Cameras used by the US Army Signal Corps in WW2

[ArchiveRaider]

Hello

I'm hoping to pick the brains of anyone who's knowledgeable about WW2 era photography cameras and the types of film they used. I afraid I know almost nothing about cameras of that period.

I 'm attempting to pin point the type of camera that was used to take this famous Signal Corps photograph:
https://research.archives.gov/id/531267

Specifically: I need to find an example of what a negative from that type of camera looks like. This is because I have been in contact with the above archive, and what the archivists are insisting is the "negative" of that photo appears to me to be just a print.


As for the type of camera used....

The following is from a US Army publication regarding the Signal Corps during 1943-1945 [p.661]
http://www.history.army.mil/banner_images/focus/150th_signal_corps/the_outcome.pdf

APPENDIX: SIGNAL CORPS EQUIPMENT, WORLD WAR II ​

Photography​

A. Still pictures

1. General use

a. PH-120, 150, 195, and 205: portrait and view cameras taking large pictures, 8 by 10 inches.
b. PH-47 and 324: taking average pictures, four by five inches, and small 33-mm. pictures respectively.​

Examples of these cameras* can be seen below; the images are taken from this 1951 Directory of Signal Corps Photographic Equipment:
http://radionerds.com/images/2/27/TM_11-487F-1951.pdf

* PH-205 isn't a camera; PH-150 was an enormous camera for studio use only

 

[table1349]

There is no way of telling what camera was used to take the photo.

 

[Dave442]

I would think something like the small Kodak PH-324 rangefinder camera would be in somebody's hand while going through concentration camps.

However, the image size is that of a regular large format such as 4x5 or 8x10. Many of those negatives were just printed as contact prints (the print is the same size as the negative) so if the archive people can give you the dimensions of the print then that would help narrow down the camera. This of course isn't definitive as you can always enlarge the image from 35mm film and print onto 8x10 paper with a border.

Enlarging the print will also enlarge the grain structure of the negative so if it is a 4x5 or 8x10 prints then a close study should be able to determine if it could have come from a 35mm negative or if it was one of the large format negatives that the print was made from.

The image looks like it was carefully set up as you can see other faces looking out from the bunks, so it was not just a quick snapshot image and that also favors use one of the large format cameras.

 

[ArchiveRaider]

Thank you for your reply Dave442.

"The image looks like it was carefully set up as you can see other faces looking out from the bunks, so it was not just a quick snapshot image and that also favors use one of the large format cameras. [...] if the archive people can give you the dimensions of the print then that would help narrow down the camera."

Yes, these particular photos were taken by a photographic unit sent into the camp to document the conditions, they aren't just snap shots taken by any squaddie with a camera. I will ask for the dimensions next time I contact them.

I would imagine the photo was taken with either a PH-47 or PH-195.

Below is a still from a WW2 training video for Signal Corps in which the soldier is holding negatives [from a PH-47, I think] which he is supposed to have mucked up somehow.

That is what I'm really looking for confirmation of, that the negative would be a piece of translucent film such as what's seen in the still.

 

[Dave442]

The records show Negative as what they have, but it could just be poor record keeping and what they have is a print that was made from black and white negative film image.

A Negative is just film where the light areas are dark and the dark areas of the image are light, this is typical for Print Film. For Slide Film the image is a Positive.

 

[Derrel]

The photo was likely shot by a 4x5 inch "press" type camera....the Unites States military version of a Speed Graphic is likely to have been the camera used to make that photo. It's possible that there is a negative on file, but that was a VERY famous image, and it's also likely that the negative "disappeared" years ago! Negatives had a way of disappearing, especially back in the era when the image WAS found only on **the** original negative, and duplication was not just as simply as "File>Duplicate" on a computer!

 

[dxqcanada2]

Specifically: I need to find an example of what a negative from that type of camera looks like. This is because I have been in contact with the above archive, and what the archivists are insisting is the "negative" of that photo appears to me to be just a print.

examples of B&W negs
https://lis471.files.wordpress.com/2011/11/img_2876.jpg
... largest one is 4x5 used by the PH-47, the square one is 6x6 roll film (ex. Rolleiflex used by Lee Miller), the strip is 35mm roll film used by PH-324

 

[Dave Colangelo]

The camera pictured in the pages you have (PH-47-H) is with out a doubt a speed graphic, I own the same one and you can compare the features. As noted its impossible to tell what camera was used to take the photo but it was more than likely a 4x5. They may very well have a negative on file but they may not have the negative on file. Im looking for a source on this but if memory serves the government used to dispatch press kits which included negatives that were copies of the original negative so that news papers could print the photo as need be. Its quite possible they have one of these copies on file.