New 220 Film!

Dwaynes photo develops it now, for the same basic developing cost ($6) as 120. They do charge more for scanning and prints, but that makes perfect sense.
 
ptpdprinter said:
My guess is that if 220 became prevalent, those photofinishers who have the capability to process 220 would charge more to process 220 than 120. Did photofinishers charge the same for 220 as 120 back in the day? And then if you want scans, you would think the photofinisher would charge you for 24 of them rather than 12.

If you don't have a 220 stainless steel reel, you can pick them up cheap at B&H:

https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/produ...teel_Reel.html
Click to expand...


But- they will cost you $0.99 each, compared to 120 reels starting at $14.95, so, ummm.., well.

Even with the outrageous price, I picked a few up just in case 220 starts coming back (I know there is Shanghai, and maybe this color film, so it's a start).

Thanks!
 
ranger9 said:
Right, and as soon as everybody tries it, they'll re-discover why 220 film was never very popular even when it was widely available and a lot of cameras used it, and sales will sink back to the levels that led to it becoming near-extinct in the first place. But that's the great thing about running your business off Kickstarter... you make your money upfront, so you don't have to worry about maintaining enough repeat customers to recover your initial investment.
Click to expand...

Credit where it’s due, I think CineStill have more than demonstrated their commitment to film photography. Certainly with their existing offerings there seems to be a great deal of ongoing repeat customers.

I don’t get why there’s such persistent animosity towards Kickstarter as a platform?
 
Rayt said:
Do 220 films have thinner film base or is that a myth?
Click to expand...

There may have been some films that had a thinner base, but it wasn't over the entire industry. The main reason that you have to have different pressure plates and such is the lack of a backing paper between the ends of the roll, thus the film in the gate needs to be flattened better to keep it in the focal plane. On my Fujica GW690 I reverse the pressure plate which presents a thicker side to the film gate, taking up the space where the backing paper would have normally been.

PF
 
james.liam said:
Because....people have been burned in the past?
Click to expand...

No doubt, and there's obviously some pretty marginal projects on Kickstarter (Reflex anyone?)

What I don't get is that the angst seems to extend to established operators that already have a proven track record funding and releasing products through Kickstarter (ie. CineStill).
 
Some manufacturers would helpfully specify the base thickness of their products. Short of putting a micrometer on a particular type it is the only way to ascertain that measurement. FWIW in the past some films available in 120 & 220 used the same base thickness.
  • Eg Fujifilm RVP ("Velvia for Professionals"); Fuji advised a 127 micron thickness for 135 Velvia base; however both 120 & 220 are listed as 104 microns.
  • Astia 100F (RAP100F) was coated on cellulose triacetate base of 127 microns (135); and 98 microns (120/220); and polyester base of 175 microns for 4x5" 8x10" & 4x5" Quickload.
  • Pro 400H listed as 135 122 microns; 120/220 98 microns.
  • Kodak informed Ektachrome 100VS as: acetate base 135 0.13mm (130 microns); 120/220 0.1mm.
These figures all referenced from the manufacturers' own film data sheets.
 
ranger9 said:
Right, and as soon as everybody tries it, they'll re-discover why 220 film was never very popular even when it was widely available and a lot of cameras used it, and sales will sink back to the levels that led to it becoming near-extinct in the first place. But that's the great thing about running your business off Kickstarter... you make your money upfront, so you don't have to worry about maintaining enough repeat customers to recover your initial investment.
Click to expand...

FWIW, this campaign is NOT being run on Kickstarter. It's run from CineStill's own website, powered by craigstarter, an open source crowdfunding tool for Shopify. I'm not sure what that means in terms of backer protections in case the campaign fails or the company doesn't deliver. As the saying goes... caveat emptor or whatever.

From the PetaPixel article about the campaign:
CineStill’s 400Dynamic campaign wasn’t held on a typical crowdfunding site like Kickstarter or IndieGoGo, but instead was published independently on the company’s website.
Click to expand...
 
dourbalistar said:
FWIW, this campaign is NOT being run on Kickstarter. It's run from CineStill's own website, powered by craigstarter, an open source crowdfunding tool for Shopify. I'm not sure what that means in terms of backer protections in case the campaign fails or the company doesn't deliver. As the saying goes... caveat emptor or whatever.
Click to expand...

