16mm overspooling, get 3 minutes from a "100 foot" daylight spool?

[Vic Morris]

A person I know claims he rolls his own, and can get 3 minutes from a 100 foot
Kodak daylight spool. He says he can get 115 feet on spool. 5 feet is lost in
the loading process, leaving 110 feet.

16mm film travels at 36 feet a minute, at 24 frames per second. So 110 feet
should run 3.06 minutes. Considering some tail end loss that gives 3 minutes!

Anyone try loading this way. He claims it works but I have yet to see results.
My worry would be how the film stock would handle the rewinding.

Would some emulsion flake off? Any other issues?

I have about 2500 feet in 16mm short ends and would like to try this...

Peace,
Vic

[J. Theakston]

Post by Vic Morris
A person I know claims he rolls his own, and can get 3 minutes from a 100 foot
Kodak daylight spool. He says he can get 115 feet on spool. 5 feet is lost in
the loading process, leaving 110 feet.
16mm film travels at 36 feet a minute, at 24 frames per second. So 110 feet
should run 3.06 minutes. Considering some tail end loss that gives 3 minutes!
Anyone try loading this way. He claims it works but I have yet to see results.
My worry would be how the film stock would handle the rewinding.
Would some emulsion flake off? Any other issues?
I have about 2500 feet in 16mm short ends and would like to try this...
Peace,
Vic

Your friend is an imbisile. An esoteric one at that.

-J. Theakston

[Vic Morris]

Post by J. Theakston
Your friend is an imbisile. An esoteric one at that.
-J. Theakston

"A person I know"... Doesn't mean they're a friend. But why the character
judgement?

For people who have 16mm short ends hanging around, and shoot with 16mm
equipment that takes 100 foot spools, being able to shoot for 3 minutes before
re-loading would be nice.

3 minutes is only alittle bit less than 4 minutes (about what you get with a
full 400 foot mag in 35mm).

Why the hostility? Did you try it, find it handy, and not want to share your
experience? What gives?

Peace,
Vic

[John Anastasio]

If you're going to insult someone, at least learn how to spell the words
you're going to use, otherwise people will think you're an imbicile.

Post by Vic Morris

Post by J. Theakston
Your friend is an imbisile. An esoteric one at that.
-J. Theakston

"A person I know"... Doesn't mean they're a friend. But why the character
judgement?
For people who have 16mm short ends hanging around, and shoot with 16mm
equipment that takes 100 foot spools, being able to shoot for 3 minutes before
re-loading would be nice.
3 minutes is only alittle bit less than 4 minutes (about what you get with a
full 400 foot mag in 35mm).
Why the hostility? Did you try it, find it handy, and not want to share your
experience? What gives?
Peace,
Vic

[J. Theakston]

Post by Vic Morris

Post by J. Theakston
Your friend is an imbisile. An esoteric one at that.
-J. Theakston

"A person I know"... Doesn't mean they're a friend. But why the character
judgement?
For people who have 16mm short ends hanging around, and shoot with 16mm
equipment that takes 100 foot spools, being able to shoot for 3 minutes before
re-loading would be nice.
3 minutes is only alittle bit less than 4 minutes (about what you get with a
full 400 foot mag in 35mm).
Why the hostility? Did you try it, find it handy, and not want to share your
experience? What gives?

Sorry. I was reading your post wrong. It came off as he was trying
to fit
115 feet onto a projection spool and making it sound like an event...
not a difficult task.

I would not recommend jamming film onto a roll as possible. Besides
the fact that you CAN damage the emulsion, with the amount of movement
that goes on PLUS the fact that the takeup is not meant to handle any
more than its maximum capacity, it is sheer luck that the camera did
not jam on him. 5-10 feet doesn't make too much difference, but any
more than that is probably going to overfeed the takeup.

-J. Theakston

[Scott Dorsey]

Post by J. Theakston
I would not recommend jamming film onto a roll as possible. Besides
the fact that you CAN damage the emulsion, with the amount of movement
that goes on PLUS the fact that the takeup is not meant to handle any
more than its maximum capacity, it is sheer luck that the camera did
not jam on him. 5-10 feet doesn't make too much difference, but any
more than that is probably going to overfeed the takeup.

Well, in fact, if you buy a "100 foot" spool from Kodak, it normally has
110 feet on it so you have some head and tail for fog protection. Getting
115 feet onto the reel is still within the SMPTE spec with most films.
--scott

[Clive Tobin]

The experts like Clive Tobin and David Mullen might be able to answer

further.

A 100' camera spool factory-loaded actually has 109 feet of film, with the
extra 5 feet of leader and 4 feet of trailer giving some protection against
loading and unloading fog in subdued light. So 115 feet is only about an
extra 6 feet, which in practice is likely right up to the rim of the spool,
and likely to spill and get fogged and scratched as others have mentioned.

Home spooling of film is not a great idea since you are likely to pick up
dust and hairs which will cast a shadow on the exposed images, or lodge in
the gate. Also you have to wind the film twice to get the edge numbers (and
perforations in single perf) back on the correct edge.

If you insist on doing it, we used to figure that 46-1/2 turns of the crank
of an HFC rewind would give the correct length. For it to make any sense,
you would have to start out with a 1200' length of film to get 11 full
length loads out of it without waste or short ends.

(These remarks are offered free of charge to celebrate my being mentioned in
the same breath as Mr. David Mullen, ASC.) :-)

Clive Tobin
www.TobinCinemaSystems.com

[Scott Dorsey]

Post by Vic Morris
A person I know claims he rolls his own, and can get 3 minutes from a 100 foot
Kodak daylight spool. He says he can get 115 feet on spool. 5 feet is lost in
the loading process, leaving 110 feet.

This is about right. If you use Estar camera stock, it's a little thinner
and you can get even more.

Post by Vic Morris
16mm film travels at 36 feet a minute, at 24 frames per second. So 110 feet
should run 3.06 minutes. Considering some tail end loss that gives 3 minutes!

Sure, that'f dine.

Post by Vic Morris
Anyone try loading this way. He claims it works but I have yet to see results.
My worry would be how the film stock would handle the rewinding.

I've been doing it for a few decades. The only major worry is that you now
have turned your B-wind into A-wind (and even if it's DP, the edge numbers
are now on the wrong side), so you really should wind it from one core onto
another and then spool down.

Post by Vic Morris
I have about 2500 feet in 16mm short ends and would like to try this...

As far as I know, everyone using daylight spools in any quantity does this.
--scott