how would this camera have got into this state

<p><img id="viEnlargeImgLayer_img_ctr" src="http://i.ebayimg.com/00/s/ODAwWDYxNQ==/z/KhoAAOSweW5U~afg/$_57.JPG" alt="" />g<br>

<img id="viEnlargeImgLayer_img_ctr" src="http://i.ebayimg.com/00/s/NjgyWDgwMA==/z/09cAAOSwBLlU~afl/$_57.JPG" alt="" /><br /> guys how would this camera have got in this state all I know is that it was found in an attic of an old house in Latvia any of you have any theories<br /> regards Andrew</p>

<p>My theory is that it was "cleaned" by somebody and 'loosened up' with WD-40. ;)</p>

<p>Casualty of WW II(?) </p>

<p>guys<br /> don't tell me not to buy it<br /> I bought it for £40 I thought it was worth it just for the look alone,<br /> the seller says the shutter and apertures work I will do a minimal restoration on this<br /> as I want to keep the "look" of it im not sure how far ill go on its looks but I want it to work and take pictures with<br /> a friend of mine says the only way he thinks it got to Latvia was via a german soldier<br /> this will be an interesting fix up job<br>

the thing is it looks like its been banged about a lot but the focusing screen is intact<br /> would any of you have taken this on<br /> regards Andrew</p>

<p>As long as it's light tight and the shutter fires, it should work just fine, methinks. kinda cool looking, really. a real conversation starter.</p>

It could be in much worse shape: http://www.japanartsandcrafts.com/ichinosetaizo1.html

Where's the case for it?

<p>Wow, that is some serious patina...looks really cool!</p>

USPS. Most of what arrives in my state in that

state was shipped USPS 50 years ago and spent

half a century in the dead letter office, aka

some mailman's flooded basement, before being discovered by an eBay estate vulture and listed as "minty".

<p>What state are you in?</p>

<p>A friend showed me a Yashica SLR with a normal lens that was left in a cook stove oven for safekeeping while the owners were away. Upon return they cooked a roast for supper. The camera looked like it had been roasted also. Surprisingly it still fired(no pun intended) but optics and all controls were cooked beyond use. </p>

State of confusion

<p>I discussing this with my wife who just just came back from Latvia setting up a program for the Department of Defense and is originally from Moscow. Couple of questions, what part of Latvia did this camera come from? Some areas are predominately German and there are other areas that have Russian majority. From the serial number on the lens this camera was made in 1932. Our thoughts are that it was probably owned by a German soldier and was separated from him and found later after it was in the ground for many years.</p>

<p>Looks like a fire and then water damage. Just a guess.</p>

<p>I like it. It has character.</p>

<p>Rick H.</p>

<p>In addition to its character, one can only speculate on its odyssey,</p>

<p>I would say dropped in a river, but then I imagine it would be full of rust too. I remember an article about a Zorki 6 that was found in a lake 30 years after it had been dropped - and it looked in better shape than that though.</p>

<p>I agree with Louis. Fire is the main culprit.</p>

Ask Lenny Kravitz.

<p>Hello all, just joined PN been watching it for years. I bought an Ikoflex at a flea market a few years ago for 2 dollars. It didn't look as bad as this one on the outside but it had 1/10 inch of dead mold where the film rolls sat. It actually worked sort of. The backside of the viewing mirror had 15 9 50 in pencil written on it. A few years earlier at another flea market I purchased a FirstFlex tlr, it had been artified by a coating of brown paste? on the entire front of the camera, including the lens. I cleaned it up and still take pictures with it. J.</p>

<p>Why German soldier? It may belong to a a Jewish photographer and camera could be prayed out of his dead body by his Latvian neighbor. Then it was saved on the attic in fear of the KGB. </p>

<p>Anything is possible but I do not think too many Latvians owned Rolleflex cameras back then. A 1932 Rolleflex would probably be initially owned by a German than a Latvian in that part of the world at that time and German soldiers did take pictures just like any other soldier. If anyone pried a camera from a dead body it would have been in good condition because they would have taken it when the corpse was fresh or before he died. It appears to me that camera was exposed to the elements for a long time. If they were afraid of the KGB or neighbors reporting them they would not hide a piece of junk they would have thrown it away. Like I said anything is possible but if I was a gambling man I would bet its initial owner was German. And why a Jewish photographer? </p>

<p>It is hard to tell but people would not hide an expensive camera unless they had reasons for that. Bloody or criminal history is one of the reason. And there was a value on Rolleiflex, everyone knew it. There were also people in the USSR who could fix them. If the camera came from Germans it would be a legit possession. But if it used to belong to a local Jew killed during the Holocaust the survival relatives could and would report the owner to KGB as a Nazi collaborator. And why a new owner did not throw it away...well because there was a known value on it. Just a guess.</p>

Wow.. what great imaginations and dramatic speculationis exhibited here.. I have a similar vintage Art-Deco Rolleicord

which was not as bad in appearance as your specimen and had suffered water damage I think in a drawer

probably in a wet basement. I was shocked when the shutter worked just fine. I have torn it down to

replace the mirror which was so corroded etc .. still in pieces as all the screws broke when opening the

viewfinder. ....Anyway I think Mr Meluso said it a combination of fire and water damage. . Your plan to leave

well enough alone is good! ;)<div></div>

<p>All very interesting, but what I want to know is what sort of person puts a camera into their oven for safekeeping?</p>