Prev: Dead: Kodachrome Film
Next: Things are getting a bit spotty with the 500/4 Nikkor!!
From: rwalker on 3 Aug 2010 11:41
On Tue, 3 Aug 2010 09:43:12 -0400, "K W Hart" <kwhart1(a)verizon.net>
wrote:

>
>Doesn't the camera require a 'framing hole'- a little hole every frame that
>the camera senses and stops the film advancing?
>Actually, years and years ago, I took a little Kodak Tele-Instamatic to a
>night high school football game. I submitted my photos to the local
>newspaper as usual, and they couldn't tell them from my usual work. Of
>course, I limited the shots to mostly sideline action, but still...
>The camera is a machine, and if you understand how the machine works and
>it's capabilities, you get the shot.


The Pentax Auto110 doesn't require the sprocket holes. Most 110s do,
but the Pentax and Minolta 110 SLRs don't need them.

I enjoy trying to get a nice image from that fingernail sized
negative. Like you say, the camera is just a machine.
From: Robert Coe on 8 Aug 2010 12:34
On Mon, 2 Aug 2010 18:37:25 -0400, "K W Hart" <kwhart1(a)verizon.net> wrote:
:
: "David Nebenzahl" <nobody(a)but.us.chickens> wrote in message
: news:4c571a84$0$2367$822641b3(a)news.adtechcomputers.com...
: > On 8/2/2010 11:34 AM dickr2 spake thus:
: >
: >> rwalker wrote:
: > >
: >> <snip>
: >>
: >>> I fairly regularly slit 35 mm film down to 110 to reload cassettes to
: >>> use in my Pentax Auto110.
: >>
: >> Are you foolin' us?
: >
: > No; it isn't easy, but film can be slit at home. People do it. (I'm
: > curious how the person does it, specifically.)
: >
: >> On a serious note, I still have 8 mm movies taken in the 1940s along
: >> with a Revere projector that still works and a Cinemaster 8 mm camera.
: >> As I recall, the camera was loaded with 16 mm film with sprocket holes
: >> on both edges. When the film was processed, it was split into two
: >> 8 mm strips with sprocket holes on one edge.
: >
: > That makes no sense.
: >
: > How would that even work? Either you'd have to expose the full 16mm frame,
: > therefore getting two half-frame films as a result, which makes no sense,
: > or you'd have to have some ultra-complicated scheme which would expose
: > first one side of the film, then run it backwards (and move the lens) to
: > expose the other side.
: >
: > I think your memory is playing tricks on you here.
: >
:
: No, it works very well. Or at least many years ago it did. You ran the 25'
: 16mm wide film through once, shooting along on edge of the film. Then you
: flipped over the spool and ran the film through again, shooting along the
: other edge of the film. After processing, the film was slit lengthwise and
: spliced end to end, into a 50' length, running about four minutes.
:
: As for the lengthwise slitters, I've seen such devices on eBay. Basically a
: plastic block with razor blade(s) embedded.

Which, presumably, you have to use in the dark. :^|

Bob
First  |  Prev  | 
Pages: 1 2 3 4
Prev: Dead: Kodachrome Film
Next: Things are getting a bit spotty with the 500/4 Nikkor!!