4thGordons Posted 14 February , 2009 Share Posted 14 February , 2009 Adrian - I will subject them to the "flash test" and see. I was a bit disappointed I must say. Still I remain optimistic about the next batch. I also happened into 2 more cameras recently Not as nice as yours but not too bad. The patent dates on the front are:April2, 1908 and Aug31,1909. Shutter settings on this one are I(nstant) B(ulb) and T(imed) Aperture settings are 0,1,2,3,4,5 (and someone placed a sticker on the bed which indicates 15,18,22,30, 45 and 90 as equivalent F-stops I am a little loathe to admit this (as I have a dozen other similar examples) but it took me about 20 minutes to work how to get the back open (it is a single piece and slides out!) The patent inside date inside is 1909. Unfortunately it takes 116 film. also a folding pocket Brownie No2 (dated 1909) this is a square version and looks to be in about the best cosmetic nick of any of my cameras so I am excited to give it a go. My only concern on this one is the focus adjuster (see detail pic) does not appear to catch the bellows very effectively so I am not sure how precise the settings will be. This one too has I B T shutter settings but only 3 aperture settings . This one is in very very good shape cosmetically. Both of these are wooden bodied with leather covering - and I suspect rather too large for soldiers to carry. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
J T Gray Posted 16 February , 2009 Share Posted 16 February , 2009 Oooh, very nice! Yes, I suspect too awkward to carry - interestingly there were both later and earlier Kodaks that were narrower and with rounded ends that would have been much easier to carry. You certainly couldn't get away with hiding them! Did I send you this link previously? http://www.geh.org/fm/brownie/htmlsrc/index.html Click on the image for further details and a better picture - suggests that your number 2 is a post-1913 model. whenever it is, it looks in lovely condition - seems to have had far more TLC than mine. Pity that the other is 116 - although if you could find, or make, a backing paper you could re-spool 120 and take panoramic shots? Of course you'd need to come up with a new spool... Adrian Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
4thGordons Posted 17 February , 2009 Share Posted 17 February , 2009 Adrian, Have you seen THIS, THIS or THIS - three different ways of making 120 work in a 116 camera - I am tempted to try the last one (which is more my speed in terms of handyman skills than the first couple) I will be sending in two more rolls tomorrow (tripod, cable release etc as described in post above and one put through the new one here - although that was a 400ASA film and it was quite bright so...) I tried a couple of "portrait" style setting focus at 8ft and measuring from film plane to approx middle of subject - I am still not convinced by the catch for setting focus on the new camera - it doesn't seem to actually catch anything.... Chris Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
J T Gray Posted 17 February , 2009 Share Posted 17 February , 2009 - I am still not convinced by the catch for setting focus on the new camera - it doesn't seem to actually catch anything.... Chris I'll have a look at mine - see if there's anything that can obviously go wrong? Adrian Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fred van Woerkom Posted 18 February , 2009 Share Posted 18 February , 2009 Chris, Beautiful cameras ! Can't wait to see the results. Cheers, Fred Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
J T Gray Posted 18 February , 2009 Share Posted 18 February , 2009 also a folding pocket Brownie No2 (dated 1909) this is a square version and looks to be in about the best cosmetic nick of any of my cameras so I am excited to give it a go. My only concern on this one is the focus adjuster (see detail pic) does not appear to catch the bellows very effectively so I am not sure how precise the settings will be. Chris, Having had a fiddle with my No2 Brownie, I wonder if you've pulled the bellows out far enough for them to engage properly? In your photo, the chrome shoe under the lens board is about level with the front of the fold-down flap. On mine you need to pull it at least another half-inch out for it to engage on even the closest setting, and for the furthest setting it's nearly an inch forwards. It's a nervous feeling, because you worry you're going to pull it apart. but as you do so the adjuster should just drop into the notch. Failing that, check that the end of it isn't bent? Adrian Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
4thGordons Posted 19 February , 2009 Share Posted 19 February , 2009 Oh B****R! you are quite correct! A little more pull and it clicked right in.... So I suppose this means that this roll of film will all be out of focus too! [sigh] - well perhaps I will get lucky with a few.... this is turning into an expensive series of experiments! Thanks though - I should have thought of that, it was literally just millimeters out but I was a little nervous about stretching the bellows that taught. - oh well live and learn....I'll get there in the end. Chris Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ian turner Posted 19 February , 2009 Share Posted 19 February , 2009 The art is to make the discovery process part of the fun. Revisiting the old photographic technology makes you realise why we live in the automatic digital age. But then you get used to the idea that there will be a lot of 'fiddling' required to get passable results, and that is a big part of the interest. Take time. I am currently awaiting delivery of my first vintage 'belows' style camera - 1950's vintage that is - and already I have learned one lesson- extend the bellows to their correct setting! Your experiences are not entirely wasteful.... Ian Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
J T Gray Posted 19 February , 2009 Share Posted 19 February , 2009 So I suppose this means that this roll of film will all be out of focus too! [sigh] - Claim it's lomography... Adrian Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