From the Cinestill website:

"*If funding is unsuccessful or development roadblocks show that 220 is not viable for delivery by December, backers will receive 10 rolls of 400D 120."
 
I was wondering about film thickness because of the dreaded curl problem with cheap b/w films and a thinner base would be a even more of nightmare to load and scan. I just bought an A24 back from KEH so hope the 400D becomes a reality but meanwhile I’ll look into trying out a few rolls of Shanghai GP3.
 
Rayt said:
I was wondering about film thickness because of the dreaded curl problem with cheap b/w films and a thinner base would be a even more of nightmare to load and scan. I just bought an A24 back from KEH so hope the 400D becomes a reality but meanwhile I’ll look into trying out a few rolls of Shanghai GP3.
Click to expand...

Picked up a Rollei 220 back for my 6008. a gamble at $150 but I will not be tempting fate with rolls of that jamming Shanghai crap if the project fails. Others that are more reliable are sure to follow.
 
Shanghai 220 Low Key Valentine Roses C22 105DS D23 by Nokton48, on Flickr

Testing Shanghai 220 in D23. Mamiya C22 105DS lens Broncolor 80x80cm Softbox Modeling Light Only Silver Fill Panel just off camera right. My old low key OMNI Muslin Background it's beeg 10x20 feet. Happy to use it again. Omega DII Omegalite laser aligned Arista RC #2 paper in Multigrade dev

Testing Shanghai 220 Wedding Flash Mamiya C22 105DS by Nokton48, on Flickr

Mamiya C22 freshly overhauled 105DS lens, testing Shanghai 220 film processed in D23. Wedding Flash 283 direct flash with mini softbox. Omega DII Omegalite head laser alligned Arista 8x10 RC #2 Multigrade dev

220 Shanghai twenty rolls. by Nokton48, on Flickr

Firstly I purchased four rolls and liked the results. So I ordered and got another twenty rolls, to give it a good go. So far only one roll has jammed at about frame 19, I reloaded the roll in the camera, and was able to force it through and finish it.

I do like this film! So a month ago I ordered another twenty rolls, and recently asked for status. Due to Shanghai closing down during covid, long delays possible. I asked for a refund and got within ten minutes to the seller's credit. Unfortunate situation but not giving up.

I have in the deep freeze 220 HP5+, Plus-X Professional, and Tri-X Professional. I tried to load up as 220 was being closed out and discontinued. I am saving this film for future and going with Shanghai for now
 
ptpdprinter said:
I know, but $35/roll still sounds ominous to me. Cinestill is charging $15/roll for 400D in 120. A 5-pack of Kodak Gold 200 runs $44.95 at B&H ($8.99/roll). A five pack of Portra 400 is $56.95. ($11.39/roll) Seems like your really need to like Cinestill 400D. Of course, if Cinestill meets its goal, it will be the only color option in 220, so they can charge whatever they want.
Click to expand...

The hopped up price is likely for funding of film stock production. My guess is that it will find its proper pricing once produced in quantity, perhaps $20,

Nokton48 said:
am saving this film for future and going with Shanghai for now
Click to expand...

🙄. Shanghai is on lockdown (until everyone starves to death). So declareth Pharaoh Xi.
 
I would imagine that all remaining medium format film would be 220, as it is probably more economical to make longer rolls, but for the fact that a great number of surviving medium format film cameras were not designed to use it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

M
New Kodachrome? New Peel-Apart Instant Film?
Replies
13
Views
827
Nitroplait
Nitroplait
Ko.Fe.
M9 (M-E 220) in filmish mode?
Replies
0
Views
113
Ko.Fe.
Ko.Fe.
Mos6502
How do we feel about Ferrania? (New film. No, it's not slide film.)
Replies
12
Views
2K
Godfrey
Godfrey
D
Kodacolor Slides
Replies
3
Views
199
Freakscene
Freakscene
Y
LLL's Film Project
Replies
9
Views
649
BillBingham2
BillBingham2
Back
Top Bottom