Thinking retro

[terri]

Oh yeah, and that little lever that sticks out the side of the film wind... when the camera is ready to fire, it's sticking out the bottom. What's it for?

That's to remove the handle. There are all kinds of groovy things you can do with this little camera, I am discovering.

 

[JamesD]

That's to remove the handle. There are all kinds of groovy things you can do with this little camera, I am discovering.

Yeah, me and Ed figured that out while I was out dropping off the roll of film I shot with it this afternoon. Unfortunately, Ed no longer has his machine calibrated for 120 film--or maybe just not the Fuji film I used. I'll have to ask. In any case, I'm not going to be getting prints; I'll have to go to Dothan to get it done. Naturally, my enlarger only handles 135 format and smaller film, so I'm not gonna be able to print the negatives myself, even if they're BW.

As for the camera, I think I finally know what all the little levers, switches, and buttons are for. Lots of stuff on this camera.

Charlie: I dun't wanna do digital! :whine: I'm all about the analog thing. Plus, my scanner doesn't do film very well--even the TMA it has built in is lousy (and designed for 35mm only). I suppose I could make ittty bitty contact prints and scan those... but that's hard to control. I've recently realized that in the past, all my work has been intended (if subconsciously) for the web; now, I want to shift my focus to creating prints worthy of hanging on the wall, with web display as a secondary intent. IE, rather than scanning a print and tweaking it in The Gimp until it looks good, working directly with the negative and enlarger to get a good-looking print, then scanning that, making simple adjustments to make the online version look like the real thing.

I'm planning an enlarger for the 4X5 format, to take it to 8X10 (maybe more). My next woodworking project. It'll likely use the same lens that the camera does. I mean, after all, it's gotta be the right focal length, right? Perhaps not the highest-quality system, but it'll do until I can afford a real enlarging lens, and maybe it'll introduce some of that retro feel from the lesser-quality optics.

Anyway, food for thought.... I'll quit, cuz I don't want anyone to get mental indigestion..

 

[mysteryscribe]

Well James I have to tell you what a wise old man once told me. The short strokes or the long stroke all work in the end. I wish I could do the dark room thing again. But alas it is not to be.

Good luck with your development. by the way 645 most likely can be printed from your 35mm enlarger. You just need to make yourself a negative carrier with a larger hole. I expect your lens will cover pretty close. You likely have a 50mm lens on the enlarger and the 645 perfect lens is really closer to 70mm than eighty. also they used to do a thing with cheap camera where they curved the back to compensate for shortness of the lens. If you dont curve it too much, you can probably get away with it fine. That is curve the print paper on the easle. You could get some vinyetting but that wont be a really big problem, Just shoot to the center of the frame and you can get a pretty good print.

 

[JamesD]

I thought was actually just thinking about whether a larger carrier would work... And I have a 75mm (I think) lens somewhere around that Ed gave me with the enlarger... but I think it's fixed aperture, as well. I'm gonna go check this out right now...

Edit:
Short answer: No. The light source is less than 6 cm across, and therefore will not cover a 6 cm negative. Part of it, sure, but I want the whole thing. Otherwise, I might as well be shooting 35mm.

I actually managed to find the lens. It is an 86mm fixed-aperture lens. After mounting it on my enlarger, I see that it will not even focus; the bellows doesn't have enough extension.

 

[mysteryscribe]

Thinking retro means you can problem solve because you always have problems. Here's one that is kinda interesting.

I shot one film holder two shots in a 3x4 retro thing today. Got back and they were fine or seemed to be. first I found a streak on one then one on the other. I couldn't tell if they were in exactly the same place on both negs but theywere darn sure similar.

First thought, there is a leak in the bellows, there is a leak around the lens. After all I installed the lens. Then I thought well maybe it's a leak around the back. I had one of those recently. It was on a new camera not on one I had used before.

I took a better look at the neg before I began resealing the camera. I found that there was a light leak track in the clear area around the edge of the negative. I had a cut film holder remember.

That shows me that it leaked inside the holder before the dark slide was pulled. On very close examination of the film holder it looks as though there is deterioration in the cloth hinge at the rear of the film holder. I taped over it with some vinyl tape and it should fix the problem.

That's what you get for thinking retro. Those film holders are probably older than me. There are two kinds that I own one is a newer model but I don't like them as well. Hard to imagine that isn't it.

 

[mysteryscribe]

One more thing about retro thinking. I found out that my wife tried to bribe the mailman to just throw my ebay purchases in the dumpster at the post office to cut down on the amount of junk in our trash can. Does that tell you anything about thinking retro....

