70mm Film FUN up ahead

This is amazing and, Nokton 48, you have a very impressive set of altogether uncommon film and equipment.

I remember, years ago, seeing that Hasselblad offered a 70mm filmback. but I've never seen or heard anything about it since then.

I look forward to reading more about this project here.

- Murray
 
Nokton48 said:
hasselblad-70-500-film-magazine-2.preview by Nokton48, on Flickr

And here is the Hasselblad A500 Film Magazine. Quite a beast, ain't it?

Only fits the EL/M. Requires two EL/M batteries to power the back, or an umbical cord, to the batteries in the EL/M.

Five hundred motorized 70mm exposures without stopping. WHEW! Took a full 100' roll of film in one go.
Click to expand...
Would think the largest market for this to have been school photographers, surely.
 
Nokton48 said:
DKImg,

Very nice! Did you slit the 70mm film down to 65mm to respool it into 120? That is a very cool idea. What else did you do to the film? What about the remjet backing?

http://www.ebay.com/itm/70mm-stainless-steel-processing-reel-NIKOR-ONE-only-/222442330755?hash=item33ca989a83%3Ag%3AphUAAOSw3mpXItoJ&nma=true&si=d2U1cArAm6rHWltsO5GPbHscM8Y%253D&orig_cvip=true&rt=nc&_trksid=p2047675.l2557

Here is a 70mm Nikor reel that sold a bit ago on ebay. I am just about positive they made a SS tank to hold the reel. I have three Nikor 100" 70mm reels and tanks. They take gallons and gallons of chemistry but will do 100' of 70mm in one go. Dragged them out of the basement of Midwest Photo and I paid $100 for all three. I think I got a steal of a deal. Those things are humungeous!
Click to expand...

It's a matter of making sure you measure correctly to respool. I don't do anything in regards to the remjet, other thank using ECN-2 chemicals. It's kinda popular here in china (where I'm living for the past 2 years). The developing machine they use can actually accept the 65mm film okay. And the developing tank I purchased is a complete set. It's rather big, It wasn't the reel that you've shown me. I think in a month or so I'll be back in the states and I'll share it.

Looks similar to this though: HERE
 
It has taken me a good while but I hand-filed out all four edges of this original Omega DII 70mm Negative Carrier. I wanted to see the Hasselblad notches in my finished silver prints.

I'm still setting up my home studio/darkroom. Never enough time!


002 by Nokton48, on Flickr
 
CMur12 said:
This is amazing and, Nokton 48, you have a very impressive set of altogether uncommon film and equipment. I remember, years ago, seeing that Hasselblad offered a 70mm filmback. but I've never seen or heard anything about it since then. I look forward to reading more about this project here. - Murray
Click to expand...


Thanks Murray. I'm having fun :)
 
Nokton48 said:
Cal,

I've not had any difficulties loading the 70mm reel. But it is good to practice and not be in a hurry. Also I bought an old outdated roll of 100' 70mm Vericolor III perfed for ten bucks at Columbus Camera Group years ago. I use it to make dummy 70mm rolls and to practice loading the reel in the light and to test the film backs. You could run a roll through and magic marker it with sharpie pen. That is what I do. Then look at the roll and count the frames


How far does the film counter go on the baby Linhof back? That should tell you what you need to know
Click to expand...

The Linhof Cine Rolliex is advertised as 70 6x7 exposures. Out of guessing a roll of 120 is about 3 feet of film and ten exposures if I'm not hallucinating, but there is a leader and a short tail...

If I could find out how many 6x6 or 6x7 exposures on 15 feet of film it would be very helpful to do the math.

BTW my "Slacker's Brew" (Diafine) which gets reused seems ideal for developing 70mm. It is a two part compensating developer that I kinda made work for me, a lazy slacker, who annoys people. LOL.

The highlights kinda get a stand development treatment, and what I love is that there is enhanced shadow detail that is so much like large format. I tend to underdevelope by under agitating (only two inversions per minute instead of three) and this underagitation also makes for smaller grain. Tri-X has only more percievable grain than Acros, and to see the difference one needs a light table and a 4x loupe to see that Tri-X has slightly more grain.

Another bonus is a bump in film speed with Tri-X (800 ISO), but with Acros I shoot box speed (100 ISO). The results are a bit like HDR in film and your negatives will kinda resemble a larger format. A friend of mine who is a large format shooter once said, " With negatives like these you don't need a 4x5," and he was looking at some of my 6x9 negatives.

