I had it 27 years but I found the owners. . .

[alexvaras]

Good thought.

I concur.

[Philip]

By the way, in the fifteen years since I last developed any 122 film, has there been any improvement in the technology? I mean, the only way I was ever able to do it, the four or five times I did, was by long, arm-tiring, dip&dunk. It would be a huge improvement in my technique if there was a developing-spool system that would take 122 film!

Philip

[PFMcFarland]

Probably easier to convert the camera to 120 via some spool adapters, and film channel masks. That's what I'm going to do with my Ansco Buster Brown. You can always find old Kodak developing tanks, but I've never seen the spools for them. I'd think they were made of wood, and thus have disintegrated over the years.

PF

I knew as soon as I wrote that I'd probably be wrong.
https://www.ebay.com/itm/Vtg-KODAK-Meta ... SwpbVbY2rN
https://www.ebay.com/itm/ANTIQUE-KODAK- ... SwldZbEBZE

[Philip]

Michael Carter offers some hope for me in this video. I will try it. . .

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U483SKQKr1Y

.

[PFMcFarland]

A more elegant solution. I couldn't remember if Patterson reels would open up that far.

PF

[melek]

Here's a link to the CBC story:

» Story here

[alexvaras]

Thank you for sharing, wonderful story and ending!

[LarryD]

Outstanding story.

[Philip]

Thanks. Just to follow up -- in November, I met with the same people in the pictures, at the same place their picture had been taken 45 years ago, and used the same camera to take some shots. I told them that I wasn't sure it would work and they'd have to give me a few weeks or even months to work it out. And we agreed to meet next summer at the place where the archery shot was made. I'll try it again then if nothing comes of the roll I shot in November.

So, I have not yet developed the film I exposed. I've been thinking ever since about how I can easily develop it. My technique twenty years ago was the dip&dunk method which requires stronger shoulders than I think I have today. With extended developing time (to make up for the very old film) and adding in washes and fix, it took nearly forty-five minutes in the early or mid-1990s. That's 45 minutes of slowly and evenly dipping the five-foot length of film in trays of chemicals. Up right arm and down left. Up left arm and down right. Repeat. Repeat. Repeat. . . .

So I have thought about how to do it in a tank. I've done some rough tinkering with my Paterson tank & reel and have figured out (using 35mm canisters) how to extend the length of the tube that joins the two parts of the film spool. But as it is, it is not very solid, nor quite exact. Being loose, I can't expect the film to hold tight as I spool it it. So I need to work that out before I do any developing.

I keep wondering "How did people develop 122 film back before the 1970s?" There must have been hardware for the purpose. I've looked at several of the spools that have been available in the past forty years, but none of them is easily modifiable for 122 film. At least no more easily than the Paterson. I sure would like to find a better way.

[melek]

I would have thought that there was a processing reel for that size.

122 film supposedly was produced up until 1970, which was well after the dip and dunk. Maybe those were just sent through a commercial process with other roll films, and it was help by clips on either end and dragged through the chemicals.

I did find these on eBay:
https://www.ebay.com/itm/Vintage-Kodak- ... 2916314653

These allow you to use 120 film in a 122 camera. They are caps for the ends of 120 film.