If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
120/220 spool/film dimensions
Hello:
Does anyone know 'spec' or typical spool measurements for 120/220 film? I measured one, and it's kind of 'ovoid', of non-circular cross section. I am doing some calculations to scale for larger film spools. I averaged the two different diameters. It would seem that the film must wind 'lumpy' also. Thanks Murray |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Some of the dimensions can be found at
http://medfmt.8k.com/bronfilms.html Length: 2.466 inches Flange Diameter: 0.990 inch Core Diameter: 0.468 inch At http://www.medfmt.8k.com/mf/620.html you can find the following: = = = = = Begin Quote = = = = = 120 width is specified by Kodak as min. 2.41, max 2.45 inches, while 620 was specified as 2.421 and 2.425 respectively. 120 film and paper will fit inside the flanges of a 620 spool, since the inner flange-to-flange dimension of both 620 and 120 is for all practical purposes identical, and of course hundreds if not thousands of re-spoolers know that from experience. The the exterior flange-to-flange dimension is a different story. Here are some caliper measurements 120, metal spool flange thickness, approximately 1.4 mm (quite variable). Total spool length is about 65.3 to 65.5 mm. 620, metal spool flange thickness, 0.5 mm. Total spool length, about 63.7 mm. = = = = = "MurrayatUptown" wrote in message om... Hello: Does anyone know 'spec' or typical spool measurements for 120/220 film? I measured one, and it's kind of 'ovoid', of non-circular cross section. I am doing some calculations to scale for larger film spools. I averaged the two different diameters. It would seem that the film must wind 'lumpy' also. Thanks Murray |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Thank you.
While on the subject...dumb question... 6x6 and 6x4.5 - are the spacings a bit more than that due to frame separation? I think I measured 47 mm (4.7 cm) between numbers the other day. I'm trying to determine empirical numbers for spool diameter increase with each frame for 4.5, 6 and 9 cm frame width, or whatever their actual numbers are. This is to perform film 'counting' by winding knob turns. 'Fill factor' will be less than 100% probably due to variable tension. Thanks Murray |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Thank you.
While on the subject...dumb question... 6x6 and 6x4.5 - are the spacings a bit more than that due to frame separation? I think I measured 47 mm (4.7 cm) between numbers the other day. I'm trying to determine empirical numbers for spool diameter increase with each frame for 4.5, 6 and 9 cm frame width, or whatever their actual numbers are. This is to perform film 'counting' by winding knob turns. 'Fill factor' will be less than 100% probably due to variable tension. Thanks Murray |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
"MurrayatUptown" wrote in message
om... I'm trying to determine empirical numbers for spool diameter increase with each frame for 4.5, 6 and 9 cm frame width, or whatever their actual numbers are. Does it work simply to measure the printed numbering on a discarded paper backing? (I ask instead of measuring it myself ). Seriously, I can hit the trash and measure one if you like. |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
"MurrayatUptown" wrote in message
om... I'm trying to determine empirical numbers for spool diameter increase with each frame for 4.5, 6 and 9 cm frame width, or whatever their actual numbers are. Does it work simply to measure the printed numbering on a discarded paper backing? (I ask instead of measuring it myself ). Seriously, I can hit the trash and measure one if you like. |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
I measured numbers on processed film...here's a laugh...I measured the
spacing of the first pair and the last pair of numbers, and I was both impressed and puzzled how similar they were...for a few seconds...then I realized they're supposed to be!!! It's the number of turns that will change as the spool 'fattens up' with film. I guess the undeveloped film won't me much thicker than the developed - my Agfa XPS 160 per data sheet has 18 micron (0.0007 inch)thickness...so I can just measure the thickness of film. I have a some scrap 120 paper somewhere too... I was just asking intead of misinterpreting what I see. Murray |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
I measured numbers on processed film...here's a laugh...I measured the
spacing of the first pair and the last pair of numbers, and I was both impressed and puzzled how similar they were...for a few seconds...then I realized they're supposed to be!!! It's the number of turns that will change as the spool 'fattens up' with film. I guess the undeveloped film won't me much thicker than the developed - my Agfa XPS 160 per data sheet has 18 micron (0.0007 inch)thickness...so I can just measure the thickness of film. I have a some scrap 120 paper somewhere too... I was just asking intead of misinterpreting what I see. Murray |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Hi Murray! ;-) just a pointer, that different 120 films have different spool dimensions, a problem which I/we uncovered and documented in http://medfmt.8k.com/mf/spool.html I also suspect you will find this very VERY sensitive to your starting point when loading film. The "fix" for some Kiev and other film spacing problems has turned out to be as simple as adding another inch or so on the takeup spool past the arrow when first starting. Enough to be "Fatter" around the spool than without the extra turn(s), and enough to space out some of the film, but not enough to go off the end of the last film shot So you may find yourself being "alice in film-spool wonderland" ;-) and discover that Ilford is different from Fuji which is different from Kodak spool dimensions - and they have in the past all differed, it seems ;-) hope this helps, or at least clarifies some "got-cha's" ;-) regards and good luck in your project bobm -- ************************************************** ********************* * Robert Monaghan POB 752182 Southern Methodist Univ. Dallas Tx 75275 * ********************Standard Disclaimers Apply************************* |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Hi Murray! ;-) just a pointer, that different 120 films have different spool dimensions, a problem which I/we uncovered and documented in http://medfmt.8k.com/mf/spool.html I also suspect you will find this very VERY sensitive to your starting point when loading film. The "fix" for some Kiev and other film spacing problems has turned out to be as simple as adding another inch or so on the takeup spool past the arrow when first starting. Enough to be "Fatter" around the spool than without the extra turn(s), and enough to space out some of the film, but not enough to go off the end of the last film shot So you may find yourself being "alice in film-spool wonderland" ;-) and discover that Ilford is different from Fuji which is different from Kodak spool dimensions - and they have in the past all differed, it seems ;-) hope this helps, or at least clarifies some "got-cha's" ;-) regards and good luck in your project bobm -- ************************************************** ********************* * Robert Monaghan POB 752182 Southern Methodist Univ. Dallas Tx 75275 * ********************Standard Disclaimers Apply************************* |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Which 120/220 film holder I need for Nikon Super Coolscan 9000EDscanner? | Ronald Shu | Photographing Nature | 7 | June 13th 04 10:35 PM |
Which 120/220 film holder I need for Nikon Super Coolscan 9000EDscanner? | Ronald Shu | Medium Format Photography Equipment | 5 | June 12th 04 09:19 PM |