How do you reshoot exposed 120 film in another camera for double exsposures?

[eddy_d]

Hello. I looked on youtube but did not find anything. I tried it a few times but the film got jammed. So if I shoot a roll of 120 in a Holga and then want to reshoot in the Holga or another medium format camera how would I do it? Thanks in advance.

Edited March 13, 2023 by eddy_d

[AJG]

You will need to wind your film back onto the original 120 spool in a darkroom or changing bag.  120 film is attached with tape at the beginning of the roll to the backing paper.  If you try to run a finished roll through a camera without winding it back it will probably hang up when the unattached film end reaches the film gate.  Be aware that even if you rewind the film onto the original spool that it will be difficult to line up images exactly when you double expose it in the second camera if that is important to you.

[John Seaman]

Yes if you don't rewind the film on to an empty  spool, the untaped end will jam as soon as it meets the film gate. Even if it doesn't, the pictures will be upside down - unless you hold the camera that way.

It's a good idea  to practice the rewinding with a scrap film.

[glen_h]

It is somewhat usual now to rewind 120 film onto 620 spools, as the latter are

not in production.  (Not so hard to find old ones, though.)

 

As above, the trick is that it is only taped on the beginning, and when you wind

from the end, it is hard to get exactly right. 

The first thing that happens, and since it is dark it is harder to know to expect.

As you wind the backing paper, the film follows the outside, not the inside.

Once you find the end, you tuck it into the paper that is being spooled.

 

Maybe the best way is to spool it until you get to the tape, then remove the

tape, adjust as it isn't exactly right, and then tape it back on.  This will make

a tiny offset when you reload the film, hopefully not too far off.

[John Seaman]

8 hours ago, glen_h said:

Maybe the best way is to spool it until you get to the tape, then remove the

tape, adjust as it isn't exactly right, and then tape it back on.

I've re-wound 120 film loads of times and never found it necessary to do this.

[rodeo_joe1]

As already mentioned, even after rewinding the film onto its original spool, the frames aren't going to line up perfectly - or even close. 

Doubtless the end result is only going to be scanned to a digital image, so why not combine the images digitally? 

[Tony Parsons]

Wouldn't it be easier to shoot two rolls of film, then marry them up in the enlarger ?

[rodeo_joe1]

7 hours ago, Tony Parsons said:

Wouldn't it be easier to shoot two rolls of film, then marry them up in the enlarger ?

Always assuming the OP has a darkroom and enlarger. 

[Tony Parsons]

9 minutes ago, rodeo_joe1 said:

Always assuming the OP has a darkroom and enlarger. 

You mean some people don't ?

 

Oh.

 

 

[glen_h]

16 hours ago, John Seaman said:

I've re-wound 120 film loads of times and never found it necessary to do this.

I haven't done it so many times.

The one I remember has a lump in the roll where it gets to that point.

I never decided to use it, though, mostly because so far I have enough rolls.

 

Trying to imagine it now, if you have three hands, one to hold each spool,

and one to tuck the end in, maybe it isn't so hard. 

 

It might be harder onto a 620 spool, which the radius is smaller.

[John Seaman]

9 hours ago, glen_h said:

if you have three hands, one to hold each spool,

and one to tuck the end in

I think the key to it is to keep the two spools as close together as possible, then you have enough spare fingers to do the tucking in. And maintain tension between the spools, particularly after the tuck in, pulling the film tight on the receiving spool.

[glen_h]

2 hours ago, John Seaman said:

I think the key to it is to keep the two spools as close together as possible, then you have enough spare fingers to do the tucking in. And maintain tension between the spools, particularly after the tuck in, pulling the film tight on the receiving spool.

OK, I will have to try it that way. 

Does it really give zero offset?  Even 1/16 inch could make a lump when it gets to the tape.

 

When I was young, there was some company advertising free "Famous Brand" film,

which I understand was the actual brand "Famous Brand".  The choice included 620,

but not 120, and I thought about ordering one and respooling.  I never did, though.

