Why 220 Medium Format Film? || Opinion
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 9 июл 2024
- Support the channel:
/ nicosphotographyshow
Donate here:
www.paypal.com/paypalme/nicos...
Check Cinestill 400D campaign here:
cinestillfilm.com/products/ma...
Website:
www.nicosphotographyshow.com
Follow me on Instagram:
/ nicolasllasera
Follow me on Twitter:
/ nicolasllasera
Link to the film I use:
Color film:
Kodak Color Plus: amzn.to/2HKjJlC
Kodak Gold: amzn.to/2Ovb1YT
Kodak Ultramax: amzn.to/2CEN1hy
Kodak Proimage 100: amzn.to/2uuSNxA
Kodak Ektar:
35mm: amzn.to/2WtufAW
120: amzn.to/2JZD30n
4x5: amzn.to/2Wvu2NL
8x10: amzn.to/2WvtLdH
Kodak Portra 160:
35mm: amzn.to/2FJyzW3
120: amzn.to/2U7gVpj
4x5: amzn.to/2FGNG2B
8x10: amzn.to/2FGOswD
Kodak Portra 400:
35mm: amzn.to/2WEQnZq
120: amzn.to/2WEQKDi
4x5: amzn.to/2WERckY
8x10: amzn.to/2HQFdx9
Kodak Portra 800:
35mm: amzn.to/2HRwP0s
120: amzn.to/2JYhjBZ
Fuji C200 in 35mm: amzn.to/2HSskme
Fuji Superia in 35mm: amzn.to/2JXbncb
Fuji 400H:
35mm: amzn.to/2U7rHMh
120: amzn.to/2HR1Hy5
Black and white film:
Ilford Hp5:
35mm: amzn.to/2JXC8NL
120: amzn.to/2HRUJJm
4x5: amzn.to/2WAPsJj
Ilford Fp4:
35mm: amzn.to/2WCZNob
120: amzn.to/2WDQeVU
4x5: amzn.to/2uADrYy
Kodak Trix:
35mm: amzn.to/2uBoOEg
120: amzn.to/2WGI7Ip
4x5: amzn.to/2HQY2As
Kodak Tmax 400:
35mm: amzn.to/2HOUNJX
120: amzn.to/2JWgfyc
4x5 50 sheets: amzn.to/2WEHuiA
Kodak Tmax 100:
35mm: amzn.to/2CJd8Uf
120: amzn.to/2FQ6uhb
4x5 50 sheets: amzn.to/2HSZLVK
Kodak Tmax P3200: amzn.to/2WJ7p8R
Developing gear:
Developing tank: amzn.to/2HPw6Nj
Changing Bag: amzn.to/2U9AQny
My video gear:
My "Store": www.amazon.com/shop/nicosphot...
Main Camera: amzn.to/2CMZJdS
B Camera: amzn.to/2EM3wMa
Good mic: amzn.to/2CHbKCD
Small mic: amzn.to/2CEjOEa
Lav mic: amzn.to/2CFGZ0J
Recorder: amzn.to/2qf5CK9
Disclaimer: This video contains affiliate links, which means if you click on one of the product links I may receive a small commission. This is a great way to support this RUclips channel at no additional cost to you.
#nicosphotographyshow #filmphotography #film
I counted on 220 for every wedding I photographed on film from '84 to '02. It meant 90 frames to start each day with a 2&2 insert/back setup on Mamiya m645 and later Bronica ETRS/Si. I never had a film assistant, so 220 film was crucial. No, I never stopped any of the 500+ jobs just to be able to reload. 🤣 IMHO, if all-film pro wedding photography is ever to be realistic, Cinestill needs to succeed with 400D to a point where Kodak says, "OK, let's bring back 220 Portra 400." I wish Cinestill well!
It’s a very nice idea to offer 220 as an option. Having it as an end of a road, last squeeze, at the end of a preordering campaign was a very weird move from Cinestill. Why keeping this in the drawer until 4x5 goal is achieved? If they don’t achieve the last goal I hope they analyze this properly. It was not a problem with Demand but just a bad move from their side.
