I don't know why my defaults changed to Mime64 encoding and no identity.
Sorry

Andrew Kolb

Yes, but 120 with the paper is so much thicker that you probably have to
change a setting in the pressure plate.

It's the same film, but the spool size is different. A 120 spool should
be too large for a 620 camera, but some of them can be modified to
accept it.

The shorter one must be a type 127 camera. They were pretty common and
film is still available in a limited way. I'm not sure about the longer
one. Check http://www.nwmangum.com/Kodak/FilmHist.html to see what fits.

-- Lassi

 Some can. Some can't. Some need different backs. 120 isn't just shorter
but it has paper backing. 220 doesn't.

 I've  got a 620 rollfilm adapter for my LF cameras. It uses 120 just fine
but I need to use a 620 takeup spool.

127 for the shorter. 116 or 616 for the longer.

Nick

Sometimes you can load 120 film in a 220 camera -- typically people say
there are problems with scratching because of the extra thickness
causing excessive pressure, but this depends very much on the camera
design, specifically the pressure plate and film gate.  The counter will
just let you keep winding and shooting on the film tail, though, and
unless you watch it you'll put the best shots of your life on black
paper instead of sensitive emulsion.

120 film will *sometimes* work in a 620 camera; if it does, at a
minimum, you'll generally have to trim the outermost rim off the spool
flanges to let the spool fit, and in some cases the 0.1 inch of extra
length will cause trouble (I have an Ansco Pioneer box camera that won't
take 120 due to length, so I have to respool onto a 620 spool;
fortunately, I have a bunch of them and that's not a difficult
operation).  There are a few cameras that will accept either 120 or 620
interchangeably, but most 620 cameras require a 620 takeup spool even if
they'll accept a 120 supply (my Kodak Reflex II is in this class).

The two rolls you describe are probably 127 (about a half inch shorter
than 620/120, with little center nibs in the flanges) and either 116 or
616 (took 70 mm film with a backing paper like 120; IIRC 116 was flat
flanges and 616 had nibs like 127, but I could have that backward).
There was also another still larger size, sometimes called 3A format,
that used 122 film, 90 mm wide; many 3A cameras had an accessory back
that would accept slide-in plate holders which, with film sheaths and
appropriately recut sheet film (3 1/4 x 5 1/2 inches, nominally), can
still be used to make postcard-sized negatives, and there were a number
of other roll film formats as well -- Kodak made 4x5 roll cameras around
1900-1910 using paper backed film similar to 120 only very large, and
there was Bantam (8 28x40 frames on unperforate 35 mm film with paper
backing, a spool like a shrunken 127), and a few even more obscure
formats, mostly smaller (No. 00 was, IIRC, 24 mm, and the Hit-type
subminiature "toy" cameras took 17.5 mm paper backed film with a variety
of mostly interchangeable spools).

220 film does not have a paper backing it's entire length; only at the
beginning and end of the roll. As such, it is thinner than the 120
film+backing, and depending on the camera, it might not wind properly.

The difference between 620 and 120 is the spool itself (and the fact that
620 is no longer commonly available!); the flanges of the 620 spool are
thinner. Some 620 cameras may have enough "slop" in the film spool holder
that a 120 roll will fit. Other 620 cameras can be modified (bent?) for 120
to fit.

Shorter one maybe 127, longer one maybe  616?

Ken Hart

Most cameras that take 220 take 120 also - just adjust the counter and
the pressure plate - the camera will have instructions to do that.

620 and 120 are the same film but 620 has a thinner spool. You can
still buy 620 from film for classics and other sites, but many just get
the 620 spools and rewind the 120 film in the darkroom or in a changing
bag. I agree the smaller spool is probably 127 - are there little
projections from each end? if so it is 127. You can buy that from a
couple of specialty sites and there are a couple of excellent antique
cameras that use it- notably the Baby Rollei and the Yashica 44.

Thank you all for the wonderful information.  I have two rolls of 120 and
may take them to the darkroom with me tomorrow and try to reroll them onto
the 620 spools.  Most of my old ?junk store? (.50-3.50 USD) cameras are some
version of a Kodak Brownie, two of which are cracked so I will take the
spools from them.  I assumed the 120 would work in the 620 because the 120
spool popped right into a 620 camera, but I did not try to feed it through
and take any pictures.

    When developing 120 is it just the same as 35mm, as in, TMAX 400 is TMAX
    400 regardless of format?

Thanks you
    Andrew Kolb

?

The latter might be a 616 spool. I found such a spool in an old
american box camera. It has a thin axis similar to the 620 spools -
thought at first it was a 620 but actually it was quite a bit longer.

Winfried