My mom loves her old instamatic and has her last film needing processing. I can get it done commercially but the cost is very high. I have an old paterson 35/120/127 dev tank. Can this be used for 126 film ? I assume it's just C41 process ?

Any advice gratefully received. :p

Check the bottom of the tank. You'll be happy to learn that 35mm and 126 film are the same width. C-41 in a big, warm tempering bath in a paterson tank should be fine and not too hard to do.

Wikipedia indicates that 126 is the same width as 135, which is in accord with my recollection:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/126_film

They also indicate that Kodak discontinued 126 on the very last day of the 20th century. That is somehow very appropriate.

Matt

The pedant in me can't help but mention that the last day of the 20th century was December 31, 2000. But no matter. :)

(There was no year zero, so the first century would begin January 1, 1 and end December 31, 100.)

126 is an interesting format. I shot it when I was a kid and it definitely fits in standard 35mm reels.

Ditto. My very first camera was a Kodak Instamatic 56X, that used 126 carts, and I have a selection of giveaways that came from a processing shop called "Snappy Snaps" that were essentially disposible cameras that fitted over a 126 cartridge.

Damned shame they discontinued it

126 was a revamp of the much older 828 roll film format repackaged in a cassette t make it more idiot proof. Personally I skipped 126 after taking occasional images with my fathers Kodak Bantam Colorsnap II which was 828 and went for an Agfa Rapid instead which used normal 35mm in special cassettes for quick loading/unloading. They all fitted my 35mm Paterson tank.

Ian

The pedant in me can't help but mention that the last day of the 20th century was December 31, 2000. But no matter. :)

(There was no year zero, so the first century would begin January 1, 1 and end December 31, 100.)

126 is an interesting format. I shot it when I was a kid and it definitely fits in standard 35mm reels.

Jim:

The logical side of me agrees with you totally, and back around 2000 I tried to persuade many people that what you say (about 1999/2000) was/is correct. Eventually I realized that public understanding would not be swayed :).

Matt

I think that Walmart and Clark Color charge reasonable rates for 126 developing.

Logically it could be run through a minilab perfectly fine, being the same size as 35mm...if my local minilab can do medium format, I'm not sure why a minilab couldn't do 126.

Many minilab operators will have never seen 126 :D

Not all Minilabs have film processors & scanners for 120 and there maybe an issue scanning 126 as the film frame is wider than 35mm.

Ian

On the high street I Think Boots still do it.

I think that perhaps the reason mini labs don't do 126 is that modern automated processing machines would have problems transporting the film through them because 126 films have only one perforation per neg.and they probably will only do 35 mm.

I vaguely remember using a mini-lab type film processor at university. They're just plain rollers, not toothed.

I have a few 126 films in the freeze and, out of interest, have just phoned my (fairly small) local Boots store....the answer is that they can't process them any more.

They suggested that a local shop with a mini-lab on the premises might be
worth a try.

It also occured to me that some of the large Boots city stores do have their own labs, so I might phone or call in on my nearest when I'm in town.

Be fun to rescue the old Instamatic from the attic. :)

Any roller machine should be able to handle 126, but I drought that most lab would be comfortable handling 126. I would subject finding a lab that deal with classis format.

I’ve got a nice Contaflex 126 that I shot ever now and then. This reminds me that I need to order more film and put it on ice before it’s to late

^^^Jeff.

It would probably be a good idea to hurry if you want to get a supply of fresh 126, as I believe the last manufacturers (Ferrania) have now stopped production of that size?

One seems to see very few 126 films offered on Ebay now, and the Kodak or Agfa ones which do appear mostly seem badly o/dated and/or overpriced.

It's quite sad that quality cameras like the Contaflex 126 will become just ornaments in the near future.

From what I understand you can reload 35mm into 126 cassettes. I tried it a few times with my Sears Easi-Load FC 600 and It sort of works, but will skip frames, and or only advance half a frame. I suppose it all depends on how the mechanical advance works in that particular camera.

^^^randerson07

Yes, I've seen instructions on the web for the possibilities of reloading 126 (and 110)...I admire the patience of people in trying to keep old cameras in commission.

I believe that the Agfa Rapid system (which was the rival to Instamatic 126, but never seemed to enjoy the same success) uses ordinary 35mm in two special cassettes, so reloading isn't a problem with that?

Perhaps it was another case of the technically best system failing against the marketing power behind the other (Betamax/VHS anyone? ;) ).
(I'm not knocking Kodak in suggesting that! :) )

From the retrophotographic site (http://www.retrophotographic.com/shop/54/index.htm)

They give a couple of links for processing 110 and 126

www.thevaultimaging.co.uk

www.palmlabs.co.uk (http://www.palmlabs.co.uk/)

^^^Aurum

Thanks for that info, you've saved me a search.

I'll have to see if either of those labs can process a Fujichrome APS slide film which I have in the freezer. (or perhaps I should donate it to a museum, I think APS E-6 films were rarer than hens' teeth. :D )

Rare is an understatement. I always thought of APS as a format for C41 print, especially when you had the options of panoramic, letterbox and the like.

I'd hate to see the aggro when some poor tech had to fit a panorama into a neat little square slide.

I suspect naughty words would be used

I believe that the idea of APS slides was that the design of new models of cameras could allow details of the shots to be recorded on the magnetic coating of the film, and the lab would print this info onto the slide mount. (And possibly that a few seconds of sound commentary could be recorded onto each....though I may have dreamt that bit. :) ). The panorama function would not work with slide film, so they would therefor be a full frame size to fit into a standard 2x2mount.

Obviously it was a clever idea which never progressed, due to the falling interest in slides for everyday snapshots, and the advent of d****al.

The prepaid envelope is for the Fuji lab in Germany. I phoned Fuji UK who confirmed that the service was discontinued, but suggested that a dip-and-dunk E6 lab should be able to handle the film. Of course, with a width of 24mm, slide mounts are the next problem, but I could scan the strip to make prints.

(Why is it that these quaint by-ways and dead-ends of photography have an odd fascination? :) )

I actually looked up APS film Kodak information (http://www.kodak.com/cluster/global/en/consumer/APS/redBook/aboutSystem.shtml)

And actually realised that there is no reason why slides could not be made, as the frame size is the same, the different aspect ratios are handled by selective shading of the frame.

All in all probably not the best system for slides!

^^^Aurum.

That's an interesting link, thanks.

I've just checked the index print from one of my own C-41 APS films, and, where the panorama or HD settings have been used, the whole of each frame is always exposed, with the picture area defined by a black border....i.e. a panorama doesn't appear on the neg as a wide picture framed by a wide clear border, and there isn't movable masking inside the camera.

This is why I guessed the camera might somehow disable the panorama function when a slide film was detected, so that all slides came out full-frame. IDK, I'll experiment if/when I use the slide film. ;)

(PM me if you're interested in seeing a scan of an Index Print.)