Can I use a process camera?

<p>David;<br /> A Process camera is a copy camera.</p>

<p>A process camera is a TYPE of copy camera used more for maps; engineering drawings; where SCALE and linearity of images matter; or to make line screens for printing where several screens must match up for color separations. A process LENS is like an enlarging lens in that it is for for close ratio work; BUT a process lens has an order of magnitude or two less distortion.</p>

<p>A copy camera just for copying say grey scale B&W photos and pictorial work often has an faster enlarging lens; and one with a leaf shutter; since one is using faster pan films instead of slower ortho films.</p>

<p>The camera in this thread is a process camera since it has a process lens installed; sort of like a Big pickup truck might have a dump bed and be called a small dump truck.<br>

<br /> In lay terms a process camera is a copy camera.</p>

<p>We had a Durst 138S 5x7 copy camera/enlarger in the 1960's and 1970's; it had a nice sharp 210mm Componon enlarging lens in shutter. It made tack sharp copy negatives and gaint 36x48" prints too. Since it did not have a process lens; making map panels match was a total bitch; the lens had some distortion. Thus we afited the rig with a process lens to get radicaly better matching of prints that went side by side.</p>

<p>Later in the 1970's we got a real process camera with abed 17 feet long that shoots 24x36" negatives; an prints them back about 2.5 time larger. With this rig one doent even focus; you set the lens; rails and use a computer for exact scale and focus. The entire track has the lens and copy platten set to 1/1000 inch. Rig like this works better than a dinky copy camera when one wants an exact scale; there is no wasted labor with tryin to get the scale spot on.</p>

<p>There are local printers that still use rigs like on this thread that are wooden; that they bought new in the 1950's and 1960's. Prior to out Durst 138s we had a wooden copy camera; bought in the early 1950's; I think it shot about a 12x18" negative; half the size of our current rig below:</p>

<p><img src="http://d6d2h4gfvy8t8.cloudfront.net/1238404-lg.jpg" alt="" width="640" height="480" /></p>

<p><img src="http://d6d2h4gfvy8t8.cloudfront.net/1238354-lg.jpg" alt="" width="467" height="417" /></p>

<p>Update 2 (for those still interested). Firstly, thanks for suggestion of Packard shutter. I know nothing about them but will start learning when I have finished refurbishment. I did say I would post some photos of the camera so here are some of the parts I am renewing.</p><div></div>

<p>Film back blind before mending.</p><div></div>

<p>Bottom of film back worn after many years.</p><div></div>

<p>And make a new oak one</p><div></div>

<p>New inner cover for film back blind</p><div></div>

<p>One more question - now that you can focus to infinity, how does the coverage of the 18 inch Cooke lens look? How big a negative would it cover (I guessed 12x15", I'd be curious to know for sure).<br>

An idea - as you obviously have craft skills, give a thought to making a tilt attachment for the lens as a substitute for the lens panel it came with (I expect you know what one of these looks like, I have one on my 5x7" Ansco camera). This is easy to make, just a few pieces of wood and a short extension bellows the same size as the lens panel, and would be great for landscape work, since if you take a landscape shot with no camera movements, depth of field will be a big problem, even stopped way down.</p>

<p>David, The coverage is certainly much less with the shorter bellows. I havent measured it or even looked at the focusing screen with a dark cloth yet but would guess its a max of 12x15 and maybe less. When I measure it I will let you know.<br>

<br>

Great idea about swing and tilt. As I was reading your post it made me think of a kind of gimble. Maybe 2 square wooden frames with one inside the other. If the outer one was slotted on each side to allow for movements and some bolts attached to the inner frame which also carries the lens board, I think it may allow for tilt and swing. The wavy line in my VERY quick sketch is meant to show the attachment of some light proof material from that point to the inside of the camera. Obviously loose enough to allow for the movements. It just might work!<br>

<br>

That said, I must try the camera as it is first which I hope to do on Sunday. Initially it will be with paper negs and indoors as I dont want to spend lots of money on film if there is a fundamental problem anywhere.</p><div></div>

<p>Well here it is, the first image from the HP on a 12x9 1/2 paper neg. Actually there is another that I took indoors with flash but this one will do for now.<br>

