Need actual measurement of 8x10 sheet film...

[duff photographer]

Howdo all,

What the thread title says. Despite trawling the internet and the LFP forum I've not been able to find exact measurements for the size of any 8x10 film (other than of old defunct films where measurements may not be standardised). ISO 1012: 1998 has sheet film specs but as many know, it's a little criminal to charge £50 to £85 for the two required linear measurements, and it does not necessarily ensure that all manufacturers follow the standards exactly.

The reason for the request is that I'm making my own film holders in 4"x10" and 5"x8", which will be using cut 8"x10" film, and I require measurements, to the nearest mm (or 32nds of an inch), for the following films...

Fuji Neopan Acros 100,
Fuji Provia 100,
Any Ilford (although I can contact Ilford directly for this who may also be able to supply film already cut in those sizes).

These are the main films I use. I'll leave out other films at this stage but if others want to add measurements for other modern films then by all means do so - it may be useful to someone else.

...and yes, I could buy some boxes and waste about £50+ of various sheet films but I lack such funds and would prefer to save that money and ask the knowledgeable and very helpful people on the LFP forum ;) .

Any help will be greatly appreciated.

Cheers,
Duff

[xkaes]

Since you have to cut the film anyway, why not just cut the film(s) to fit the holder, instead of the other way around?

[Maris Rusis]

I just measured a sheet of Fomapan-100 8x10 sheet film on the light-box: 201.7mm X 253.0mm. As far as I know all 8x10 sheet film is smaller than the actual 8 inches X 10 inches format which applied only to glass plates.

[duff photographer]

Since you have to cut the film anyway, why not just cut the film(s) to fit the holder, instead of the other way around?

Sadly, that won't work. First off, if the film holder is too small I will be cutting the film more than once thus introducing a further risk of scratching and dust (and wasting a little film area on top). Secondly, if I've made the film holders too large one half of the cut film will be too small to fit and thus a waste of half a film. Cutting it exactly in half means two pieces of film exactly the same size and to do that I'll need to know the exact measurements.

I'm sure there are photographers out who do use 8x10 in the films I stipulated and if they see this it won't too much of a hardship to fish one out and spend a very short while measuring one up if they are willing to do so. It'll be a lot easier than me guessing at what size film holder a 5x8 or a 4x10 should be. The only film I have to hand is 4"x5" Quickload Fuji Provia and Readyload TMax 100 which measures at 99mmx124mm and 99mmx125mm respectively (took me 30 seconds to locate and measure, so...).

:D

Cheers,
Duff.

[duff photographer]

I just measured a sheet of Fomapan-100 8x10 sheet film on the light-box: 201.7mm X 253.0mm. As far as I know all 8x10 sheet film is smaller than the actual 8 inches X 10 inches format which applied only to glass plates.

Thanks Maris.

That helps a lot. Although it's not Fuji or Ilford, it gives me a ball park figure (or I could start using Fomapan-100!). Very much appreciated! :D

Cheers,
Duff.

[Vaughn]

Just measured several sheets each of FP4+ and HP5+. Not consistant, but usually 1/16 of an inch less than 8x10, give or take 1/32 inch. One sheet was 10" long

[B.S.Kumar]

Do commercially available 4x10 and 5x8 holders take exactly half an 8x10 sheet of film? Or are there variations among them?

Kumar

[Vaughn]

Found a sheet of Fuji 8x10 Acros.

It is 1/16 inch less than 8x10 in each direction. 7 15/16" x 9 15/16".

[Jim Becia]

Do commercially available 4x10 and 5x8 holders take exactly half an 8x10 sheet of film? Or are there variations among them?

Kumar

Kumar, I have found that both my 4x10 and 5x8 holders take exactly half the sheet.

[B.S.Kumar]

Thank you, Jim.

[duff photographer]

Found a sheet of Fuji 8x10 Acros.

It is 1/16 inch less than 8x10 in each direction. 7 15/16" x 9 15/16".

Brilliant! Thanks Vaughn, and for the size for the Ilford film. Both are in the ballpark of what Maris measured as well.

I think I can now safely go and add dimensions to my rough drawings (with a little to spare, just in case).

All the very best,
Duff.

[Keith Pitman]

Do commercially available 4x10 and 5x8 holders take exactly half an 8x10 sheet of film? Or are there variations among them?
Kumar

For 4x10, I cut an 8x10 sheet exactly in half with I jig I made. I would presume that 5x8 is exactly half an 8x10 sheet too.

[Keith Pitman]

Here is a link to the specs for standard film holders including 8x10:

http://home.earthlink.net/~eahoo/page8/filmhold.html

And, here is a link to some non-standard film holders, including 4x10, as used by KB Canham:

http://www.canhamcameras.com/Film%20Holder%20Specs.html

Note that the Canham 4x10 film holders have become the de facto standard. There is another, older size 4x10 holder that was an X-ray film holder that is smaller and hard to find. Also, I believe Lotus 4x10 film holders were similar to Canham holders, but slightly different. I would suggest standardizing on the Canham-type film holders as they are more common. There is one or more articles on the LF Home Page about 4x10 film holders and related gear.

[duff photographer]

Here is a link to the specs for standard film holders including 8x10:

http://home.earthlink.net/~eahoo/page8/filmhold.html

And, here is a link to some non-standard film holders, including 4x10, as used by KB Canham:

http://www.canhamcameras.com/Film%20Holder%20Specs.html

Note that the Canham 4x10 film holders have become the de facto standard. There is another, older size 4x10 holder that was an X-ray film holder that is smaller and hard to find. Also, I believe Lotus 4x10 film holders were similar to Canham holders, but slightly different. I would suggest standardizing on the Canham-type film holders as they are more common. There is one or more articles on the LF Home Page about 4x10 film holders and related gear.

Thanks Keith. The Canham link is a new one for me - useful stuff.

Yes, it makes sense to follow the more common standard on the 4x10 so I'll pay close attention to the Canham numbers.

I saw the piece on 4x10 film holders by Kerry Thalman a while ago, and it's one of the reasons I decided to give 4x10 a go. Not the easiest of formats to get the composition right but when you do, it works really well.

Thanks again,
Duff

[Greg]

Am in the position to be able to check the measurements of quite a few 8x10 film negatives dating back to maybe the 1930s. Maximum size is never over 8"x10" Minimal size is about 1/16" less in both dimensions, with the longer dimension in one case 1/8" less than 10". So much for precise standardized film dimensions....

[duff photographer]

Am in the position to be able to check the measurements of quite a few 8x10 film negatives dating back to maybe the 1930s. Maximum size is never over 8"x10" Minimal size is about 1/16" less in both dimensions, with the longer dimension in one case 1/8" less than 10". So much for precise standardized film dimensions....

Hah! Yes indeed. I guess there's a 'margin of error' in these things regardless of so-called standardisation. If I factor a minimum of 1/8 inch into the design then that should cover most things - that would work out as 1/32 inch (about 0.8mm) for each side of the holder.

Thanks Greg.
Duff