OT: Bulk loading to save money

The short answer is, do you care about $1 OR $2 a week?

The long answer is, consider the investment in a bulk loader, reusable cassettes, the time it takes to load into the cassettes, etc. In the future, I think this may be one of the directions film takes. ie. Bulk purchases, via the internet from who knows where, and load to your hearts content. At present, it probably is not a significant advantage, but in the future it may be one of the only ways.

BTW, I currently do it for B/W film, but have given up doing it for colour because my preferred colour films are not readily available in bulk. It is not an easy call, but I suggest a mix 'n match approach at present.

Works for me.

Also, you can roll odd amounts of exposures (30 to a roll is what I do). Makes for nice contact sheets.

I'm doing it right now, Neopan 400 from Megaperls in a 100ft bulk loader. USD 32 for approx. 20 rolls gives me USD 1.6/roll - if I could find Neopan 400 for USD 2.6/roll I might not be bothered, but Fuji b&w is almost unobtainable in Europe, leave alone at these prices. A wonderful emulsion and, as mentioned before, bulk loading might soon become the only affordable way to go, anyway.

Been doing it for 45-50 years. Two problems. The tail is always fogged so you can put exposures there if the film counter is not watched. The second is plastic cassetts don`t seem to work in screw, m r bodies. Oh yes, a third. Cassets in the stores are filthy dirty so you need to order from B and H. You will get clean ones. Dirt is the true enemy of home loads.

The current design Watson loader is the best.

You can work entirely in the dark and avoid problem #1 and deciding which loader is best.

And there's the convenience factor of always being able to spool up a roll and go. Friends who have abandoned bulk loading have given me their loaders so I have a few and keep three of them full with different films.

Of course, having a spare card for your digicam moots the need for a convenient source of film....

Let's see: one roll a week, that's 52 rolls a year, give or take. That's $52 saved. You'll need about four 100 ft rolls for that. Depending on the roller you have, it may take you at least a whole day in all, if not more, to bulk roll those four rolls, what with the loading, the rolling, the cutting of the leader (which you need to do if you have a Leica with the "tulip" spool on the receiving end), the marking of the cassettes (unless you shoot only one kind of film), etc...

So, it amounts to a whole day of work for $52. How does that compare to your salary or wages or fees or whatever? $52 a year? Don't do it for the money.

But do it for the fun, the relaxation, for not having to go to the store every time you need a few rolls, and for the convenience of rolling different length cassettes.

I've been doing it just about from the beginning, back in 1961. It's saved a lot of money over the years, lets me use Leica cassettes, and also use films that were only available in bulk. I used to use Kodak Royal-X Pan Recording Film which wasn't spooled in cassettes by Kodak, and I've gone through a lot of motion picture stock like Double-X ISO 250 and XT Pan ISO 40 which I liked better than Panatomic-X.

I get about 19 36 exp. rolls from a 100 ft. roll. I just go in the darkroom and do it by hand, no loader. Including trimming leaders it takes under two hours, closer to one really, so the saving is significant. When figuring the savings base it on your after tax cost, what's left after all your taxes are with held, not your gross pay. You don't pay income tax on money you save.

I roll my own. It's really not that much trouble. I typically load up several rolls while I'm watching TV, so it's not like I'm expending valuable time loading cassettes.

Thanks everyone. I guess I'll just shelve this for now. I'll probably reconsider this option later down the road.

By the way, what do these special Leica cassettes do, Al?