What goes around

[TomHildreth]

Comes around, but we don't know when. Most photos on this forum were

recently taken on old equipment, and they sure are interesting to my

eyes. A small percentage of photos posted here are in the "found

film" category, and the interest in these is deservedly high. What I

haven't seen here very often are photos taken on old equipment when

the equipment was current.

 

Here's a couple of shots I took that belong in the latter category.

The reason I'm including them isn't that as aircraft they will have

broad appeal, but that they were recently published, not in spite of

their 40+ year age, but because of it. (Something to bear in mind

when deleting/discarding images).<div></div>

[jonathan_stark]

Hmmmm. Looks like that F-86 has a bad case of chicken pox!

[gib]

wow. great shot.....also I like your perspective on old camras and old shots when they were current devices. I may do a little rooting around in my old photos.

[TomHildreth]

This one I took with my mother's Argoflex, perhaps a model 75. It was not a full frame image on the old 620 color print film, and I wanted to get it digitized. I made a 35mm-size template out of hard clear plastic(including sprocket holes), and cut down the original negative. I then sent it to Kodak to have it burned to Photo CD. My family was always supportive of my interest in photography, and I feel a sense of pride in being able to show a photo taken with my late mother's camera. Both these photos were published in Air Force Legends #212, the North American F-86H Sabre by Earl Berlin.<div></div>

[h._p.]

Old pictures are important to us for the memories they stir.

 

My daughter with my RolleiMagic atop my five penny tripod retrieved from a jumble sale and taken on a TeleRollei which I bitterly regret having sold to a friend.......<div></div>

[donday]

Under the theme of "photos taken on old equipment when the equipment was current," this came to mind.

 

My mother's father had a 3A Folding Brownie since he was a young man, and during one reunion at which my mother must have mentioned my interest in photography, he brought it out and gave it to me. A few years later, at the last reunion we had with him, I brought that camera along, loaded with 122 Verichrome Pan (last rolls were still available in some drugstores, hence the "then current" thought), and took this photo of my parents, my sister, and DaddyEd and his sister. Now, some 30 years after I took that picture, it is a direct connection between me today and the grandfather who shared the camera that we both used as youths.

 

-- Don<div></div>

[dan flanders]

I work a lot with old (ancient) family photos. These two have been previously posted on a PN forum, but they are particularly cogent to this thread<div></div>

[dan flanders]

Sorry about that! That was the cause -- here is the effect.<div></div>

[TomHildreth]

Nice timing on the shot of your smiling daughter. I wonder if this was one of those moments when you just pushed the shutter release, knowing if you were too deliberate you would have missed the shot. Whether it was or not, it is a sweet picture. I have a Star tripod that looks a lot like the tripod one in your photo. I was forever getting my fingers pinched between the upper part of the legs and the platform. I bought a new replacement tripod and almost threw the Star out, until I realized my outdoor technique of jamming the small, rounded legs of the Star into the ground was how I obtained good stability. It's still with me, a beater, but very usable. Don't know when I'll get around to using the new one.

[TomHildreth]

That's just so right what you did with Daddy Ed. The term "unbroken circle" comes to mind.....you created one on film. Wonderful.

[TomHildreth]

Those gloves! I got a hunch the young lady felt if she was going to hand crank the old Hupmobile to get it started, then a picture was an appropriate reward, adding, "There, see? I told you I could do it!"

[lesged]

Tom it's not difficult to fill your order. All you need is to be born enough time before 1970 and know how to take a photo. I have contact prints of 35mm that I took as far back as the late 1930s, but not the negatives.

 

Here is one of me and my son, Marc, taken in Franklin Park in Roxbury, MA in 1954 by my wife Claudia. What is special for this forum is the custom made leather case in Marc's hands. It was made in Florence for the 4 x 3cm folder that took this photo. I can't nail down the camera brand, but it was not made by Zeiss. The lens was a Meyer Goerlitz Trioplan f2.9 in Compur shutter, B, T, 1-200. Only ID for film is 127 size, marked 'Kodak Safety Film.' with 16 exposure per roll (1/2 frame.)I developed the film in a darkroom at MIT in the laboratory I worked in.

 

Another historical item is Marc's hair length. The Beatles hadn't come over yet and long hair for boys wasn't popular in 1954. They called his haircut, "English Schoolboy." I have a shot of Marc in the same park taken some weeks later with a classic short haircut of the day.<div></div>

[bacsa]

Harvey, that's a very sweet shot of your daughter.

[silent1]

Well, I don't have anything as poignant as the shots of DaddyEd made with his own old 3A, or the daughter with the RolleiMagic, but I do have a shot I prized highly when I got it back from the processor in about 1974. The Kodak Instamatic 104 was reasonably current then -- you could still buy 126 cartridge cameras, though they were all Magicube and electronic flash by then, and this camera itself was just ten years old.

 

That was the year we took a family trip to Yellowstone. I hated the trip, but took a lot of photographs I liked a lot -- of which only a few have survived to the present. This scan is from a 3" matte finish print -- the negatives have been gone for at least twenty years.<div></div>

[TomHildreth]

Yeah, it was all a lot simpler before the hula hoop. On the subject of hair: My brother and I were involuntary victims of those excruciating "summer buzz-cuts" back in the 50s. Having spent the better part of the school year trying to emulate the slick hair style of the Hound Dog man, the timing of these father-induced shavings always seemed to doom any chances of a hoped-for lovelife. Or that's my recollection anyway. Maybe its not a coincidence that my lovely wife never cared for Elvis much, and has spent 33 years with a guy who has very little hair.

 

Another thing on hair and then I'm done. I don't watch much TV, but it seems Hollywood thinks all boys under the age of 12 need to have Beatle-like haircuts to get onscreen. Long bangs in the front and generally bowl-shaped. Who are they kidding? Talk about out of touch. Wake up, west coast!

 

Great shot of your son. Is this the lad who is doing the NPR show? I have been trying to listen to that one, but haven't synched with it yet. I can feel the sunshine in that shot, Lester. Don't know if its coming from your wife or the big orb in the sky, but it's a nice period photo.

[TomHildreth]

Ah yes, Kodak and their off-the-wall film formats. Always marketing downward to the consumer, and letting this approach affect their product lines oferred to the more serious shooter. I just saw a box of Kodak 110 in a Wal-Greens store yesterday. That small format seems to have nicely out-lived the Kodak disc-film, and will probably outlive the APS aberration.

 

I don't think I have ever been to a National Park. From what I hear and see in the media, perhaps it's too late? Huge crowds and depleted staff seem to be the scene lately. Or is that just TV hysteria?

 

Several people, including yourself have mentioned absent negatives. I know what that feels like. I have a list of about 60 early photos for which I cannot find the negatives. Guess some of them were damaged when I was learning how to print. Or, on some others, maybe I got overly critical and decided (in the pre-Photoshop era) that they were useless. Or maybe I'll find them in a box somewhere, but I doubt it. I've looked more than once.

[davidv1]

Tom,

 

I visited quite a few National Parks on a roadtrip last year. I'd never visited most of them before, so I can't comment on whether they're better or worse now. If you want to avoid crowds, I suggest going later in the summer. Most folks with kids are back home by then, so campgrounds, motels and parks are less crowded. You really should go if you can. They're definitely worth the trip.

 

Regards, David