4thGordons Posted 28 February , 2009 Share Posted 28 February , 2009 Photos came back today - no where near as bad as I thought despite my incompetence with the bellows settings - most in focus - most reasonably exposed. These were taken with the 1909 patent date Brownie pictured above in post 51(using a tripod and a shutter release cable). This was using Fuji film. I had a couple where the numbers on the backing burned through onto the bottom of the neg/print (I was warned!) Old State Capitol (Springfield IL) - where Lincoln debated. Reconstructed "Historic Cabin" Someone trying not to look too cold (or worried about the shutter operator!) Now I have sort of got the hang of it I will have a go at some proper ones. Thanks for all the help!! Chris Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ian turner Posted 2 March , 2009 Share Posted 2 March , 2009 Well, they came out alright then, didn't they? Not bad for a 100 year-old camera! Thanks Ian Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fred van Woerkom Posted 2 March , 2009 Share Posted 2 March , 2009 Well done, Chris ! Cheers, Fred Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
J T Gray Posted 2 March , 2009 Share Posted 2 March , 2009 Hurrah - they look much better! Adrian Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JPAE Posted 5 March , 2009 Share Posted 5 March , 2009 Fantastic thread and so interesting to see the technology of the time in use. Just found an interesting book on W A Poucher who used a VERY expensive Leica for his outdoor pictures. The UR-Leica was available from 1913. I wonder if there are pictures attributed to this camera at the front, as opposed to the bellows type that has been used here. I am now inspired to find our bellows Kodak in the attic and give it a whirl, although it's not been used since 1957. Cheers for now, Phil. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
speake Posted 17 May , 2009 Share Posted 17 May , 2009 What was the lens used in those cameras? 22mm? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
J T Gray Posted 17 May , 2009 Share Posted 17 May , 2009 What was the lens used in those cameras? 22mm? To give coverage of a 6x9 negative (120 film), you are looking at round about a 100mm lens. Given that film formats went up to a whopping 7x5 inches, I suspect that some of the bigger cameras must have had lenses in the region of 300mm just to cover such a vast negative. Prior to 35mm cameras with interchangeable lenses I suspect that a 22mm lens was the domain of specialised miniature cameras or toys such as the Coronet Midget. This is assuming you are talking focal length rather than diameter, of course! Adrian Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pietro Posted 21 May , 2009 Share Posted 21 May , 2009 If your talking 'standard' lens, not wide angle, nor long (now telephoto), the rule of thumb is that the focal length is the diagonal measurement of the negative, which gave a view of 53 degrees. So, as Adrian says, for 6x9cms it would be about 100mm. A traditional format in the past would have been 'whole plate' - 6 1/2 x 8 1/2 inches and the standard lens would have been 10 inches (250mm). If using large format sheet film today it would be usually 5x4 inches, sometimes 10x8 and the standard lens is 150mm or 300mm respectively. Sorry to mix the metric with the imperial, but its how they are usually described. Peter Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
J T Gray Posted 22 May , 2009 Share Posted 22 May , 2009 I'd never thought of it like that, Peter (which probably means I've been told and it's gone in one and out t'other...). A quick bit of mental Pythagoras (an early Greek version of Monty Python?) suggests that the distance in question for 6x9 is 115mm. The closest to hand 120 folders have 10.5 and 11cm lenses - so +/-ten percent or so that's about right. Well well well... Thanks, consider me educated! Adrian Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ian turner Posted 22 May , 2009 Share Posted 22 May , 2009 I have a Zeiss Ikon Nettar 515 - it is 120 format with 6 x 4.5 negatives. That's 7.5cm after considering Mr Pythagoras - and of course the camera has a 75mm lens..... We live and learn. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
J T Gray Posted 22 May , 2009 Share Posted 22 May , 2009 And the diameter of the condenser in your enlarger wants to the same as the focal length of the lens - anyone got a 4 1/2" condenser going spare? Adrian Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RobL Posted 20 May , 2011 Author Share Posted 20 May , 2011 Some photographs taken in the past year with my 1917 Kodak; 1916 Matchless Motorcycle and Sidecar with Vickers machine gun of the Motor Machine Gun Corps Royal Flying Corps Crossley Tender 1914 British Infantry in camp Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WhiteStarLine Posted 21 May , 2011 Share Posted 21 May , 2011 Great thread and thanks for sharing it. Here is my grandfather's Kodak Vest Pocket Autographic, still in our family after photographing scenes on the Somme and the Hindenburg Line in 1918. His name and regimental number can be seen on the back and in the background is a Kodak Bellows that may or may not also have accompanied him. One of the photos, taken by a fellow digger in an English pub in 1917 is attached - Eric Swanson Frost is seated 4th from the left, pipe in right hand. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RobL Posted 8 December , 2011 Author Share Posted 8 December , 2011 WhiteStarLine, just seen your post - great camera! Very nice photograph too. Here's a few more from my 1917 Kodak; Small section on the march Moving up the line on the War Department Light Railway, 1917 Hendon's 1915 Watch Office Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sassoon Posted 8 December , 2011 Share Posted 8 December , 2011 I just wanted to add my two cents in and say SUPERB pictures! Thank you for sharing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrEd Posted 8 December , 2011 Share Posted 8 December , 2011 Here's some photos of the camera itself As you can see, the stand for it is also the perfect size for supporting the camera when horizontal, the viewfinder moves as well With the older films, you used to be able to open the flap at the back and write on the negative, ie 'me and my mate John with a captured Jerry machine gun' with a special writing stick, then hold it up to the sunlight for a few seconds for it to work I have exactly one of these, where did you get the film from? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now