So yes its very contrasty, very small dof, terrible composition but it is an image. I focused on the fence, rated the paper at 6 iso and gave 3 minutes at f45.<br>

Question is, do you think it is worth spending £150 on some film plus up to £100 on a s/h packard shutter (which I will ask more about in a different post as I know nothing about them).<br>

I would hope a contact print from film would be a lot sharper than this paper neg.<br>

Thoughts please.</p><div></div>

<p>16x20 contact prints are quite rare, but I did once see a couple by Roger Fenton (19th century British photographer) and they were pretty sharp! Rendition of fine detail is spectacular, and of course if you had normal film you could tackle a much wider range of subjects. Assuming you got the camera cheaply, I am sure you could sell on the camera plus lens and shutter without great financial loss if you made this investment and then regretted it!</p>

<p>I know its very late on this topic. I have used a 20x24" agfa process camera for pictorial work.<br>

Mr Cad in london have Film in large sizes, I bought ten sheets of 16"x20"<br>

Its easier to use paper negatives as you don't have a shutter. I have set up the camera in my garage and photographed sitters outside the door by opening and shutting the door for a 30 second exposure, I deveoped this imediatly and then contact printed it while wet onto a second sheet of the same paper, total time 5 minutes to viewable print for the sitter.<br>

A lot of fun.<br>

All the best<br>

Larry Cuffe</p>

<p>Larry, I have just seen your post. As an update I have used the camera quite a bit now with 11x14 film and have to say the results have been fantastic. Contact prints are very very nice. Now, how to make a tripod?!</p>

<p>Glad to hear your geting the machine out, I'll have to get back to mine which is buried under a load of stuff in the garage.<br>

Re Tripod. If you are serious.<br>

Makers of large telescopes have a similar problem, and there seem to be two solutions.<br>

1) atach wheelbarrow handles with wheels on the ends. This allows you to move the telescope around easily.<br>

2) use marine trailer jacks to provide the machine with wheels you can wind up and down.<br>

Both these solutions would involve building some sort of a box to hold the camera up from ground level, and then providing the box with wheels to move it.<br>

Theres a picture of this kind of thing at the bottom of this page:<br>

http://www.dobsonians.co.uk/Options.html<br>

All the best<br>

Larry</p>

 

<p>Hi Jim<br>

I've just bought the same camera you posted here in 2009.<br>

The camera I have is in good working condition and I have other lenses which will cover but no film holder. I can see the location is on two pins at the bottom and a pair of latches on the sides.<br>

If you still have the camera, could you send me or post a couple of pictures to help me in building one. Thanks in advance<br>

Tony Lovell</p>

<p>Tony,<br>

I attach a couple of photos I have on file and would be pleased to send more if required. I think it will be quite a task but will help where I can. Are you in the UK? If so you are very welcome to come over and take measurements etc.<br>

Jim.</p><div></div>

<p>Sorry that was not the best one obviously. There is also a roll back to the back itself and a fairly simple shutter/door the other side. I dont think images will be enough to go on to make one but I will send another of repair work to mine.</p><div></div>

I know it’s been years, but I’m wondering what your solution was for a tripod, Jim Gardner and Tony Lovell? And did you have any difficulty estimating aperture size, since the camera is not being used at its large magnifications, as intended?

 

I was given a process camera a few years back, but it will need a lot of things to make it usable for pictorial use: a tripod/wheeled base/cart, for starters, and also a film changing tent specifically made for its vacuum back to allow film loading in the field (I think I could make this by repurposing a couple big film changing dark bags). It has an electronic shutter meant for controlling four big halogen floodlights with a blue filtered sensor mounted on the front standard. It used light unit increments instead of being a seconds/minutes timer. The camera has a ground glass focusing screen which became detached from the unit many years ago, but is otherwise intact.

 

I’m thinking of using this camera with either the Anitec “line” film which was given to me with the camera (which I will develop so as to tame its high contrast) or with x-ray film. I had cut down a big sheet of the Anitec film to 4x5” under a red safe light, and tested it in an old Speed Graphic, about EI 3-6. Turned out decently for a first try.

 

Jim & Tony: any thoughts?

 

Thanks,

Micah in NC