[leekil]

Has anyone here tried using modern film in an Auto 110? By which I mean loading your own film into a 110 cartridge. The Lomo film seems to be pretty crappy, even expired Kodak seems better, but has anyone has tried something like Portra or Ektar?

[pid]

How can you do that? Can you show? Would like to do that too.

[timw4mail]

What do you mean the Lomo film seems crappy? From what I understand, Lomo is basically getting whitelabeled film from Kodak.

[Ontarian50]

I only ever shot 110 in a cheap snapshot camera, before I graduated to 35mm. But I always understood the reason 110 was never taken super seriously was that film flatness was always an issue. Having film guided through the cartridge via plastic slots was never going to be as precise as a camera with a full-fledged pressure plate.


Having experimented later with true sub-minature cameras, like the Minolta 16 and Minox, which do have pressure plates keeping the bare film flatter, having super sharp film is only a small part of the battle. Issues with focus, careful exposure, and just trying to keep those super light cameras held firmly during exposure, were all hassles.

[murrelet]

Has anyone here tried using modern film in an Auto 110? By which I mean loading your own film into a 110 cartridge. The Lomo film seems to be pretty crappy, even expired Kodak seems better, but has anyone has tried something like Portra or Ektar?

Can you post your results from Lomo film? I suspect what you're seeing might either be the upper limit of the 110 format or something going on with your camera.

[stevebrot]

What do you mean the Lomo film seems crappy? From what I understand, Lomo is basically getting whitelabeled film from Kodak.

...or something like that. The film code on the negative margin will usually tell who "confectioned" the film, if not the outright manufacturer. Some of the Lomography films in 35mm and 120 are undoubtedly white-labeled product from Kodak or some other established maker. Cartridge film manufacturers are a rare thing however, and it is likely that the arrangement for Lomography 110 is more complex than buying white label from Kodak or Fuji. More likely, they have either acquired production machinery for cutting/perforating/imprinting large roll stock to 16mm for loading to cassette (so-called "confectioning") or they have partnered for the service with a minor player having such machinery.

One thing is pretty well known and that is that loading one's own 110 cartridges is not possible. Available information indicates that loading one's own 110 cartridges while possible, requires some effort. Another thing that is well known is that the definition of quality at Lomography depends highly on customer expectation and those expectations are often on the side of "creative" rendering.


Steve

[leekil]

Can you post your results from Lomo film? I suspect what you're seeing might either be the upper limit of the 110 format or something going on with your camera.

I don't think it's a camera issue. It may be the limits of the 110 format, but like I said, I had better results from expired Kodak than Lomo. But that's why I was wondering if people had any roll-your-own samples from other films, so I could see how they look.

What do you mean the Lomo film seems crappy? From what I understand, Lomo is basically getting whitelabeled film from Kodak.

I have heard more that Lomo film is made in China or Eastern Europe, than being a Kodak product. The Lomo film, at least the 110 film (which is all I've used), seems extra grainy and also has weird colors -- both of which could be a design feature.

I'll post my own examples in a bit, but this link demonstrates a difference in grain for (35mm) Lomo vs. Ektar:

Ektar 100 vs Lomography 100 - 35mm Film - The Darkroom Photo Lab

How can you do that? Can you show? Would like to do that too.

(I haven't done it yet.)

You Tube

You Tube

You Tube

You Tube

[timw4mail]

I'm pretty sure that Lomo's Tiger CN200 film for 110 is an entirely different film from the 35mm 100 Color.

I have an album that I scanned (Lomo Tiger CN200): 110 Scans

Ignoring my white balance issues, I thought I got pretty decent results consider the size of the film, and scanner limitations.

[leekil]

I'm pretty sure that Lomo's Tiger CN200 film for 110 is an entirely different film from the 35mm 100 Color.

I have an album that I scanned (Lomo Tiger CN200): 110 Scans

Ignoring my white balance issues, I thought I got pretty decent results consider the size of the film, and scanner limitations.

Your photos look less grainy than mine; though they also seem like they might not be as sharp, but perhaps it is a contrast difference? I didn't scan my own, so I am also thinking that there might be a scanner resolution/aliasing issue happening as well.

I see in your second image, there seems to be an issue with red dots on the film. I observed that in mine as well, and was trying to rule out a camera light leak. If you have it as well, it seems more likely to be a film problem than a camera one, especially since I only see it on the Lomo rolls.

[stevebrot]

(I haven't done it yet.)

Cool videos, though the choice of films is limited to 16mm cine and microfilm stocks. Loading Ektar 100 or other popular still camera films would require splitting from 35mm or 120 roll film. FWIW, that is not too far-fetched since it is not usual for enthusiasts to split 120 to 127 and one can even buy jigs to do so.


Steve

[Eyewanders]

I have heard more that Lomo film is made in China or Eastern Europe, than being a Kodak product....

It really depends which film you're speaking to at the time and when you purchase. Lomography source film in many ways, much like the Film Photography Project, though the latter is much more transparent (to a point) about its origins.

The last roll from them I shot, used last summer which I just scanned 2 days ago, was a fairly newer roll of Lomography Color 400. After processing the film code very obviously ID'd it as Kodak Gold 400. (Film code 400-3, plus it just looks like Kodak Gold which I was never a huge fan of at all.) But it just depends. I've had 100 speed 120 from them that was entirely different from the 135 (which many believe was Ferrania for quite a while and I concur). They're all over the map.

[Paul Ewins]

My own experiences of reloading 16mm film into 110 cartridges was mixed. I carefully cut the cartridge apart along the seams and once reloaded stuck it back together with black tape. It worked, in as far as there were no light leaks and the film moved through the cartridge correctly. Frame spacing was hit and miss because the film didn't have the end of frame perforations in the correct spot, so I was just judging it based on the backing paper. Fortunately the shutter cocking of the Auto 110 doesn't rely on the perforations like some 110 cameras. Two strokes of the advance lever and it is cocked, but if you wind on again the shutter is uncocked. It should be entirely feasible to split film down to the correct width and load it into 110 cartridges.

[Pentaxis]

I don't think it's a camera issue. It may be the limits of the 110 format, but like I said, I had better results from expired Kodak than Lomo. But that's why I was wondering if people had any roll-your-own samples from other films, so I could see how they look.



I have heard more that Lomo film is made in China or Eastern Europe, than being a Kodak product. The Lomo film, at least the 110 film (which is all I've used), seems extra grainy and also has weird colors -- both of which could be a design feature.

I'll post my own examples in a bit, but this link demonstrates a difference in grain for (35mm) Lomo vs. Ektar:

Ektar 100 vs Lomography 100 - 35mm Film - The Darkroom Photo Lab




(I haven't done it yet.)

110 Film Reload part 1 - YouTube
110 Film Reload Part 2 - YouTube

Wow! They were really great videos: informative and interesting. I actually clapped my hands in applause when the presenter accomplished it all!
Thanks for the links to the videos.

---------- Post added 05-23-18 at 09:36 AM ----------

One thing is pretty well known and that is that loading one's own 110 cartridges is not possible.

From the two videos posted Ii seems that is not the case :-).

[stevebrot]

From the two videos posted Ii seems that is not the case :-).

I will amend that comment


Steve

[Kenzie2k3]

I have shot a couple of rolls of Tiger through my Auto 110.