Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 71,918   Posts: 1,584,731   Online: 775
      
Page 2 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 42
  1. #11
    htmlguru4242's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Sandy Hook, CT
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    973
    Thanks for the suggestions; I'm pretty sure that my camera doesn't use the sprockets for winding; the take-up spool actually turns. I certainly don't want to risk it though; I'll see about the film splicer; doing it in the dark shouldn't be too bad, as the holes don't need to be perfect. Seeing as how the microfilm is, at best, ISO 30 - ish, perhaps I could do this under REALLY dim green light; which'll give me some illumination.

    Ah, mfobrien, that microfilm slipped my mind (and my PM folder; delete button happy). I'll contact you about that shortly. I just want to organize my (regular) film in the camera and then a roll or two extra; i'll let you know.

    I believe the instamatic cameras (126 or 127?) used ~35mm film with holes along the bottom; it was in a cartrige. I remember making a pinhole camera from one of these cartriges with cardboard and turning the reels to advance ...

  2. #12

    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    60
    Hi,

    A Canon EOS Rebel G which sell for $50 or so with lens on E bay ( and to the best of my knowledge all the EOS cameras) uses infra red light to determine film spacing and has no sprocket teeth.
    It should work fine for your application and will take nice pictures to boot.
    Your idea makes we think I need to buy some of the 5 inch wide panatomic aero film and cut it into unperforated strips . I do love that Panatomic, and maybe this way I could get some fresh dated film instead of the fossil film I have been using.

    Jay L

  3. #13
    Rlibersky's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    St Paul MN
    Shooter
    8x10 Format
    Posts
    777
    Images
    12
    What is the unperforated film used for? I mistakenly bought some 160VC a year or so ago. Have not been sure what to do with it, right now it os a spacer in my freezer.

  4. #14

    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Italia
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    4,680
    Is it 35mm? I think some sort of large roll camera must have used it. The bigger formats are all like that. 46mm and 70mm. OTOH both of those can be used for other cameras. 46mm I think hand rolled for 127 and of course 70mm for 70mm.

    Maybe 828 was unperforated 35mm?

  5. #15
    Donald Qualls's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    North Carolina, USA (transplanted from Seattle)
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,845
    828 was almost unperfed; most 828 cameras will work, more or less, with unperfed film.

    As it happens, I've recently repaired and been shooting a Bantam RF, one of if not the last 828 camera made by Kodak. I've been using cut-down 120, with the backing left on it, cut from the 6x4.5 track edge. If the Bantam didn't have a friction roller winding stop, I'd be able to get decent frame spacing using the numbers on the backing -- which means used 120 backing could supply a framing track to use unperfed microfilm in an 828 camera.

    Most other 828 models used a feeler finger, identical in operation to that in 126 and 110 cartridge camers, to automatically stop winding, but unlike the plastic cartridge formats, the cameras depend on that feeler *only* to stop the film advance, rather than to unlock the shutter; as a result, almost all 828 cameras can be used with unperfed film, by manually framing through the red (or green) window, just as you'd do with 127 or 120.

    Cut the backing to 35 mm width on the 6x4.5 track side. If you want to be "original" cut the film to 8 frames (for this purpose, that'd be about 16 inches) and then leave a tail of 8.5 inches after the last number; cut the leader to 7 inches from the film start (at the same location as the 120 had). However, with modern films and backing, thinner than those available in the 1930s, you can just as easily cut the film to 32 inches and use a full length 120 backing with the leader and tail cut to half their original lengths, and get 16 exposures on an original 828 spool (I've done it). I will note that it's a lot less work (IMO) to cut down existing 120 than to respool anything onto the cut-down backing...

