Timeline for What was 70mm photography?
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
9 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mar 10, 2023 at 8:23 | comment | added | Jindra Lacko | The Apollo use case was very interesting, and unique. In many respects - both the camera, and the specially designed lenses, were extremely customized. The camera has no viewfinder nor mirror, and the lens made use of the space for a highly recessed design (it would not fit a regular Hassie; kind of like the first Nikon fisheyes). There was a need to cram as many exposures as possible into limited space. When more normal people used the 70mm film they shot it with a special back on their regular MF cameras, and enlarged using their regular frames for 6x6 or 6x4.5 or what not... | |
| Mar 10, 2023 at 0:45 | comment | added | Michael C | The reason NASA chose to use 116 film for 56x56mm negative size was to maximize the number of exposures in each film magazine. 116 format offered much larger magazines than 120 format. Using only 56mm (plus spacing between each exposed area) allowed even more exposures for the same length roll. Each magazine was pre-loaded before liftoff and not opened up until safely back in the photo lab in Houston. Kodak made a special emulsion, but they were able to use their existing machinery to spread it onto 116/616 film. Hasselblad only had to modify the camera's film gate and film advance distance. | |
| Mar 10, 2023 at 0:32 | comment | added | Michael C | The standard exposed width for 70mm 116/616 film was 63.5mm, or 13.4% larger than the standard 56mm width of 120/220 film. Exposed height running along the long axis of the film was up to 108mm, compared to 82.5mm for 120/220, or almost 31% larger in the long axis. That gave a maximum area of 48.4% more area for 116/616 70mm film over 120/220 film. | |
| Mar 10, 2023 at 0:20 | comment | added | Michael C | Negative size was NOT the same for 70mm and 120 film. 120 cameras had no standardized height (when ran through the camera vertically - they exposed anywhere from 1 5/8" to 3 1/4" image height depending on the camera using 120 film). 120 film had a total width of 2.5" (60.96mm) with an exposed width of 2.25" (56mm). 116/616 film (70mm still image format) was 70mm wide, including perforations, and exposed a width of 63.5mm up to 4.25" (108mm) in height. The specially designed 70mm cameras used on the Apollo missions had a smaller 56mm x 56mm film gate, but that was not standard for 70mm format. | |
| Dec 18, 2018 at 21:56 | comment | added | Jindra Lacko | The cartridge was highly inconvenient! It was huge, and the capacity was too big for professional use - 90 shots instead of 15 for the 645 format. Remember a pro had to finish the roll on time, have it processed and turn in the photos. Medium format was not for fast action, that was the realm of 135 format. | |
| Dec 18, 2018 at 19:36 | comment | added | MicroMachine | I shoot 120 all the time! Not sure why it's not in a cartridge - sounds like it would have been more convenient for users | |
| Dec 18, 2018 at 19:34 | comment | added | xiota | @MicroMachine Probably b/c 35mm dominated the consumer market. | |
| Dec 18, 2018 at 17:51 | comment | added | MicroMachine | Thanks! I’m very curious as why it didn’t replace 120 roll film since perfs and cartridge seem a better technology for mass markets...? | |
| Dec 18, 2018 at 17:48 | history | answered | Jindra Lacko | CC BY-SA 4.0 |