I hope some other film manufactures make their popular stocks in 220 again. Ilford HP5 and Delta 100/400 in 220 would be very useful.
I’m glad to see more film formats being developed. Now we need to #bringback126film for the millions of Instamatic 126 cameras out there. Imagine Kodak ProImage 100 in 126 format? The perfect ISO! Instantly a million Instamatic cameras are viable again. We have 110, why not 126? It would be a smash hit! 🙏🏻
Hey Nico. thanks for sharing a great topic. It is great to see Cinestill launch 400D and in 220! I do have 4 rolls of FujiFilm Velvia 100 220 remaining and use them on my RB67 6x8 film back on special occasions. Interestingly my film lab charges me the same as a 120 roll. However, now that 220 will gain popularity I believe my luck with the film lab will change.
Who ever needed to change the roll after just 12 shots, when it is freezing cold, will appreciate this product. Cinestill is a great company, their TCS is a huge help, their C-41 packs and their monobath developer Df96 are great. Perhaps their solutions are not for everyone, but for those who can use these products it is great to have them in the community! PS: ALL reels for developing tanks will take 220 films (or 2 x 120 films, if you are careful).
I think it’s exciting. I’d love to order through cinestill as part of the preorder but postage to Australia is ridiculous. Will be buying from my local though once it’s out.
It's not coming out bro
I shot 220 film on a Hasselblad during weddings back in the late 70s for the same reasons you mentioned. It was a timesaver. I still have some 220 E100 in my refrigerator and have the backs to shoot it on my medium format cameras. I would be happy if they made XX or other BW films in 220 since I don’t shoot much color anymore.
You should put it on ebay and get rich lol
Nico Nico Nico! You're the man! It's so funny you stopped your Sister's wedding to reload film. "I love the smell of film" 😄 I want more 220 film as well that would make life twice as good. Thanks for showing us. I wasn't cringing, I was enjoying every second of this video. Thanks for being so prolific
Thanks for the informative discussion and demonstration. You make really good points about developing and cost, particularly lower chemistry cost for home development and time savings. Cheers!
i was always shooting 220 film and 70mm (Tri-X, Ektachrome, Velvia and Astia. In 6x4,5 it means 32 shots (220) and 100-120 shots on 70mm very pretty for traveler photography and much cheaper in use specially when you make slides.
Thank you for showing me how this film looks inside!
The cost of production for a given film in 220 should be less expensive than for 120, not requiring the duplication of backing and packaging. My vague recollection from the days when many professional films were sold in both 120 and 220 is that such savings were not passed along in any degree to the end-user. While it remains to be seen, I'm not holding my breath for that to happen with Cinestill, or Kodak should they get back into the 220 game. More likely, they will surcharge the 220 roll price on the theory that they are doing us some sort of special favor just to make it available. As for the inherent virtue of 220 roll format. if I am shooting a MF camera lacking mid-roll interchangeable film backs, and I am not shooting a large number of frames quickly (like a wedding), then I'd use 120 just so I could clear the film from the camera more quickly to option shifting to another type of film. Remember that 220 consumption was almost exclusively by commercial photographers, and those guys are all doing that work with digital equipment these days.
Not all of us- there are many film/hybrid wedding photographers who would really love 220. Digital is absolutely more common, of course, but if Kodak offered Portra 400 or 800 in 220, I'd be so happy.
@@jen43072 As I reviewed my comment before posting, I realized I'd probably get your response. I think you would agree that the number of fashion, general commercial and product/catalog photographers shooting film these days is so rare as to be practically zero. I suspect, based only on my assumptions of what customers want, that there are only a small percentage of wedding film users. Certainly as a percentage, and probably as a matter of volume of consumption, there is insufficient market potential for 220 roll film to draw a Kodak or Fuji back into 220 production. As for Cinestill, it seems to be a company designed around marketing in relatively small volumes of resold product at relatively high prices. I give them credit for putting a twist on someone else's product for resale, creating just enough real or perceived value added to allow them to take a profit out of the product turnover, but selling a Vision 3 ISO 250 film at ISO 400 isn't going to trigger a landslide of market demand to restore 220 as a common film format. If Ilford where to jump the shark and suddenly start offering their B&W films in 220, either at normal retail or though there annual special order program, that would be news.
