Using a stack cutter to cut down film(8x10-->5x7 in my case)

[Daniel Stone]

hey all,

Has anyone ever used(or does use still) a stack cutter to cut down film? In my case, I'm cutting down 8x10 to 5x7. I shoot color, so 5x7 color is a no-go anymore, unless you cut it down or buy in on a special-order run. Not a huge problem using a rotatrim(which I've been doing thus far), but definitely something I'd like to save time on in the long-run, since 20 sheets takes me ~1hr to do. Not fun... I'd probably cut down 80-100 sheets of 8x10 in a 'session', not all in one pass/cut. More like 10 sheets(sandwiched between the outer cardboard, for protection) of 8x10 at a time.

101797


thx,
Dan

[frotog]

Canham does frequent special orders of 5x7. Unless you're shooting lots of different emulsions it might be a wiser bet to stock up with what you need with one special order.
Alternatively you could look into having a die punch made. The problem with the stack cutter lies in the tiny amount that needs to be removed from the 10" axis. Also, a good yale stack cutter with a fresh blade is not cheap. The chinese knock-off's on ebay are not worth it.

[mdm]

Sounds good. I just use a rotary cutter to cut my 5x7 and whole plate film.

[Daniel Stone]

Canham does frequent special orders of 5x7. Unless you're shooting lots of different emulsions it might be a wiser bet to stock up with what you need with one special order.
Alternatively you could look into having a die punch made. The problem with the stack cutter lies in the tiny amount that needs to be removed from the 10" axis. Also, a good yale stack cutter with a fresh blade is not cheap. The chinese knock-off's on ebay are not worth it.

Yes, this is nice and all. Getting in on 5x7 S.O.'s DOES work, however, most of my 8x10 color film I've purchased in case-qty's, at VASTLY lower prices than current going retail. So I certainly have a reason to DIY, since I'm saving a great deal of $$$ per sheet. Also, I'm still working through a large stash of 160VC 8x10 I have, but am certainly experimenting with Ektar 100. So far it seems to be a great film, but has some persnickety characteristics that I still have to iron out. Drew Wiley's recommendation mentioned multiple x's here on the forum regarding the use of warming filters; it certainly is recommended. But in most conditions, Ektar when properly exposed(I've found using ASA 50 yields the best negatives FOR ME) and processed normally(3:15), I get very good results.

But I also enjoy shooting transparency film a good deal(I have a stash of E100G, but am purchasing/using Provia as well, in addition to a few other emulsions, like EPR64)...

I'd love to have "1 film" to use, that would certainly make things simpler. But I shoot different films for different end results. All will be scanned and digitally printed for output(if I decide to print them that is), but they each render things differently. And sometimes I just feel like doing things in a bit of "crazy" ways ;)...

so DIY cutting is what works for me, I'm just interested in speeding up the process a bit :D

[Colin Graham]

No reason it shouldn't work if it's a good cutter with a decent clamping bar and a square fence. I routinely cut 3-5 sheets at a time with a lowly rotary cutter. But I'd want to test it with a stack of reject negatives first. The action of the cutter will probably want to pull the stack out of position.

Anyway, good idea. Did you have a particular cutter in mind? It would be nice to cut an entire box at once.

[Drew Wiley]

It's pretty hard to keep a full stack of thin film from slipping sideways a bit when the cutter comes down. An ordinary stripper bar is probably inadequate and you
might need to develop a two-sided retainer box (as opposed to that little triangle on the unit I sent you), then make a sold pressure platin with slip-resistant
textured silicone rubber sheeting applied to some kind of solid heavy block material (avail from McMaster). I'll bet there's some kind of commercial unit somewhere
that just needs to be modified, but you'd probably have to hunt for it under graphics arts used equip rather than photo gear. I doubt group orders for 5x7 film are
going to be realistic from Kodak except for things like Portra 160 and TMax400.

[Daniel Stone]

-snip-
I doubt group orders for 5x7 film are going to be realistic from Kodak except for things like Portra 160 and TMax400.

My point exactly... Tmax 400 and Portra 160 ARE great emulsions, but 160 is too low-contrast for my tastes, most of the time. Yes, digital post is an "option", but Ektar 100 + Portra 160VC are great when I need/want to shoot C-41.
I LOVE shooting chrome, and to my knowledge, cutting down 8x10 is now the only way to get it easily.
Not shooting much b/w these days, and when I do, it's usually in my GX680's. And with 120, my options are easy pickin's :D

Drew, thank you again for the cutter, I've successfully sliced down close to 60 sheets of 8x10 thus far, so I have a working supply at-hand right now. But I want to increase that for this upcoming trip. Maybe just shutting myself into the bathroom at night will be the best option(no windows) going forward. At least until I've moved out of my place at the end of this month. An hour a night cutting down film isn't THAT bad I guess.

-Dan

[frotog]

Realistic? Why wouldn't it be? Of course it's realistic and it will continue to be so until kodak stops making color film. Canham placed an order for portra 400 about 2 months ago. I asked him in June if he'd run another order for the 400 and he reached the kodak minimum amount in a little over a month which surprised him as he had just fulfilled a large order of the same a couple months prior. With photographers like Paolo Roversi, An-My Le and Massimo Vitali using this emulsion enough to reach a minimum order on their own with alarming frequency, I don't see any problem with availability in the coming years.

[Drew Wiley]

We're talking about 5x7 sheets here, frotog, not 8x10. I takes a LOT more patience to put together a min order cut of 5x7 color film than 8x10, and always has.

[Daniel Stone]

I remember the Portra 400 5x7 order, a bloke here was looking for bodies w/ cash, IIRC.

If I didn't have a stockpile of 8x10 color film already at-hand(most purchased for way below current market prices per sheet), I'd have bought into it.

-Dan

[Drew Wiley]

I'd be careful about putting all your eggs in one basket until you get comfortable between the very real distinctions between Portra 160, 400, Ektar, and the
remaining chrome films. I'd have chosen the 5x7 format a long time ago - I love the proportions - unless it was for the difficulty getting color film that size in this
country all along. I still have a whole bunch of outdated discount 8x10 chrome film still in the freezer which I might never find a use for, some of it tungsten
balanced. It might be fine a month of so after it's thawed; but old film seems to lose balance a lot faster afterwards. No big deal. I paid next to nothing for it.