Some Interesting Intellectual Property on Film Holders

[mat4226]

Browsing the auction sites this morning and came across this piece of large format intellectual property:

http://www.ebay.com/itm/301654731206?_trksid=p2055119.m1438.l2649&ssPageName=STRK%3AMEBIDX%3AIT

For anybody out there looking to keep designing film holders, this could be useful, but maybe not $4500 useful?

[Sal Santamaura]

...this could be useful, but maybe not $4500 useful?That price might be appropriate for the molds (if not worn out), but I'm not sure drawings add much to what one finds in available ANSI standards for those film sizes.

[Jac@stafford.net]

What Sal said. The ANSI documents are less expensive. In this age, a correct CAD file might be useful.

[Drew Wiley]

The whole trick is buying the right materials in appropriate volume. Machining them is much easier nowadays. And there are more materials options. Molds are a bit costly, but no big deal. But market? I think it's there to a limited extent, if someone was willing to make this a labor of love. But don't expect to get rich, if you even manage to break even.

[koh303]

That price might be appropriate for the molds (if not worn out), but I'm not sure drawings add much to what one finds in available ANSI standards for those film sizes.

Most of not all of the tooling of fidelity/lisco is long gone and in a dumpster somwhere if not already reclaimed.
This lot has been up for sale for the past 2-3 years, up and off, and also long before the calumet bankruptcy. Unfortunately, it is not complete, and the info in it is only useful if someone was to set up a whole new factory and tooling for film holders, and even then so much research would need to be done.

Its a cool collectors item more then anything...

SAL - the Ansi documents available online are nowhere near the actual size of a fidelity/lisco film holder. The ANSI might be "correct" but the film holders work, and if anyone wanted to make something usable, the ANSI would not be anything more then a starting point...

[Drew Wiley]

It would be a no-brainer problem to any machinist trained in these materials. One could simply dissect an extant holder and measure the specs. Or one could redesign something even better.

[koh303]

It would be a no-brainer problem to any machinist trained in these materials. One could simply dissect an extant holder and measure the specs. Or one could redesign something even better.

+1

[Drew Bedo]

What about 3-D printing the parts at home? I see and read where things are first scanned , then printed. Could a film holder be disassembled, then the parts scanned and printed?

[koh303]

It could, but i have not yet seen a 3d printed or grown product with that level of exactness and tolerance which will suit a film holder.

[jp]

It might be intellectual property, but it's probably not the business right to make exactly what they did. Sorta like building and selling Shelby Cobra car clones based on a box of papers you bought on the Internet.
IANAL, but if you wanted to get into the film holder business, you might be safer legally NOT having this. Patents expired helps.

[koh303]

It might be intellectual property, but it's probably not the business right to make exactly what they did. Sorta like building and selling Shelby Cobra car clones based on a box of papers you bought on the Internet.
IANAL, but if you wanted to get into the film holder business, you might be safer legally NOT having this. Patents expired helps.

I am absolutely sure chamonix and shen hao do have their own patent, and are using what is already covered/protected by any number of existing patents... No one is crying about that, and not only because they are in China.

[gleaf]

ANSI will sell you the specifications for all standard double side ridge lock film holders for $25 downloadable pdf.... Before it was ANSI IT3.108 it was way back a mil spec dating to WW 2 era. It hopped through a few numbers to get to IT3.108 but current rev is 1998 I believe.

[Drew Bedo]

It could, but i have not yet seen a 3d printed or grown product with that level of exactness and tolerance which will suit a film holder.

I have no experience with 3-D manufacture, and my knowledge is nieve and incomplete. However, it is my understanding that 3-D printing can be of prwtty high resolution now and there are newer materials available. I even read that a manufacturer of premium bicycles used 3-D printing to make titanium frame parts on a production basis.

I would think that some smart person could, if so motivated, come up with the CAD/CAM files necessary to print the parts for a working film holder. The next project would be a light weight Grafmatic clone.

[koh303]

The next project would be a light weight Grafmatic clone.
Thats called a fuji quick load.

[Sal Santamaura]

,,,the Ansi documents available online are nowhere near the actual size of a fidelity/lisco film holder. The ANSI might be "correct" but the film holders work, and if anyone wanted to make something usable, the ANSI would not be anything more then a starting point...I'm not sure what "actual size" differences you're referring to. I have Fidelity/Licso holders in 4x5, 5x7 and 8x10, all purchased new over the course of several decades. The primary dimension of interest to me was "T." I've never measured other specified holder dimensions nor noticed fit or image location/size discrepancies when shooting with them in a wide variety of cameras.

My 4x5s' "T" depth varied all over the place. I don't use them, instead relying on a number of Toyo holders, also purchased new, obtained before that company moved production off shore and began shipping reeking holders.

My 5x7s all measure well within the ANSI depth specification. Perhaps this size sold so poorly that, despite my not having picked them up until around five to ten years ago, they were all molded when the tooling was still fresh.

After experiencing wild sample variation in Burbank's 4x5 "T" dimension, I was prepared when purchasing a dozen 8x10s. Calumet still existed and stocked real stuff :) in 1998, so I went to one of its stores and measured depth. It took around three dozen to find twelve holders that were within ANSI tolerance. I still have and use those holders today.

[Corran]

Thats called a fuji quick load.

Uh, no.

[Oren Grad]

Thats called a fuji quick load.

I think you may be confusing Fuji QuickLoad, which was like Kodak ReadyLoad, with Fuji QuickChange, which was indeed more like a Grafmatic.

[koh303]

I think you may be confusing Fuji QuickLoad, which was like Kodak ReadyLoad, with Fuji QuickChange, which was indeed more like a Grafmatic.

Indeed thats what i meant.
Quick change holders have 8 septums, are made of fiber reinforced plastic.

[Corran]

Fuji QuickChange

Sounds great, but ouch, quite a steep price!

http://www.ebay.com/itm/311337327153

$400 for the privilege? Yeah, a modern run of these things at a reasonable price ($100? $150?) would be pretty nice.

[Oren Grad]

All this is really confusing - that eBay seller has it wrong! - but Fuji's "Quick Changer 45" is not the same thing as the QuickChange that we were just discussing. The latter was a relatively recent product which came packed with 8 sheets of film. It wasn't really intended or engineered for re-use, but if you handled it carefully you could reload and re-use it.

[Corran]

I see. The one I linked looks like a Grafmatic clone, but I wonder if it is as heavy?

This must be the QuickChange:

http://www.ebay.com/itm/121633609900

But they say only the cartridges are for sale, not the holder? Strange.

I only recently got into the Grafmatics. I avoided them due to the complexity and potential for dust issues I have read about. They are nice for hiking though, when I do not want to carry a bunch of holders. I got 4 Grafmatics for less than $150.

[cdholden]

The next project would be a light weight Grafmatic clone.

When you get around to doing that, please scale up and make me a few in the 5x7 flavor.

[SLVRGLTN]

It seems to me someone purchased the lot of film holder blueprints does anyone think someone will actually start remaking these again someday? Sounds like another Kickstarter? Maybe who knows very interesting to say the least!