    3,472
    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2009
    Location:
    South Austra
    Shooter:
    Medium Format
    Hi all,

    I'm considering making a loader to slit 70mm film down and spool to 220 for use in my RZ. While Mamiya sells a 70mm back, the price (plus Adapter-G) is silly money - like $450 - and that's before I even get developing tanks/spirals.

    Can anyone please tell me:
    - are the spools the same diameter as 120, i.e. can I spool onto my huge collection of 120 spools?
    - what is the official width and length of a 220 film?
    - how long are the leader and trailer papers?
    - how much overlap should there be between film and paper?

    I could probably figure it out by inspection of a 120 roll but it'd be good to know the official numbers. Worst case I can spool to 120 I guess.

    Alternative question: will a Linhof Cine-Rollex (being Graflok) mate cleanly to a Mamiya Adapter-G?


    thanks...
     
  2. scherbis

    scherbis Member

    Messages:
    10
    Joined:
    Nov 29, 2005
    Shooter:
    35mm
    Do you already have the 70 mm film? If not where are you buying it from?
     
  3. Jeff Bannow

    Jeff Bannow Member

    Messages:
    1,759
    Joined:
    Mar 1, 2007
    Location:
    Royal Oak, M
    Shooter:
    Medium Format
    Best thing would be to take apart a few 220 rolls. Should be easy to get the dimensions from that.
     
  4. gorbas

    gorbas Subscriber

    Messages:
    471
    Joined:
    Dec 9, 2007
    Location:
    Vancouver, Canada
    Shooter:
    35mm Pan
    You will need 70mm unperforated film for it. With perforated, inside distance between sprocket is 60mm. It's fine with 120/220 cameras but it's tricky for loading (in my case) Paterson reels and that 1 mm make difference. Last summer I made few rolls of 120 from 70mm and by my opinion it's not worth effort unless you have some special emulsion or you don't have anything smarter to do. Making 220 is even harder than 120. YMMV
     
  5. StoneNYC

    StoneNYC Subscriber

    Messages:
    8,200
    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2012
    Location:
    Connecticut,
    Shooter:
    8x10 Format
    Guys guys guys... 70mm is the same size as 116... (polyglot I mentioned this in another thread you are reading).
    So just buy an old rotary tank that accepts 116, no work measuring and cutting, it just fits...


    ~Stone

    The Important Ones - Mamiya: 7 II, RZ67 Pro II / Canon: 1V, AE-1 / Kodak: No 1 Pocket Autographic, No 1A Pocket Autographic

    Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
     
  6. StoneNYC

    StoneNYC Subscriber

    Messages:
    8,200
    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2012
    Location:
    Connecticut,
    Shooter:
    8x10 Format
    Sorry I didn't fully read... Well you can always spool it onto 116/616 spools and shoot old folders and box cameras that are 116/616 in size (like me).

    Also you can get cheaper 70mm backs... I'll sell my hassleblad 70mm back for $150. I think I got my 70mm mamiya for $300, you kist have to be diligent in searching.


    ~Stone

    The Important Ones - Mamiya: 7 II, RZ67 Pro II / Canon: 1V, AE-1 / Kodak: No 1 Pocket Autographic, No 1A Pocket Autographic

    Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
     
  7. AgX

    AgX Member

    Messages:
    11,900
    Joined:
    Apr 5, 2007
    Location:
    Germany
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    Polyglot wants to homebuild type 220 from 70mm film, that is why he is asking for specifications.
     
  8. StoneNYC

    StoneNYC Subscriber

    Messages:
    8,200
    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2012
    Location:
    Connecticut,
    Shooter:
    8x10 Format
    Sounds insane, too much cutting lol

    My only suggestion is they make a cloth cutter for people who make hook rugs, could find one with the 5mm distance blade and cut off the perf evenly on both sides, you just crank away and it feeds/pulls the cloth along as it cuts, not sure if it could be modified for film but it's possible.


    ~Stone

    The Important Ones - Mamiya: 7 II, RZ67 Pro II / Canon: 1V, AE-1 / Kodak: No 1 Pocket Autographic, No 1A Pocket Autographic

    Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
     
  9. MattKing

    MattKing Subscriber

    Messages:
    16,799
    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2005
    Location:
    Delta, BC, Canada
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    I think I can answer at least one of polyglot's questions :whistling:.

    The 120 and 220 spools are identical. If they weren't, you wouldn't be able to use the empty spool from a just exposed 220 roll as your next take-up spool.

    And proceeding now to some guesses....

    There is a small amount of excess film on each end of a 120 roll. If you double the length of a 120 roll, you will end up with twice the amount of that excess - I would guess that you only need that excess once

    And as for the length of the leader and the trailer, you can probably use the same lengths of "leader and trailer as a roll of 120 has.
     
