Save 220 Rollfilm

[Socke]

there is a petition to the manufacturers to save the 220 roll film online.

See who promisses to order 1800 films 😉

www.film220.com

Unluckily Ilford already scrapped the mashine so they are out.

 

[jaap]

My GAS is only increasing for a Mamiya 7

 

[darkkavenger]

I was never able to find 220 film, and I would really love to find some available, it's so unpractical to shoot only 12 frames 🙁

 

[nksyoon]

I was never able to find 220 film(

Keep an eye on ebay - I found 15 rolls of NPH 220 there late last year.

 

[aterlecki]

As much as I'd love 220 to make a comeback I'm not willing to see it happen at the expense of the financial health of a film-producing company. Better to have rollfilm in 120 for a long time than 120 and 220 for only a couple of years before both disappear. When companies like Ilford will no longer produce different coloured caps on their film cannisters because the volumes and cost required is not viable then I think there's little incentive for companies to bring back 220 in a declining market (albeit one whose numbers may stabilize in the future).

How many of you who could get a film in 220 that you like would refuse to shoot the 120 equivalent if the 220 version disappeared? Very few I suspect. How many of you would switch from one film in 120 which you regularly used and liked to a different film in 220 simply because it is made in 220? Again very few. These are probably two major questions that companies would examine in a decision to reintroduce 220.

I haven't timed myself but it can't take more than 30-60 seconds to change a roll of 120 in my Mamiya 7. Those who think that is too long (usually commercial shooters) will probably already have made provisions for their shooting like multiple backs, multiple cameras and assistants.

220 - nice to have but not at the expense of having nothing in the near future.

 

[Photar]

In my experience 220 is usually more than twice as expensive as 120. Therefore it never appeared attractive to me. But then I certainly do not shoot 3600 120 rolls per year ...

 

[Kyle]

As much as I'd love 220 to make a comeback I'm not willing to see it happen at the expense of the financial health of a film-producing company. Better to have rollfilm in 120 for a long time than 120 and 220 for only a couple of years before both disappear. When companies like Ilford will no longer produce different coloured caps on their film cannisters because the volumes and cost required is not viable then I think there's little incentive for companies to bring back 220 in a declining market (albeit one whose numbers may stabilize in the future).

How many of you who could get a film in 220 that you like would refuse to shoot the 120 equivalent if the 220 version disappeared? Very few I suspect. How many of you would switch from one film in 120 which you regularly used and liked to a different film in 220 simply because it is made in 220? Again very few. These are probably two major questions that companies would examine in a decision to reintroduce 220.

I haven't timed myself but it can't take more than 30-60 seconds to change a roll of 120 in my Mamiya 7. Those who think that is too long (usually commercial shooters) will probably already have made provisions for their shooting like multiple backs, multiple cameras and assistants.

220 - nice to have but not at the expense of having nothing in the near future.

I agree with what is said above. Bringing back 220 at the expense of other films would be a silly endeavor.

Here's my further take on the issue. Nowadays, who is left shooting medium format? Most pro's seem to have gone digital. So it seems that MF is left to artists and 'advanced amatures.' IMO, being constrained to 10-15 exposures per roll is really just an inconvenience for someone who isn't making their living off of photography. That is, it may be a PITA to have to change film, but at least we don't have to worry that its taking away from our potential to make a living. I can understand why a PJ or studio photog does not want to change rolls as often, because the less time they spend shooting, the more chance there is to miss a shot, and that can effect how much money they're making. However, how many pros are still using medium format? A studio photog has the problem covered, as already pointed out, he can easily have multiple cameras, backs, and assistants at his disposal, so the issue is basic moot. As far as a PJ goes, all I have to say is what sort of PJ shoots MF (or film in general). Everything I've read about the photojournalism explains that its a very cutthroat and competitive business. With so much competition, why would anyone put themselves at a disadvantage to those shooting digital. Processing and scanning are added inconveniences that would make it harder for a PJ to sell his work. Perhaps I don't have an accurate vision of the world of professional photography, or I'm just plain wrong, but thats my insignificant $0.02.

 

[Little Prince]

Good to see someone take initiative in such a way.

However, I agree with aterlecki. I don't know if producing 220 compromises the industry's financial health, but if it does I'd rather have lots of 120 and no 220 than just a little of both.