    There were also 35 mm long-roll cameras used for stuff like school photos; they used unperfed film, took (IIRC) a 33 mm wide frame but I don't recall how long it was (the transport was vertical in the one I remember from grade school, but I don't honestly remember if that one was 35, 46, or 70 mm). And of course school photographers *never, ever* let loose of the negatives, figuring that reprints were a significant fraction of their profit (I guess -- I don't recall ever ordering one after the initial order of framing size, pass-around, and wallet sheets).
    Photography has always fascinated me -- as a child, simply for the magic of capturing an image onto glossy paper with a little box, but as an adult because of the unique juxtaposition of science and art -- the physics of optics, the mechanics of the camera, the chemistry of film and developer, alongside the art in seeing, composing, exposing, processing and printing.

  6. #16
    htmlguru4242's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Sandy Hook, CT
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    973
    Yep, Donald, I've seen those long-roll cameras for school photos before; they took an entire 100 foot roll of film; kind of cool, though now everything seems to be going digital ...

  7. #17

    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,670
    What is the unperforated film used for? I mistakenly bought some 160VC a year or so ago. Have not been sure what to do with it, right now it os a spacer in my freezer.
    Many microfilm cameras use unperforated film.

  8. #18

    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    3

    It should be fine

    ''I don't see how it could possibly work seeing that most if not all 'regular' 35mm cameras actually use the sprocket holes to advance the film.''

    But the Canon AE-1 isn't one of them.
    You'll be fine with any camera that has a manual wind on as these models generally have a slot in the wind on spool that you insert the tongue of the film into. This is usually enough to pull the film on when you wind. The perforations assist this and help keep the film in place but are by no means essential.
    I have run unperforated film through my Nikon Fm2 without any ill consequences and it's internal mechanics are identical to the Canon AE-1 (which I also have although have never run an unperforated film through).
    What you will find is that the film tends to slip about a bit more than it should and I would also recommend that you only put through relatively short films (20 exposures or so).
    If you're worried about the film not ''pullng'' you could also try taping the end to the wind on spool to give it extra security. Obviously this means you will not be able fully rewind it in order to change films and I wouldn't recommend you try rewinding a taped film in any camera with an automatic rewind.
    I certainly fail to see how you could possibly damage an AE-1 running an unperforated film through it. Why don't you run a small test strip through?

  9. #19

    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    348
    Just for the record, a friend of mine who used to be in the school photo business would cut off unused portions of his 100' rolls of unperfed 35mm at the end of each days shooting and spool it into carts for his SLRs.

    He shot a lot of it in Minoltas, Canons and Nikons all through the 80s and 90s. In all of those cameras I am familar with, all the sprocket post does is hold the film in line and trip the exposure counter as the film goes by.

    The company he worked for didn't care about the end rolls. They knew as well as he did that it wasn't economical to start a day when you were to shoot 500 kids with a 20' roll in the camera that would have to be changed less than an hour into the work day.

    BTW 35 non perf kodak film is still available through B&H. The school photographer, who will be shooting the underclassmen in the high school where I work, will be shooting the hundred foot rolls. He tells me that there are two shooters working for his company that still shoot film and the company has promised to support them until they decide to retire.

  10. #20
    Terrence Brennan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Ottawa, Ontario
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    290

    Long roll cameras

    Quote Originally Posted by Donald Qualls View Post
    There were also 35 mm long-roll cameras used for stuff like school photos; they used unperfed film, took (IIRC) a 33 mm wide frame but I don't recall how long it was (the transport was vertical in the one I remember from grade school, but I don't honestly remember if that one was 35, 46, or 70 mm).
    When I worked for a photofinisher in the 1980s, a fair bit of our business was from school photographers. They mostly used Camerz cameras, and the format was 33 x 44 mm, on unperfed 35mm film, AFAIR.

    Here's a link with an image of a typical camera: http://www.rockymountainfilm.com/equ...z%20camera.htm

Page 2 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Contact Us  |  Support Us!  |  Advertise  |  Site Terms  |  Archive  —   Search  |  Mobile Device Access  |  RSS  |  Facebook  |  Linkedin