Printfiles for 3-Rings

[Frank Petronio]

I've been burned by getting the Printfiles that hold 7 rows of six frames and then finding the pages won't fit my normal 3-ring archival binders...

What works best?

 

[Steve Bellayr]

I use the Printfile that hold rows of 4 with 7 rows. They work with common 3 ring binders. 4x7=28 which covers 24 exposure rolls.

 

[nikon_sam]

I use the 7 rows of 5 frames...I know that I will most likely have some frames left over (I normally get 38 shots on a 36 exp. factory roll...)
I take the extras and put them in another page with other leftovers...but only after looking at them to determine if they are worth keeping...

 

[t.s.k.]

I have the 6 x 7row sheets and I've had them in an undersized binder for a couple of years awaiting a replacement.
I put the binder in a box to control the dust. It's not a huge priority for me as I'm just glad they fit on one sheet.
IIRC, the binders either had to be special ordered (not in stock w a long wait) or were too expensive to ship. Again, not a huge priority right now.
Sorry to be no help.

 

[Roger Hicks]

Dear Frank,

Just buy bigger binders. Or cut cardboard 'end-papers' and perforate them with a 3-hole punch. Seriously: that's what I've done on occasion.

Cheerss,

R.

 

[Chuck Albertson]

What Roger said. I buy the ClearFile Archival Plus Safety Binder, and they work fine with the 7x6 neg pages.

 

[robklurfield]

Printfiles does make an oversized binder, but they're expensive.

 

[sepiareverb]

Staples 'Better Binder' and the Print File 35-7B here. I too combine extras from the heads of the rolls in a separate page.

 

[Particular]

Oh....not this problem again!

I use the 7x6 Printfiles and keep them in a Besfile box/binder (Beseler). They just fit. The hight is perfect, but they are a tiny bit squashed in the width. For me that still is better than the alternatives.

After having studied this problem I am baffled that nothing really is compatible with anything else in the negative storage universe. It really is a mess.

 

[finguanzo]

After going through this, I started using the individual negative sleeve's and storing them in the little individual folders, in a box...

 

[Bob Michaels]

I've been burned by getting the Printfiles that hold 7 rows of six frames and then finding the pages won't fit my normal 3-ring archival binders...

What works best?

Shooting 35 frames per roll and using the standard 5x7 Printfile pages is my norm. I usually reload when there is a break in the action, not when I get to the very absolute end of the roll. On those rare instances when I cannot stop and shoot frames 36-37-38, I just use another sheet.

Edit: I always waste frame #1 by leaving the film back open and winding an extra frame onto the take up spool. That way I am absolutely positively certain film is being transported through the camera. I made that mistake once back in the 80's. I have not since.

Film is cheap. Don't let trying to squeeze out a few extra frames complicate your shooting.

 

[charjohncarter]

I use the 7 rows of 5 frames...I know that I will most likely have some frames left over (I normally get 38 shots on a 36 exp. factory roll...)
I take the extras and put them in another page with other leftovers...but only after looking at them to determine if they are worth keeping...

Same, for 35mm, and the same for 120; 6x7, 6x9.

 

[peter_n]

I use Archival Methods 2.5 inch oversized binder & slip cases and the standard 6x6 PrintFile 35-6HB sleeves that fit right in there.

 

[tj01]

The most important thing for me is I can contact sheet on 8X10. With the 7 rows 6 frames Printfile, I only do 5 frames and leave out the commentary box at the top. I keep them in normal binders with a bit sticking out. I'm not paying more for oversize binders from them.

Usually I use 7 rows 5 frames for 35mm.

 

[mto'brien]

These do printfile 7 rows of 6 with room to spare: http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/140932-REG/Besfile_B_9051_Archival_Binder_With_Rings.html

 

[Tom A]

I use the 7 down - 6 across Printfiles. With "office" type 3 ring binders I find that you have to "pull" slightly to get them to fit in the last hole of the sheet. Not a big deal. I used to buy "Both" oversized binders but the quality is crap - the base for the rings would pull off!!!
I also use 1/5 -2" binders (D-ring) - less 'compressed" sheets (you can get 100 sheet in the 1/5" and 150 sheet in the 2" binder.
One day I will re-file in better binders - but with 8-9000 films in Print files - it takes a bit of dedication.
You can also talk to a specialist "binder" maker and have them custom made. Not that expensive if you do volume (20+). They can do slightly oversized at a nominal cost.

 

[planetjoe]

These do printfile 7 rows of 6 with room to spare: http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/140932-REG/Besfile_B_9051_Archival_Binder_With_Rings.html

Really? That's good news if so, because I've had a devil of a time trying to sort out the morass of incompatibilities in this area.

Frank: FWIW, there was this thread from a grillion years ago where a bunch of us did this dance and came up with nothing. The problem was the fact that no closed, locking binder would fit the 6-wide pages (hence my incredulity, and interest, in the above). My specific need was to be able to store pages of sleeved negs, though; that might be the difference.

From that thread, though, let me offer my convoluted method which I still use:

2. ARCHIVING: When shooting film, my negatives are stored, sleeved, in FilmGuard Pro-Line negative pages (item #PL24920). This is one of few neg pages that can fit sleeved negs besides the Print-File Ultima series. My choice of Pro-Line was based on a long, complicated search process. The issue seems to be one of strip length. A 36-frame roll usually works out to 6 strips of 6 images, but - and here's the important part - there is no sealed 3-ring binder available that can easily fit a six-frame wide negative page. Yeah, I couldn't believe it either. I happen to eschew "open" binders, so you can see my dilemma. I thought about cutting the Ultima pages down width-wise, but then I'd have six strips of five frames, which would be a waste of 6 frames per roll (I shoot mainly 135-36 films). Instead, the Pro-Line pages fit seven strips of six (they're taller), and so when I cut them down (by about an inch in width) I end up with seven strips of five, which only wastes one frame per roll. As a consequence, I always wind on to "2" before shooting. All these pages are captured in ImageSafe locking binders (or the equivalent; these go by a couple different names. They're the biggest ones I've been able to find). By the way, even if I went with an "open" style binder, the only one that would fully fit - and protect - 6-frame side pages is the PrintFile "G" series album, which is pretty pricey for the flimsy binder it is.

...I've since noticed that Filmguard has been bought up by Lineco, but the PL24920 pages are still available at B&H, for example.

Looking back, though, I can't for the life of me why I didn't simply use the PL24921 pages (5-wide), as I cut down the PL24902 in width, anyway. Maybe they weren't available then? Hmm; I dunno.

Hope this doesn't confuse the issue more than it should.


Cheers,
--joe.

 

[mto'brien]

Really? That's good news if so, because I've had a devil of a time trying to sort out the morass of incompatibilities in this area.


Cheers,
--joe.

Yes, they are all I use for storage. They accommodate 7 row/6 neg with room. They are pretty dust proof, as well. They also come in 3 diff fashionable colors, black white and gray! 🙂

 

[planetjoe]

Yes, they are all I use for storage. They accommodate 7 row/6 neg with room. They are pretty dust proof, as well. They also come in 3 diff fashionable colors, black white and gray! 🙂

I am going to look into this; thanks!


--joe.

 

[Vics]

I use printfile CP35-7HB and CP120-3HB then I put in the little file hanger spines and hang them in letter-size file cabinets with their proof sheets. Lord, it's up to three four-drawer cabinets now and almost time to get a fourth one. 43 years of negs and contacts in those drawers!