  10. polyglot

    polyglot Member

    Messages:
    3,472
    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2009
    Location:
    South Austra
    Shooter:
    Medium Format
    So there isn't 61mm of useful film between the perforations? That kind of ruins the plan.
     
  11. ic-racer

    ic-racer Member

    Messages:
    7,470
    Joined:
    Feb 25, 2007
    Location:
    Midwest USA
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    Just crop the perforations out. You only want to cut the film on one side anyway. Your aspect ratio may be more like 6x9 or a 35mm frame in the end. Nothing wrong with that.

    If it were me (with my Horseman 6x9 system) I'd take the rool of 70mm and use a fine cut saw to cut the perforations off one end of the roll. How much? Well, you have the spools, just cut it to fit your spools. Then I'd just load it on the spools in the dark. How much film? I'd just fill the spool to the brim and keep them in the dark, like sheet film. The Horseman 220 backs are cheap now, so I'd get maybe 5 of them and just load them in the dark. Loading each back can't be any harder then loading 8 film holders in the dark. No leader paper, just attach the film to the spools in the dark with some tape. Since you are in the dark, as soon as you close the back you are 'good to go,' no need to look for a 'wind-up' mark before closing the back.

    When ready to process, load frame #1 on the reel first and run it to the center and just cut off any excess. No fancy measuring is needed for any of this unless you wind up with frame spacing issues (depending on how your back works). In that case a little trial and error to find out how much 'wind-on' is needed for the start of the roll before closing the back, or build up the take up reels with some tape to the desired starting diameter and just close the back after taping the film on the take-up spool.

    If you are perfectionist and want the lens centered, you can measure how much the perorations extend into the image area, divide that by two and apply that much front rise, on a Horseman (load the perforations to the bottom of the frame). On the RZ load the perforations on the top and you get a little automatic 'front rise' for each image after you crop.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Nov 22, 2012
  12. AgX

    AgX Member

    Messages:
    11,900
    Joined:
    Apr 5, 2007
    Location:
    Germany
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    Fiddling around with a saw in the dark is different from drawing film through a splicer...

    And not much mechanical saws have precision guides to move the film spool along.
     
  13. ic-racer

    ic-racer Member

    Messages:
    7,470
    Joined:
    Feb 25, 2007
    Location:
    Midwest USA
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    No "precision guides" just mark the roll, hold it in hand and saw. The margin of error is huge (millimeters) for my Horseman backs. I can do the cut by hand with the night-vision. I just cut a guitar saddle to 1/64" by hand yesterday. I'd use the same saw. I could probably do the cut in the dark by propping the saw up horizontal on a piece of appropriately sized wood.

    Now the 'dust' may spoil the edge of the film, but I'm thinking of something like a 'surplus' or 'free' roll of 70mm that would be otherwise useless. Not something that cost $500 :blink:
     
  14. Sponsored Ad
  15. polyglot

    polyglot Member

    Messages:
    3,472
    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2009
    Location:
    South Austra
    Shooter:
    Medium Format
    Mark the roll, eh? A mark that I should look at, with the lights on? Or that I can't see in the dark with my fingers near a sawblade? Can't say I'm liking either option, and an RZ back is not going to deal well with film that is the wrong width and burrs all down one edge. It also means cutting one end off the metal spool that the film is held on, so there will be little metal burrs spread all through the film, not to mention stress-fogging.

    Far easier to put a razor or two in a little channel/guide and pull the film through it as it's travelling from the large roll to the small. There are a number of film-slitting designs on the web and they're pretty simple; I could make one up to slit the film as it came off the 70mm roll.
     
  16. StoneNYC

    StoneNYC Subscriber

    Messages:
    8,200
    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2012
    Location:
    Connecticut,
    Shooter:
    8x10 Format
    Polyglot, just invest in a back, save yourself the hassle. Ive been following the 70mm backs for a while on eBay, the SAME back is constantly re-listed, one was listed at $400 and I sent a private message as said "I've seen you re-list this 4 times, would you accept $100 with shipping?" And got my back for a fraction of the asking price.

    You really only need 2 canisters, 4 if you are going crazy, and they still sell 15 foot Kodak rolls of 70mm for around $30, but it comes with a new canister so you get PRE-loaded film and a canister that's reusable. Not a bad deal.

    I'm still not FULLY convinced about giving up 70mm but I'm getting there, however I spent a lot of time invested in gathering the components so I'm not sure I would sell very cheaply... So don't buy from me! Lol


    ~Stone

    The Noteworthy Ones - Mamiya: 7 II, RZ67 Pro II / Canon: 1V, AE-1 / Kodak: No 1 Pocket Autographic, No 1A Pocket Autographic

    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
     
  17. polyglot

    polyglot Member

    Messages:
    3,472
    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2009
    Location:
    South Austra
    Shooter:
    Medium Format
    The problem is not the 70mm back ($160) but the adapter required to mount it on an RZ ($260). Note that I have an RZ, not an RB and not a 'blad.
     
