==Article scope== 

 As just a lay reader, I find the scope of this article, and the article on 35 mm still film, to be deeply confusing, and it does not address the subject named in the title. I expect this issue is being worked on, since it seems to be the only non-crossed-out item in the list of to-do items, at top. 

 The two problems as they stand are:  One, an article titled "35 mm film" ought to be about just that.  Instead, it is limited to 35 mm motion picture film, and of course it is profoundly technical.  It's as if an article on the Civil War dealt only with the Confederacy or with the United States, not both; and furthermore delved into, say, battleship designs. 

 Two, to make matters worse, the article on 35 mm still-photography film has the converse problemit ought to be called by the phrase I just used; instead it's titled "135 film", namely, it's apparently limited to Kodak's subset of the 35 mm film world.  It's as if an article about the entire Confederacy were titled, say, "Secession".  It ought to be called, and its scope ought to be, "35 mm still-photography film." 

 I came to the present article simply to read about and understand the important milestones of 35 mm film, motion-picture and still. I find it unreasonable that I can't read an overview of all the important developments in 35 mm film, in other words its history, in one article. I was utterly dumbfounded, for example, to find an article having the title "35 mm film" never even mentions Kodachrome. 

 Moreover, this article mixes history and descriptionand even prescription, what with the plethora of format specifications.  The person wishing to read about the overall history of 35 mm film most definitely does not want to be told about detailed data on sprocket holes. 

 Hence, you should offload the vastly detailed motion-picture contentby all means keeping all that detailto another article. 

 So as I see it, you need three articles: "35 mm film," "35 mm motion-picture film," and "35 mm still-photography film." The current article titled "135 film" can also remain, if you wish to treat Kodak's 35 mm products as a separate topic. 

 As I said, I suspect this issue's being worked on.