hi all.

i just started developing my b&w film recently and i'm playing around with the idea about using bulk film:

- need some opinions about your experience on bulk-loading films - how many 36-frame rolls is the 100' bulk roll equivalent to? i've read somewhere that it's 18--is that accurate? doing the math can tell if i can actually save money using bulk film - what bulk loaders? i see Watson, Lloyd and Alden? which is the best? - film cassette recommendations? - any other tips? - which is sharper and has better bokeh: 35 summilux or the voigtlander ultron? do you have 72 dpi images from scanned prints using the lenses to show the difference?

* i was kidding about the last question *

thank you.

-- Dexter Legaspi (dalegaspi@hotmail.com), March 21, 2002

Answers

i apologize for the format of the questions...there should have been line-breaks between questions...

-- Dexter Legaspi (dalegaspi@hotmail.com), March 21, 2002.

dexter, i used bulk tri-x for a time. i feel that there is a significant savings by bulk loading your film, but i never had luck with it the process. just too easy to scratch the hell out of your film. you have to make sure there's no dust in the loader when you load it, make sure the gate is locked when not loading or you will fog the entire bulk roll, make sure the gate is unlocked when you begin to load the cassettes or you might as well plant your spring garden in the resulting scratches/grooves. just too much hassle for me. if you do decide to do do it, make sure the loader is immaculate and wiped with a damp cloth and allowed to dry prior to the film going in. make sure you inspect each cassette's felt prior to buying as there is a wide quality control range in any given box of cassettes, and only use each cassette a given number of times as the felt will collect dust and grit no matter how hard you try to keep everything clean (i used mine 5 times each and marked after each use...i'm a POOR college student). all in all, far easier to just buy film in boxes. in terms of cleanliness and care, you have to be even more anal retentive than a LF photographer when he/she loads holders. good luck if you

-- Dave Stonner (dws69880@cmsu2.cmsu.edu), March 21, 2002.

If you price film at B&H I believe you will find almost no advantage in buying bulk rolls.

The only reason I might buy bulk rolls is to package 30 shot rolls, since I like working in 30 shot pieces instead of 36.

-- Pete Su (psu_13@yahoo.com), March 21, 2002.

I've bulk-loaded for years (40 years, in fact), and never particularly had problems. All it takes is reasonable housekeeping-- if I had Dave's problems, I probably wouldn't risk getting out of bed in the morning! How hard can it be to work a bulk loader correctly, given that there are probably thousands of them sold every year? :-)

But I've always preferred to do it in the dark--one 36 exposure length is about my outstretched arms with my wrists bent in. Don't touch anything but the edges, and don't lay the film down while you're winding it, and there'll be no problems. Once in a while run some masking tape through the light traps to remove the dust, and you can use the cassettes virtually forever.

I've used both of the available bulk loader types, and both work, but the one with the counter works a bit better. Either one ruins the last few frames, so you can't just wind film until it stops, which is why I like rolling in the dark.

I just noticed in Pop Photo that I can buy 36 exposure rolls of Tri-X from B&H and a number of other sources for $1.99 a roll, which isn't really all that bad compared to bulk! I believe it's less than the list price of a 100-foot roll, which I have sometimes paid small local shops, so that's an idea well worth considering, isn't it?

-- Michael Darnton (mdarnton@hotmail.com), March 21, 2002.

If you price film at B&H I believe you will find almost no advantage in buying bulk rolls

at B&H pricing: USAW TriX is $23.95...which comes to $1.33 per roll. buying Imported TriX is $1.99 per roll. which is about $6 savings for 18 rolls. hmm...you might be correct there...if you don't do a lot of b&w shooting...

-- Dexter Legaspi (dalegaspi@hotmail.com), March 21, 2002.

Don't forget both cassette and time costs. Maybe your time isn't worth anything, but mine is. :-) (Not much, obviously, since I still bulk load. :-)

-- Michael Darnton (mdarnton@hotmail.com), March 21, 2002.

I use both Alden and Watson, one for Agfa APX 25, the other for Techpan. Alden is better built, Watson, imo, is rather sloppy.

-- martin tai (martin.tai@capcanada.com), March 21, 2002.

Hi Dexter-

The link below is for the thread on bulk loading I started awhile back. Seems like any one of them work fine. Although someone told me that the Lloyds pull the film thru a felt light trap, which is something else to keep clean. I ended up buying an Alden from B&H and the "general brand" screw top plastic cassettes. The Alden is pretty well made and feels solid, more so than the Watson (to me at least) After buying the loader and cassettes, it costs me just under $1.50 per roll to load HP5.

Don't worry about scratches too much, just keep your stuff clean and you shouldn't have any problems. I get 17 rolls from a 100' load, with just about 2' left over.