But now we have to respool onto 620.

[rodeo_joe1]

4 hours ago, glen_h said:

But now we have to respool onto 620.

Have to? 

Surely the sensible thing to do would be to stop using obsolete cameras? There's plenty of alternative old cr*p out there! And one cheap meniscus lens is just as smudgy as the next.

[glen_h]

2 hours ago, rodeo_joe1 said:

Have to? 

Surely the sensible thing to do would be to stop using obsolete cameras? There's plenty of alternative old cr*p out there! And one cheap meniscus lens is just as smudgy as the next.

OK, don't have to.

Sometimes I am in the mood to use an old camera, though prefer one with at least a few aperture,

shutter, and focus settings.  And mostly those don't use 620 film.

And I do have some roll of VP620 that likely work, if I want to use them.

I was finding it interesting, though, that 50 years ago I thought about respooling

from 620 to 120, and now more likely the other way. 

Well, about that time I got into 35mm, so less interest in 120, and even more,

my enlarger only worked for 35mm.

 

But okay, a few years ago I put a roll of VPL120 into a Brownie 2, model F,

which does use 120 film.  One reason was suspecting that I was the first

person to try that combination of camera and film.  I had a type F filter

that I held in front of the lens, maybe close enough.  In case you don't

recognize it, it is a tungsten balanced C-41 film.

 

The Brownie has three aperture settings, the smallest of which might

be f/32.   The manual says never to use it with the I (instantaneous)

shutter setting.  You are supposed to use it with B, for indoor shots,

where you open the shutter a good fraction of a second.

 

But there was no ASA 400 film when it was made!  So, with a roll

of TMY120, and a nice sunny day, I got some shots with f/32.

And at f/32, the lens doesn't have to be all that good, to get

somewhat sharp pictures.

 

But yes, sometimes I am in the mood to use some strange combination

of old camera and film, just to do it. 

[chris_autio]

On 3/15/2023 at 4:30 PM, rodeo_joe1 said:

Always assuming the OP has a darkroom and enlarger. 

Or expose on a sheet of paper, reload enlarger with another neg, then reexpose sheet.

[glen_h]

Double exposing the negative has a different effect from double exposing the

print, but both could be useful.  Reminds me, though.

 

Consider taking two digital color images, and then adding them together.

That is, the digital equivalent of a double exposure.

 

Is there a mathematical operation that will separate them again? 

Consider that if you look at one, you can often figure out what parts go

together, especially when they are an unusual color. 

(I suspect it doesn't work in black and white.)

[rodeo_joe1]

On 3/24/2023 at 9:25 PM, glen_h said:

Consider taking two digital color images, and then adding them together.

That is, the digital equivalent of a double exposure.

Except digital 'double exposure' doesn't have to be a simple addition of lighter areas. There are a number of layering options available in most image editors, that can imitate either a camera double exposure, or one done in the enlarger. Or something that would be almost impossible to acheive optically. 

Edited March 26, 2023 by rodeo_joe1

[Ricochetrider]

With the Hasselblad V system cameras it’s possible to shoot double exposures without all the hoopla. Simply shoot a pic, then don’t wind the film forward in the film back. Put the dark slide in, remove the back, fire the camera, reset it, then reinstall the back and shoot the 2nd frame atop the previously exposed one. 
 

I did this by accident once. When I saw the developed film, I was like wtf? Then searched around the Web a bit to see how it happened. 
 

[rodeo_joe1]

On 3/29/2023 at 12:57 AM, Ricochetrider said:

Put the dark slide in, remove the back, fire the camera, reset it, then reinstall the back and shoot the 2nd frame atop the previously exposed one. 

That's not "all the hoopla"? 

With a decent rollfilm SLR, like a Mamiya, you just flip the 'Multi' lever and take a second (3rd, 4th, however many you like) exposure(s).

Same with practically every Nikon SLR ever made. 

No back removal nonsense needed!