 

[mysteryscribe]

THE ONLY TWO THINGS IN LIFE THAT MAKE IT WORTH LIVIN' BEAT UP OLD CAMERAS AND FIRM LOOKIN' WOMEN.

Can you tell I've been back working in the dark room again.

I was sitting here with my shirt pocket draggin' me down and thinking what a difference a few years makes. At thirty it would have been a pack of cigarettes and a lighter in that pocket.... now its reading glasses and a light meter. May how tires do change.

One more random thought. I saw a post titled . I didn't know where to put this, and it had a picture... I would never dare title a post with a pic like that.... someone would tell me...

 

[mysteryscribe]

You gotta love spam... why just this morning alone I can lose 20 lbs...gain and inch... have it be rock hard... and meet a hot housewife in my area.... and I'd bet my last nickle it is my wife.

 

[mysteryscribe]

just as an after thought I checked two of my vintage camera lenses today and both have very dead shutters. I think it is the heat and humidity in my studio. I don't keep the ac on when I am not using it and I only use it an hour a day.

I have replaced the lenses on the cameras but I really hate to lose the vintage lenses. I kept the glass and plan to use them as barrel lenses, but still, its a downer.

 

[mysteryscribe]

The very first camera I ever butchered was a polaroid 160.. I added a 6x7 film back to it. I got bored and tore it up for parts so today I finished the build on 160 I coverted to 3x4 cut film. I like it a lot ugly as sin but it fits my mood.

 

[mysteryscribe]

I was banging around the site when I saw something that reminded me of a story. I had a wedding in one of those huge old stately almost gothic churches once. I got there my usual hour before and scoped the place out. I found the idea place to set up the balcony cam. It was in the organ loft at the rear of the huge stately old church. Boy was I going to have a great shot.

The bride came down the aisle going in. I shot here and all the brides maids then I rushed up to shoot the crowd from the organ loft. The shot went off without a hitch. I rushed back down stairs and went to the crowded reception in the church parlor.

When the proofs came back there was this absolutely gorgeous shot of the huge EMPTY church. That crowd from the reception was lost in the huge church. I printed it anyway even though it looked as though the hundred or so people were all on the front three rows. I loved the church shot.

I swear i didn't I know how sad a shot it looked until now that I have seen someone else's empty church shot. Makes me wonder why I even shot it since it was a for hire job.

 

[mysteryscribe]

i am approaching the end of the line for a retro build... I am building the ultimate trash heap camera. This one is 4x5 sheet film

Body is a polaroid 420 (plastic) I think in this polaroid stands for solid bodily waste product.

the back is made of masonite, liguid nail and a lot of prayers.

the lens board broke off so it is held on with contact cement.

The lens is a wallensak 35mm glass set with a very ancient shutter. the lens elements are epoxied in. They can not be removed for cleaning god help me.

the aperuter scale is gone from the shutter so Im guessing 'what is what'. Always a good way to start the day.

The bellows pulled loose from the piece of plastic (aka crap) of a lens board.

Everything is together now but the lens has not been attached. I am pretty sure the max fstop is 11... I am basing that on the fact that I could hardly see to set the infinity stop position. That would mean the min f is probably 32... No doubt this is a tripod camera....

Anybody know how to build a wooden tripod. I'm thinking one that doesn't fold up just opens up. Like a surveyors tripod.

Oh yeah i think i will laminate this one with wood. LOL why not nothing else about it is going to be original.

 

[JamesD]

Charlie, I do believe that you are not just a photographer, but also a sculptor. Better yet, your sculptures are functional.

What was all that discussion we were having a while back about art and artists?

 

[mysteryscribe]

before we get to far into the black slapping the damn lens is toast or better yet wet.... the seal between the elements is gone it is not like the sweat on the outside of a beer glass. Piece of crap. Of to ebay to buy a lens. tra la tra la tra la..

By the way thanks for that tripod screw reciever idea... it works great. The furniture thingie...

 

[mysteryscribe]

I couldn't find a decent lens so I decided to go pinhole with it.k I never tried a 4x5 negative pinhole camera. If I get bored with it, I might look for a single element glass lens to stick on there for a nice retro look. actually I have one come to think of it with a shutter even. Now that should be interesting except the shutter probably isnt dependable enough but I can break the leafs out of it with and f350 there isnt going to be need for a shutter anyway. Just a lens cover. This might be a fun project after all...