Diafine in Panthermic, so as long as it is above 68 degrees F all is good and temperature is not a variable and needs not to be controled. Remember I'm a lazy slacker, or perhaps a clever slacker. LOL.

The development times are short. Tri-X is soaked in Part "A" for three minutes with the gentlest two inversions per minute, then poured out to be reused. No real developing happens until Part "B" activates the Part "A" that previously soaked into the film. A stand like development kinda happens to the highlights, so unless you really are grossly off with exposure the highlights will never be blown.

Diafine is an strong aggressive developer so the amount of shadow detail is mucho. By underdeveloping I basically am dialing in the mids. Understand that I kinda threw away the instructions and did not follow the directions, but because I'm a mucho clever guy I figured out how to make Diafine work for me. The recommended ISO's to me are very aggressive, and realize that I'm trying to make denser negatives for wet printing and not scanning.

With Diafine when in doubt always overexpose. The original purpose for Diafine is to unwind high contrast, but I get full range tonality of larger formats.

I hope I added something useful to your thread. Lets do/make crazy. "Crazy is good," I say. That 70mm Kodak WL Surveilence film which you say resembles Tri-X seems like a great place to start. Imagine 800 ISO, no grain, and full range of tonality (mucho mids).

Cal
 
I really don't have a good "read" on how many feet of film will go into your Baby Backs. Too many variables. How much space is between each frame, how much leader is required, etc.

Get ahold of an English instruction sheet. It's prolly all in there. Sometimes you need to consult the destructions. LOL

The good thing about WL Surveillance, is that it is 150 feet, not 100 feet, like some of the thicker base films. So you get 50% more film per can. That is a good thing.

Don't waste money on fancy Linhof film cassettes, they just slapped their label on it. The regular Kodak ones are fine. In fact, actually they are ALL Kodak 70mm film cassettes.

Good luck with it. I like beefy negs too, and I'm getting good n beefy with the WL and D76. Shadow detail is copious, so this is a true ISO 400 film stock.
 
mabelsound said:
Didn't know any of this even existed. Very cool!
Click to expand...

Thank you John!

I am stoked to start using this stuff after all these years. I probably have enough 70mm raw stock to get through most of the remaining ones.

Plus I tend to buy cool interesting things! :D:dance::D
 
Ive been really wanting to get some 70mm film for use in my RB67 but have always struggled to find any information on any available stocks. The biggest problem when knowing some was still made was the perforations and if they will actually work with the back.

Would you recommend doing this and is it more economical than shooting 120 frame by frame?
 
Jake Mongey said:
Ive been really wanting to get some 70mm film for use in my RB67 but have always struggled to find any information on any available stocks. The biggest problem when knowing some was still made was the perforations and if they will actually work with the back. Would you recommend doing this and is it more economical than shooting 120 frame by frame?
Click to expand...


Hey Jake,
Type II perforated film will go in the RB67 70mm film backs. It is around. Prices for film are all over the place. It depends on what you can find. Generally it is more expensive to gear up for this, but the firepower is awesome I can tell you. Kind of like shooting analog digital. I hardly ever look at the frame counter :)

You can also respool 120 paper backing with whatever you can find. Then this 70mm fits 120 cameras. But you have to cut down the stock, so you need to make a film slitter. See the above post from China; He is doing it
 
Nokton48 said:
Hey Jake,
Type II perforated film will go in the RB67 70mm film backs. It is around. Prices for film are all over the place. It depends on what you can find. Generally it is more expensive to gear up for this, but the firepower is awesome I can tell you. Kind of like shooting analog digital. I hardly ever look at the frame counter :)

You can also respool 120 paper backing with whatever you can find. Then this 70mm fits 120 cameras. But you have to cut down the stock, so you need to make a film slitter. See the above post from China; He is doing it
Click to expand...

I mean how many shots can you get out of say 100 or 150 ft? Would really appreciate not having to change film when im shooting london fashion week as carrying a RB67 is bad enough but changing film every 10 frames killed me.
 
Jake Mongey said:
I mean how many shots can you get out of say 100 or 150 ft? Would really appreciate not having to change film when im shooting london fashion week as carrying a RB67 is bad enough but changing film every 10 frames killed me.
Click to expand...

I understand what you're saying. This could work for you if you are determined and resourceful.

I would suggest you get hold of an RB67 70mm Back instruction book. That should tell you what you need to know.

I mean, if it takes 15 feet of film, and you have a 150 foot roll, you could fill ten 70mm cassettes with film. So for $249 for WL Surveillance on Ebay that would be $25.00 per roll? I guessing about all of this!

Hope that helps.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top