While I hate dust as much as the next person, this interests me for the convenience. When I printed in the darkroom, I had to spot each print. Now that I scan, I spot once and I'm done, so dust is arguably a bit less frustrating.
While metal and plastic multi-sheet film holders were in use and later the paper Quickloads too, nobody went into manufacturing re-loadable paper film holders? Why? The weight advantage was always there - or was it? The reason was that paper holders, especially used many times, produce a plenty of paper dust. Loading film into paper holders (or envelopes) introduces more dust on film than doing the same with metal or plastic multi-sheet film holders. To make a reusable paper holder as dust free as metal o plastic holders you would need to use special hardened paper - but then you can make them directly of plastic with almost no weight disadvantage... Quickchange decided for plastic...
While somebody doesn't care, any user of paper re-loadable sheet film holders will soon realize that the advantage of Quickloads dust free film is taken away. Joanna knows that. Some don't care, some do.
Now you're just repeating yourself.
For my use the dust-free aspect of factory packaged Quickloads and Readyloads is almost entirely moot. I'm after savings in weight, and even more critically, bulk.
I'll wait and see what Johanna produces, and if it fits my needs. I agree that dust is a *possible* problem, but I don't see why that should discourage her from trying.
I don't think Joanna gets discouraged by something she already knows...
Good luck! I think that you're doing a wonderful thing!
None of Joanna's posts in this thread say the envelopes will be paper. Were I embarking on such a project, given that they will be reusable rather than disposable, I'd be investigating tough, electrically conductive plastic envelopes. No paper dust and no static to attract other dust. A white area would easily accept notes from a "Sharpie" pen that could be removed by a simple isopropyl alcohol wipe.