  18. StoneNYC

    StoneNYC Subscriber

    Messages:
    8,200
    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2012
    Location:
    Connecticut,
    Shooter:
    8x10 Format
    I have an RZ, my 70mm back came with the adapter plate... so they are out there


    ~Stone

    The Noteworthy Ones - Mamiya: 7 II, RZ67 Pro II / Canon: 1V, AE-1 / Kodak: No 1 Pocket Autographic, No 1A Pocket Autographic

    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
     
  19. StoneNYC

    StoneNYC Subscriber

    Messages:
    8,200
    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2012
    Location:
    Connecticut,
    Shooter:
    8x10 Format
    Hmm I looked on eBay, I see what you mean, the plate adapter separate is more (from Europe) than I payed for both.

    However the current RB 70mm backs have the suction cup, mine doesn't so I supposedly can't shoot as accurate in macro (suction cup adds more pressure to the plate to ultra flatten the plane of film) I've thought of buying one and then selling it just for the suction cup haha


    ~Stone

    The Noteworthy Ones - Mamiya: 7 II, RZ67 Pro II / Canon: 1V, AE-1 / Kodak: No 1 Pocket Autographic, No 1A Pocket Autographic

    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
     
  20. polyglot

    polyglot Member

    Messages:
    3,472
    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2009
    Location:
    South Austra
    Shooter:
    Medium Format
    Yep.

    There's the possibility of acquiring a roll or three of Plus-X locally so I might just do that and be patient waiting for a back to appear. It's not like I'm going to run out of film next week :wink:
     
  21. OzJohn

    OzJohn Member

    Messages:
    165
    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2011
    Shooter:
    35mm
    Noboby seems to have answered the question you asked: the dimensions of a 220 roll. Offhand, I don't know either but if you want to PM me a postal address I'll send you gratis a long expired, unexposed, unrefrigerated roll that you can experiment with. I don't think we can actually buy 220 film here in AU any more and AFAIK Portra is the only emulsion available in 220 anywhere. Good luck with the project. OzJohn
     
  22. StoneNYC

    StoneNYC Subscriber

    Messages:
    8,200
    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2012
    Location:
    Connecticut,
    Shooter:
    8x10 Format
    I have two rolls of plus-x in my fridge and I just shot two rolls of it for a nude bourgeois scene last week waiting to develop, actually what developer do you suggest for that? Adinol?


    ~Stone

    The Noteworthy Ones - Mamiya: 7 II, RZ67 Pro II / Canon: 1V, AE-1 / Kodak: No 1 Pocket Autographic, No 1A Pocket Autographic

    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
     
  23. StoneNYC

    StoneNYC Subscriber

    Messages:
    8,200
    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2012
    Location:
    Connecticut,
    Shooter:
    8x10 Format
    220 is the exact same size as 120 just twice as long on the length of film because the paper backing is absent from the film portion of the roll.


    ~Stone

    The Noteworthy Ones - Mamiya: 7 II, RZ67 Pro II / Canon: 1V, AE-1 / Kodak: No 1 Pocket Autographic, No 1A Pocket Autographic

    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
     
  24. MattKing

    MattKing Subscriber

    Messages:
    16,799
    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2005
    Location:
    Delta, BC, Canada
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    Hmmm - "nude bourgeois"????

    Does being middle class matter:munch:?
     
  25. MattKing

    MattKing Subscriber

    Messages:
    16,799
    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2005
    Location:
    Delta, BC, Canada
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    Not quite - because there is only need for one set of film leader and trailer, not two.
     
  26. StoneNYC

    StoneNYC Subscriber

    Messages:
    8,200
    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2012
    Location:
    Connecticut,
    Shooter:
    8x10 Format
    I did say "the film part" as in the film is double the length not the film + leader/tail. :smile:

    Haha well I don't know why I said that haha, I guess it was a very simple scene in a quaint old looking room that would have been from a middle class household, I haven't developed the plus-x obviously but here is a Pan F+ image from the set. I have more and I've already posted this a few times, I really need to pay for an account so I can just post in my own gallery haha, I'll get to it soon, in the mean time...

    [​IMG]

    See, middle class nude haha




    ~Stone

    The Noteworthy Ones - Mamiya: 7 II, RZ67 Pro II / Canon: 1V, AE-1 / Kodak: No 1 Pocket Autographic, No 1A Pocket Autographic

    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk