How Long Will Film Hold Out?

Blue · 06-23-2011, 09:19 PM

Originally posted by RioRico

The Wikipedia entry on 135 film says Kodak introduced 135 in 1934. I once had a copy of the first 135 (35mm cart) still camera, the nifty German 1934 Kodak Retina I folder. So 135 has been around almost 4/5 century. Not bad. Not quite as long as 78 rpm records, but not bad...

I'd say that is the better part of a century.

Kodak used to turn out a new film format a year.

eddie1960 · 06-24-2011, 05:51 AM

Originally posted by RioRico

The Wikipedia entry on 135 film says Kodak introduced 135 in 1934. I once had a copy of the first 135 (35mm cart) still camera, the nifty German 1934 Kodak Retina I folder. So 135 has been around almost 4/5 century. Not bad. Not quite as long as 78 rpm records, but not bad...

The 78 only lasted until the 60's (and by that point it was in 3rd world countries only, apparently there are Beatles 78s from India)

So 135 has crushed that record (pun intended) still being in production

Aside from that try to find a new turntable for 78's hens teeth are easier to find, for a long time someone i know was doing conversions for collectors, the correct needle is a bugger to get as well

Nesster · 06-24-2011, 06:20 AM

On the other hand, Kodak introduced 120 film in 1901. 110 years old and still going strong. I used my No.2 Folding Pocket Brownie from around 1913 this year, and this relative youngster still produces photographs!

Blue · 06-24-2011, 07:16 AM

Originally posted by Nesster

On the other hand, Kodak introduced 120 film in 1901. 110 years old and still going strong. I used my No.2 Folding Pocket Brownie from around 1913 this year, and this relative youngster still produces photographs!

127 was introduced in 1912. It is still around mainly because of boutiques and collectors. I sort of consider it a "baby" medium format. It was too bad that not more upper end bodies used it.

stevebrot · 06-24-2011, 10:35 AM

Originally posted by Blue

127 was introduced in 1912. It is still around mainly because of boutiques and collectors. I sort of consider it a "baby" medium format. It was too bad that not more upper end bodies used it.

Yes...it is indeed a pity! I remember shooting 127 in my parent's brownie in the mid-1960s (my first exposure to photography). I know several "cult" photogs here in the Portland area that shoot 127 using various box cameras and folders and now that I have the "baby" Yashica-44, I guess I am part of the club. Fortunately, there are local sources for the film!

Steve

(...should really consider finishing the roll of Rollei Crossbird 200 that is in the Y-44...

)

**ChrisPlatt** · 06-24-2011, 04:09 PM

127 "superslides" rock!

Chris

stevebrot · 06-24-2011, 08:56 PM

Originally posted by ChrisPlatt

127 "superslides" rock!

Any suggestions for scanning 127, either strips or as mounted slides?

Steve

(Seriously considering shooting 35mm film in the Yashica-44...the cartridges will fit...)

Nesster · 06-25-2011, 05:45 AM

Originally posted by stevebrot

Any suggestions for scanning 127, either strips or as mounted slides?

Steve

(Seriously considering shooting 35mm film in the Yashica-44...the cartridges will fit...)

As you know, I've scanned them using the 120 holder, I simply left one edge hanging free. If there's too much curl I think a bit of tape across to support the film won't do much harm.

stevebrot · 06-25-2011, 11:22 AM

Originally posted by Nesster

As you know, I've scanned them using the 120 holder, I simply left one edge hanging free. If there's too much curl I think a bit of tape across to support the film won't do much harm.

I tried that and the tape, but was defeated by film curl. I finally taped the negatives to the scanner glass, but was not happy with the results. There is also the issue of tape residue on the glass

One option I haven't tried is to scan mounted as "super-slides" using the 35mm slide holder on the V700 and then manual select the scan area.

Steve

Nesster · 06-25-2011, 04:43 PM

you could take Xacto knife to some mounting board or other thick stuff, and make your own sandwich. The problem might be whether the scanner gets confused about what it is looking at.

stevebrot · 06-25-2011, 09:02 PM

Originally posted by Nesster

you could take Xacto knife to some mounting board or other thick stuff, and make your own sandwich. The problem might be whether the scanner gets confused about what it is looking at.

That is another option, and probably the most viable. I have read of people making an insert of thin polystyrene sheet to fit in the opening of the Epson negative holder. The challenge is to retain the plane of focus.

Steve

**ChrisPlatt** · 06-26-2011, 08:09 AM

127 "superslides" are 4x4 cm transparencies mounted in 2x2" mounts.
That's the same outside dimensions as standard 35mm slides, but the mask opening is much larger.

Why couldn't these be scanned like you would any 35mm slide?
If so, why not mount 127 negative frames individually in the same fashion?

Please forgive my admitted lack of scanner experience...

Chris

K-9 · 06-26-2011, 08:59 AM

There are absolutely no labs in my area that process film in house anymore. Very sad and it's forced me to sell off all of my film bodies, as there is no use to keep them, use them, then wait weeks and risk losing the shots in the mail waiting for their development.

I feel film is really only good for medium and large format, or any size transparencies, as 35mm prints have now been surpassed digitally. I wanted to keep at least one 35mm body for slides, but since no one around here processes them anymore, I've sold off my last film body last year.

stevebrot · 06-26-2011, 05:19 PM

Originally posted by stevebrot

...One option I haven't tried is to scan mounted as "super-slides" using the 35mm slide holder on the V700 and then manual select the scan area...

Originally posted by ChrisPlatt

127 "superslides" are 4x4 cm transparencies mounted in 2x2" mounts.
That's the same outside dimensions as standard 35mm slides, but the mask opening is much larger.

Why couldn't these be scanned like you would any 35mm slide?
If so, why not mount 127 negative frames individually in the same fashion?

Please forgive my admitted lack of scanner experience...

Chris

You can scan them in mount on both my scanners, but the Nikon 5000 ED will only scan the 24x36 portion of the frame! I cannot say for the Epson V700 (my other scanner), though I suspect that at the very least, I can use the slide holder and manual select the scan area.

Steve

zuikoholic · 06-26-2011, 06:15 PM

Long enough for me - I just won an MZ-s with grip for a fair price on the evilbay! Did not think any film SLR would appeal enough ever to supplant my OM4Ti, but I am gonna give this one a trial with a couple of FA Limiteds and see what happens.

i anticipate *love*. : )

06-24-2011, 10:35 AM	#110
stevebrot Otis Memorial Pentaxian Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Vancouver (USA) Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 42,007 Original Poster	Originally posted by Blue 127 was introduced in 1912. It is still around mainly because of boutiques and collectors. I sort of consider it a "baby" medium format. It was too bad that not more upper end bodies used it. Yes...it is indeed a pity! I remember shooting 127 in my parent's brownie in the mid-1960s (my first exposure to photography). I know several "cult" photogs here in the Portland area that shoot 127 using various box cameras and folders and now that I have the "baby" Yashica-44, I guess I am part of the club. Fortunately, there are local sources for the film! Steve (...should really consider finishing the roll of Rollei Crossbird 200 that is in the Y-44...)

06-24-2011, 04:09 PM	#111
ChrisPlatt Site Supporter Join Date: Nov 2007 Location: Rockaway Beach NYC Posts: 7,696	127 "superslides" rock! Chris Last edited by ChrisPlatt; 06-24-2011 at 04:24 PM.

06-26-2011, 08:09 AM	#117
ChrisPlatt Site Supporter Join Date: Nov 2007 Location: Rockaway Beach NYC Posts: 7,696	127 "superslides" are 4x4 cm transparencies mounted in 2x2" mounts. That's the same outside dimensions as standard 35mm slides, but the mask opening is much larger. Why couldn't these be scanned like you would any 35mm slide? If so, why not mount 127 negative frames individually in the same fashion? Please forgive my admitted lack of scanner experience... Chris Last edited by ChrisPlatt; 06-26-2011 at 08:16 AM.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Long exposure-film vs digital	lavascript	Photographic Technique	3	01-05-2011 04:01 PM
Misc Long live film! Taking a Super Program out for a spin	ismaelg	Post Your Photos!	2	01-03-2011 01:37 PM
How long will you hold on to your K7?	Tony3d	Pentax DSLR Discussion	114	11-12-2010 06:26 PM
Macro Hold on!	Iris	Post Your Photos!	18	05-24-2010 11:09 AM
How long does shot film last?	MJB DIGITAL	Film SLRs and Compact Film Cameras	13	03-13-2008 12:20 AM

06-23-2011, 09:19 PM	#106
Blue Moderator Site Supporter Join Date: Jun 2008 Location: Florida Hill Country Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 17,377	Originally posted by RioRico The Wikipedia entry on 135 film says Kodak introduced 135 in 1934. I once had a copy of the first 135 (35mm cart) still camera, the nifty German 1934 Kodak Retina I folder. So 135 has been around almost 4/5 century. Not bad. Not quite as long as 78 rpm records, but not bad... I'd say that is the better part of a century. Kodak used to turn out a new film format a year.

06-24-2011, 05:51 AM	#107
eddie1960 Veteran Member Join Date: Aug 2010 Location: Toronto Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 13,667	Originally posted by RioRico The Wikipedia entry on 135 film says Kodak introduced 135 in 1934. I once had a copy of the first 135 (35mm cart) still camera, the nifty German 1934 Kodak Retina I folder. So 135 has been around almost 4/5 century. Not bad. Not quite as long as 78 rpm records, but not bad... The 78 only lasted until the 60's (and by that point it was in 3rd world countries only, apparently there are Beatles 78s from India) So 135 has crushed that record (pun intended) still being in production Aside from that try to find a new turntable for 78's hens teeth are easier to find, for a long time someone i know was doing conversions for collectors, the correct needle is a bugger to get as well

06-24-2011, 06:20 AM	#108
Nesster Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: NJ USA Photos: Gallery Posts: 13,072	On the other hand, Kodak introduced 120 film in 1901. 110 years old and still going strong. I used my No.2 Folding Pocket Brownie from around 1913 this year, and this relative youngster still produces photographs!

06-24-2011, 07:16 AM	#109
Blue Moderator Site Supporter Join Date: Jun 2008 Location: Florida Hill Country Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 17,377	Originally posted by Nesster On the other hand, Kodak introduced 120 film in 1901. 110 years old and still going strong. I used my No.2 Folding Pocket Brownie from around 1913 this year, and this relative youngster still produces photographs! 127 was introduced in 1912. It is still around mainly because of boutiques and collectors. I sort of consider it a "baby" medium format. It was too bad that not more upper end bodies used it.

06-24-2011, 08:56 PM	#112
stevebrot Otis Memorial Pentaxian Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Vancouver (USA) Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 42,007 Original Poster	Originally posted by ChrisPlatt 127 "superslides" rock! Any suggestions for scanning 127, either strips or as mounted slides? Steve (Seriously considering shooting 35mm film in the Yashica-44...the cartridges will fit...)

06-25-2011, 05:45 AM	#113
Nesster Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: NJ USA Photos: Gallery Posts: 13,072	Originally posted by stevebrot Any suggestions for scanning 127, either strips or as mounted slides? Steve (Seriously considering shooting 35mm film in the Yashica-44...the cartridges will fit...) As you know, I've scanned them using the 120 holder, I simply left one edge hanging free. If there's too much curl I think a bit of tape across to support the film won't do much harm.

06-25-2011, 11:22 AM	#114
stevebrot Otis Memorial Pentaxian Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Vancouver (USA) Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 42,007 Original Poster	Originally posted by Nesster As you know, I've scanned them using the 120 holder, I simply left one edge hanging free. If there's too much curl I think a bit of tape across to support the film won't do much harm. I tried that and the tape, but was defeated by film curl. I finally taped the negatives to the scanner glass, but was not happy with the results. There is also the issue of tape residue on the glass One option I haven't tried is to scan mounted as "super-slides" using the 35mm slide holder on the V700 and then manual select the scan area. Steve

06-25-2011, 04:43 PM	#115
Nesster Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: NJ USA Photos: Gallery Posts: 13,072	you could take Xacto knife to some mounting board or other thick stuff, and make your own sandwich. The problem might be whether the scanner gets confused about what it is looking at.

06-25-2011, 09:02 PM	#116
stevebrot Otis Memorial Pentaxian Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Vancouver (USA) Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 42,007 Original Poster	Originally posted by Nesster you could take Xacto knife to some mounting board or other thick stuff, and make your own sandwich. The problem might be whether the scanner gets confused about what it is looking at. That is another option, and probably the most viable. I have read of people making an insert of thin polystyrene sheet to fit in the opening of the Epson negative holder. The challenge is to retain the plane of focus. Steve

06-26-2011, 08:59 AM	#118
K-9 Veteran Member Join Date: May 2009 Location: USA Photos: Albums Posts: 1,971	There are absolutely no labs in my area that process film in house anymore. Very sad and it's forced me to sell off all of my film bodies, as there is no use to keep them, use them, then wait weeks and risk losing the shots in the mail waiting for their development. I feel film is really only good for medium and large format, or any size transparencies, as 35mm prints have now been surpassed digitally. I wanted to keep at least one 35mm body for slides, but since no one around here processes them anymore, I've sold off my last film body last year.

06-26-2011, 05:19 PM	#119
stevebrot Otis Memorial Pentaxian Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Vancouver (USA) Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 42,007 Original Poster	Originally posted by stevebrot ...One option I haven't tried is to scan mounted as "super-slides" using the 35mm slide holder on the V700 and then manual select the scan area... Originally posted by ChrisPlatt 127 "superslides" are 4x4 cm transparencies mounted in 2x2" mounts. That's the same outside dimensions as standard 35mm slides, but the mask opening is much larger. Why couldn't these be scanned like you would any 35mm slide? If so, why not mount 127 negative frames individually in the same fashion? Please forgive my admitted lack of scanner experience... Chris You can scan them in mount on both my scanners, but the Nikon 5000 ED will only scan the 24x36 portion of the frame! I cannot say for the Epson V700 (my other scanner), though I suspect that at the very least, I can use the slide holder and manual select the scan area. Steve

06-26-2011, 06:15 PM	#120
zuikoholic Senior Member Join Date: Jan 2011 Location: Melbourne Posts: 145	Long enough for me - I just won an MZ-s with grip for a fair price on the evilbay! Did not think any film SLR would appeal enough ever to supplant my OM4Ti, but I am gonna give this one a trial with a couple of FA Limiteds and see what happens. i anticipate love. : )