6x9 cm vs. 2.25x3.25"

[al olson]

I have always assumed that 6x9 was a euphonism for 2 1/4 x 3 1/4. Conversion of cm. to in., however would result in 2.36x3.54". Is this the actual size of 6x9? I have never seen sheet film in this size.

The reason I am raising the question is that I have a Jobo 3012 drum that will process (12) 6x9, (6) 9x12, and (2) 8x10 sheet film. The drum has sets of raised guides down the sides where you can slide in two 6x9 sheets between them. However, there is nothing to keep them from moving about and sliding out of the guides when processing. I am thinking that if the film were another .25" wider that the additional compression would keep it in place.

Ah well, maybe I will just go back to tray processing and use the drum for 8x10s.

[Glenn Thoreson]

Are you sure your drum isn't for 6.5X9 cm? Your statement about 6X9 being loose, and that it accepts 9X12 cm, leads me to believe it might be made for European sizes. 6.5X9 is European and just a bit wider than the U.S. 6X9 counterpart. It won't fit into 6X9/2X3 holders.

[Emmanuel BIGLER]

Just to write down actual sizes
The "American" 2"x3" size for cut film is, as mentioned, 2-1/4" x 3-1/4" = 57x82 mm
The "European" size 6.5x9 cm is in fact 2-1/2" x 3-1/2" = 63,5x88,9 mm (with the Continental-European decimal comma). From there comes the missing 1/4" in width.

120/220 rollilm is 61mm wide, image size in 6x9 is 56x82 to 56x84 mm
70mm perforated film.. is probably ??? 70mm wide ;)

So, to make thinks "simpler" for the user, the 4 kinds of films require different spacing in reels :(
Trays with hand processing are really more universal ;)

[al olson]

Thanks, gentlemen, for your comments.

My Super Technika says it is 6x9, but I use film holders for 2 1/4 x 3 1/4 so I thought that 6x9 might be the same size to the nearest centimeter.

Thanks, Emmanuel, for clarifying the European sizes.

Glenn, the guides on the drum are spaced about 9 cm apart so that the 6x9 and 9x12 sheets are inserted with the 9 cm between the guides. I guess I need the extra 1/4" for enough compression to hold my film between the guides.

It does hold two sheets of 8x10 all right by placing the 10" dimension across three spaces and I will continue to use it for that. But I have to wonder why someone in the US would have acquired this drum in the first place. I bought it on ebay.

So back to tray-developing my 2 1/4 x 3 1/4. By the way, the plastic sandwich containers that are carried by the grocery stores make great developing trays for 2 1/4 x 3 1/4. And you can put the lids over the chemicals when not in use. They are also great for soaking Polaroid 55 negatives, especially when you are in the field.

[David A. Goldfarb]

If you can find the old Nikor stainless steel sheet film tank, it's adjustable for all sheet sizes up to 4x5".

[Emmanuel BIGLER]

My Super Technika says it is 6x9, but I use film holders for 2 1/4 x 3 1/4 so I thought that 6x9 might be the same size to the nearest centimeter.

I have at home both sizes of Linhof of cut film holders, the 2"x3" and the 6.5x9.
Like for 9x12 vs. 4x5" with the International springback, the "smaller" 2"x3" holder and the 6.5x9 share similar outer dimensions, except for total thickness of the holder, some are similar to a "thick" classical Linhof 9x12 with the pressure plate that accepts glass plates, some are thinner and look like a Fidelity®). The most critical distance is film-to ground glass distance, identical for all models, as well as the outer size that fits the lighttrap felt & grovves of the small 6x9 springback. So only the dimensions inside are different by 1/4" in width.

I have seen some Mamiya 2"x3" / 6,5x9 single cut film holders where, as far as I have understood the device, a pressure plate can be flipped from one side to another to accommodate either a 2"x3" or a 6.5x9.

[Glenn Thoreson]

6X9 is actually just a nominal image size on 120/220 roll film. 2 1/4 X 3 1/4 is a nominal sheet film size. None of the measured film sizes are the stated measurements, which leads to much confusion. A sheet of 2X3 sheet film is pretty much the exact size of the opening in a 6X9 negative carrier. In other words, it falls right through. Makes it hard to enlarge that way. Enlarger negative carriers were made for 2X3 sheet film, but they're very hard to find. So, if you're going to enlarge 2X3 negs, you may want to do as I do: Shoot loose and use a 6X7 carrier. Until I acquire a carrier I can saw out. Good luck, and enjoy.

[David A. Goldfarb]

Or use a 6x9cm or 4x5" glass carrier for 2x3" sheet film.

[Chuck Pere]

I see that Lens and Repro has listed a 23C 8063 6x9 cut film carrier for $25 new. A great deal if you have that enlarger and use that film.