Thank you! I got on a tear about this a few weeks ago, and had no idea we'd be having this discussion so quickly. I really hope either they can make this goal, or that they'll produce it anyway. They'll be over 500 orders of 2 or 5 rolls of 220 on the campaign either way ... not bad for a format people were pretty dismissive of just a few weeks ago! Especially since people's budgets have been tapped out by the rest of the campaign and by Gold 120.
In the old days I used 120 for general photography and 220 for weddings. At the time I used a Mamiya C220. It would be nice to see 220 come back.
Key expression, Nico, ‘I love the smell of film.’ But you must add, ‘Smells like the victory of film over digital.’ Apocalypse Now referenced.
I had 2 Yashica Mats back in the 1960s as a wedding photographer.
I never used 220. I could change a 120 film on the hoof while chatting with the bride and groom.
I used Tri x.
Get better at reloading.
Thanks for the explanation!
I still have several rolls of Orwo NP20 in 220, I love shooting it in a Pentacon Six where you can actually get 26 shots.
👍Thanks Nico...On hearing the possibility of 220 film being available again I got my Bronica ETRS gear out of the display cabinet only to remember I sold the 220 film back last year 🤔
Oh well never mind, I've still got the Pentax 6x7 😁
I shot a lot of 220 film in the past, I guess film flatness was also better than with the 120 film paper sandwich running through the back.
I definitely noticed smoother film advance with motor driven cameras.
The only issue I had was to hang the film very high when drying due to the huge length, even longer than 36 frames 135 film.
great idea, esp. for Mamiya shooters too, as the RB/RZ 67 and the press/universal has backs which can take this, as they are multi-format (the press cameras, that is), so you can resurect these wonderful cameras, and have the choice of a longer roll of film, a bit like 36 exposure 35 mm film rolls as compared to the standard 24 exposure rolls; sure, it takes longer to shoot one roll, but as you mention, for weddings, events ( like air shows, concerts) having the ability to shoot for longer, and not reload as frequently, is a fantastic concept, esp. if you consider the 6x9 and 6x12/6x17 panoramic formats, where you only get 4-8 shots a roll, and less if your technique involves bracketing exposures!!, so this would resurect the Fuji G/Gx 680, the hasselblad x-pan and some other purpose built panoramic cameras, as NOW with this roll size it makes shooting worthwile, not loading every 10 minutes!!
I have a Hasselbald 500CM , is it possible to shoot 220 film in A16 camera back made for 120 film ?
7:26 was hurt to watch but thank you 😂
I’m not mentally prepared for 220 film.
Do have to buy more sleeves or just double stack them in the 120 sleeve ?
Do I have to learn how to shoot 24 frames instead of 2 120 rolls?
Do I invest in a A24 back for my Hasselblad even tho there’s no official film yet?
I think it’s good to say and make sure everybody knows, all Cinestill film is Kodak film, don’t let them fool you with marketing 🤷♂️
I’m excited to have this 220 film option for my Fuji GW690 ii 😂
I did order the twin pack of 400D in 220. If you're using a Hasselblad H camera, the back can take both 120 and 220 film.
"I love the smell of film"...I love it! You're a laugh Nico. Yep all for it yep expensive esp with postage but we need to support things like this if we want to see them back in production. I have a 220 back for my bonny etrsi and if I don't see more 220 film soon I'm going to roll my own from 70mm ... I already roll 120 ...how much harder can it be? 😀
I just hope Ilford start production of 220 film. Here’s hoping….🤞🏻
Thank you for the sacrificial offering Nico, I've never seen 220
Recent news, Cinestill failed with their 220 project.