BULK LOADERS

-- jeff voorhees (debontekou@yahoo.com), March 21, 2002.

Here's that link again

BULK LOADERS

-- jeff (debontekou@yahoo.com), March 21, 2002.

1) I usually get 19 36-exp. rolls and 1 short (18-20 exp.) roll from 100' of bulk film. I roll 40 'clicks' of the Watson (Alden? - anyway the old Bakelite-type plastic loader that is big and tear-drop shaped) Remeber not to try and squeeze in those 37th/38th frames - the last 3-4 inches of the roll gets fully exposed while attaching the film to the casette spool, and comes out black.

2) You can save money bulk loading if you have a reasonably cheap source for casettes - some places sell Kodak cassettes at prices approaching $2.50 each - at that level you won't save much. I get the kind that are plastic with a 'bayonet' end cap rather than the metal ones with snap on caps - mostly because most metal ones come with pre- printed labels I don't want. But bulk film prices have taken a leap recently - it's now $40 for 19+ rolls for just the film, instead of $22.

3) The best loaders are those that DO NOT use a felt light trap, but have a rotating film chamber that allows the film to travel untouched during loading.

4) If you bulk-load - the odds are that you will eventually have some film fogged by leaks around the end-cap join - usually just the first few frames/frmae edges - but it will happen.

5) Time vs. money - I do my bulk loading while watching TV news/movies/ whatever - so it costs me no 'time'.

-- Andy Piper (apidens@denver.infi.net), March 21, 2002.

I've used a Watson 66 bulk loader for many years. Its a very solid unit, similar to the Aldens. The current Watson 100 appears IMO to be much lower in quality. Watson 66s seem to go on Ebay for a very low price--if you opt for one of these, make sure it comes with the removable crank.

One BIG advantage of bulk loading for Leicas is the ability to use Leica cassettes which have no felt light trap, can be used over and over again, and, used properly, cannot scratch your film. I use them all the time. They can AFAIK be used in all Leicas through Wetzlar M6s. (Solms M6s lack the mechanism on the baseplate latch to open and close the cassettes--although it's possible to use an earlier model base plate). There are different cassette models for Ms and screw mount Leicas. Either will fit LTM Leicas, but only 'M' models fit Ms.

The old Watson 66s will accomodate Leica (as well as similar RF Canon, Nikon, and Contax) cassettes--I don't know if they'll work in an Alden or current Watson. Would anyone who's used these newer bulk loaders care to comment?

-- Robert Marvin (marvbej@earthlink.net), March 21, 2002.

I use a watson loader for bulk tri-x . It's pretty flimsy , but nonetheless light tight . Loading bulk film into the watson takes about one minute in the dark . Dispensing film into a cassette takes about two minutes . Knock on wood no light leaks or scratches yet ( gone through 300ft ).

-- leonid (kotlyarl@mail.nih.gov), March 21, 2002.

I've loaded literally thousands of rolls over the last 30 years, almost all with Lloyds loaders, and have *never* had a film scratch tracable to the loader. Ten or twelve years ago, when I was doing a lot of overseas assignments to produce slide programs for missionary and humanitarian organizations, I would travel with 100--150 rolls of hand-loaded Fuji RDP slide film.

Nowadays, there's no point in loading slide film when I can buy Fuji Sensia from B&H for $2.79 a aroll. However, I do still like to hand-load black & white, because, by counting the turns carefully, I can load 35-exposure rolls to fit the negative file pages I prefer. Seven strips of five frames each fit perfectly on 8x10 paper for contact sheets.

I usually get 18 rolls plus one shorty from Kodak film, but when I was hand-loading Fuji slide film I got 20 full rolls.

-- Dave Jenkins (djphoto@vol.com), March 21, 2002.

I use Watson loaders with plastic and metal cassettes--they all work; none are perfect. Haven't counted the number of rolls, but 18 sounds right.

-- Mike Dixon (mike@mikedixonphotography.com), March 22, 2002.

Kodak used to sell reloadable cassettes they called "Snap-Caps." Don't know if they still sell them, but if they do, avoid them. If you drop one, the cap is likely to snap right off.

-- Dave Jenkins (djphoto@vol.com), March 22, 2002.

I never self load 35mm film, because 35mm films are inexpensive.

My two loaders are used for cutting into Minox 9.2mm film, which is more then double the price of 35mm film. For example a roll of BW Agfapan APX 25 (36 exp) cost $8.

http://minoxlab.com/shopsite_sc/store/html/page2.html

I can cut a 50' Agfapan bulk into 40 rolls 36 exp Minox film, each roll cost less then $1, with substantial saving.

-- martin tai (martin.tai@capcanada.com), March 22, 2002.