I subscribed to the campaign and they sent me the double amount of 120 rolls as compensation.
They said that it was not possible to manufacture 220 at a decent price.
They will continue showing it there is a possibility in the future
I’ve never had problems with cinestill but they get consistent criticism online for quality control issues. From what I have heard from older photographers, 220 is efficient, but there are downsides and I’m not certain it will help cinestill’s reputation. Besides, there are well-established and successful photographers I follow who scoff at the price.
I always used 220 back when it was available. It was nice getting 24 exposures on a roll. Hopefully this will be a start of the return of 220. There seems to be more 220 backs than 120 backs for Bronica SQ.
Great News!
I have 220 film but nothing to shoot it in. My rolleichord does not shoot it even though I was told it did when i bought it. You can shoot it in a Holga or Diana with adapters but even then a pain to do.
I have several A24 magazines, and even an A32. .. which is a 6x4.5 format magazine for 220 film. = 32 x 4.5 frames.
you selling any of that gold 400 ? id take a punt on it for a practicce , and knowingly dodgy look , everyone needs practice might be a way for some of us out there to support the channel ?
was hoping cinestill would reach 220 , but I blew my budget on a brick of 35 and a brick of 120 , had I known I might of saved half to support 220. and get it across the line , feel like they should have just offered it early on but hey it is the way it is ,
Wish I could back the 220 production but the shipping costs they have going are crazy to the UK.
Hopefully they can hit the goal so I can buy locally later
Nice video 👌 god job
Shot a roll of GP3 yesterday, another in the GW for today:) 18 shots for 6x8. Anxious to see the results in Black, White, and Green - the new xtol-like developer from Flic Film. I sure hope to see my order for 400D in 220 come through in time for xmas!
Enjoy the worst film ever made, in terms of manufacturing quality.
@@user-ti9zc1xv2b I've shot other rolls of their 120 back probably 2015, and then more recently in 2021. The early 120 rolls were hit and miss - 3 of 5 had QA issues and I think they were hand-rolled. The more recent rolls from 6 months ago were solid 5-for-5. I know the 35mm was a later offering from them and I read that it had issues, but I've never shot that.
As for results - steep curves - definitely contrasty with blown highlights. Switching to DD-X helped a *lot* vs Rodinal back then. The Xtol-like Flic Film B, W, & G developer I'm going to use should produce even better results.
If your dislike was due to the relatively weak latitude, I could see that. This film reminds me of older emulsions, where the shadows crush easy and skies go white. The bad rolls I had were due to a combination of hand rolling and imperfections in the emulsion. The latest rolls were solid.
I don't have any need for 220 film. In contrary, if 220 would be available as easily as 120, I wouldn't buy it. I generally don't do machine-gun picture taking, and definitely not when I'm out with an analog medium format camera, and I very rarely do more than one roll of 120 film or two a day when I'm out shooting. I also don't really believe that there are still many professional wedding or sports photographers out there whose clients are willing to pay the price for medium format analog photography. The only use case for 220 nowadays is in fact the rare off-civilization traveler who insists on taking his pictures in analog medium format and can spare the space for some additional 20 or 50 rolls of 120 for some more water or food due to using 220 film (or some similar adventurers).
I'm very skeptical that there really is a relevant market for 220 film out there. I'd rather see some more money invested in additional 120 film emulsions.
Indeed
Watch Nico enjoying the smell of film 🎞 at 7:44 :)
Is there any place a photographer can purchase 220 film?
Reflx Lab has recently announced 220 film. A quick google to their name should take you to their shop.
Whew that was close - nearly sold my Yashica 24!
Myself, I would like to see some 70mm double perf films... currently only Ilford makes HP5 in this format during their annual ULF order
What would you shoot it in?
Hasselblad and Mamiya had 70mm backs
Also Pentax 645, Linhof and Bronica etrs
I'm still waiting for the elusive 120mm that everyone keeps talking about.
My Kiev 6c gives me a little dial to change from 12 to 24
I never thought of putting two rolls of 120 onto the same reel till now 😓
I'm another person in the market for 220 for whichever manufacturer starts making it. I'm not going to complain about twice the cost if I'm getting twice the shots. I know I;m going to be shooting more than 8 shots on my camera, I don't want to have to change the rolls as often.
Also, no problem sacrificing a 220 for demonstration purposes. I don't think I've ever seen a video on youtube of how 220 is constructed, now it's here documented for everybody so nobody else ever has to sacrifice a roll. 😄
I'll buy it and the price for a used Linhof Technorama just got higher I would expect... 🙈
Seeing someone expose film like that always hurts. It's just emotional.
Producers didn't want to charge 20$ for a roll
*laughs in 2022 prices*
Times are changing :')
Exactly.
"we scrap them and is an expensive process"
Harman Tech
I was so surprised when 220 film got discontinued some years ago. To me it didn’t make any sense, 220 is cheaper, easier to carry gives you more shots and so much more practical than 120 imo.
Their website shows it at 92% but all of the options are "Unavailable"
Campaign ended a day ago. It will be available soon, but no 220.
@@NicosPhotographyShow DOH! I missed it by a day.
Best quote of the year: 7:48 Someone please meme this.
My local lab charges the same price for both 120/220 rolls so that's why I've been shooting more 220 rolls. I'm all for 400D in 220 but my goodness that price is a bit of a chokehold.
That will likely change if 220 becomes more common. I work at a lab and we currently charge the same because we get so little. But it does exhaust twice as much developer, and our 220 price will go up when it has to.
@@GregoryVeizades lmao. Hi Greg. It's JP again.
And not to mention many have capability to shoot 220 already. Like my camera can choose between 120 and 220.
I’ll take your gold 220 if you think 1990’s is too expired to shoot haha. My vericolor expired in 1984 gave me great results
"Porta would be $32 a roll" no big deal that's just the cost of Velvia 50 in 35mm now 😎😭
39.99 for a 120 5-pack if you are willing to buy a 10 month expired box
@@Emma-zk6it from where? eBay?
@@elleoat Dwayne's photo
@@Emma-zk6it thanks, I just ordered some.
@@elleoat you're welcome
Definetly I miss Portra 160 220. Te adicional cost is absolutamente irrelevant. My thing is Aerial oblique photography and midle format vertical survey, 4 or more pentax 67 preloaded cameras are a must. So 120 siempre is really a pain considering the time consumed reloading versus Airplane horas cost. Beg and cross fingers for 220 come Back!
Thank the opportunity to express my feelings.
.
And I gave away my 220 insert for my Mamiya 645 😞
But hey Cinestill is way to expensive anyway 😅
GW690～～～woot woot
Film is not dead.
Very neat talk but the amount of users can't sustain 220 because there aren't alot of cameras that support 220 but all 120 cameras support 120
I'd say 90% of medium format cameras support 120 and 220 very few only support 120 since 220 was a common and availible format
@@A_Man_Of_Culture_ the pressure plate has to be adjustable
@@A_Man_Of_Culture_ most cameras with interchangeable backs need the 220 back and then most older TLRs have no support for 220
LOL. 220 is impossible to find these days. Damn hipsters are driving up the prices of everything.
I gagged at $100 for 5 rolls.... $75 would be a lot more budget friendly....
Given that B&W is far more popular than colour for film photography (and is much simpler to develop and print at home), it's a bit strange that CineStill launched a campaign to bring back 220 colour, rather than B&W.
I dislike 220, it's like perversion of 120. And all these light leaks on horizontal edges as a norm :) But whatever.
Meh-mees is actually pronounced meems, Nico.
In spanish we say it meh-mees, so being spanish I always say stuff “wrong”, sorry.
@@NicosPhotographyShow All good then Nico, as you were... : )