Social Security Number.

[glenn_mabbutt]

...not "panache", "cachet" was the word I was actually thinking of :)...

[JDMvW]

People in general bought cameras to use, and the one solid unique and recognizable number to etch on an item was the SS#. Local police departments urged people to engrave their numbers on valuable possessions so they could be reclaimed in case of recovery from a theft.

 

It is only post-digital that the SS# has become a problem. It's part of the history of the object, just like the crude "Germany" scrawled on early post-War Praktiflexes smuggled out for hard currency instead of meeting the reparation demands of the Red Army.

 

To characterize an action as idiotic or dumb implies that people in the past should have been worried about what some jerk in the 20th century would find collectible. No scratched name or number* ever made a camera unusable--and cameras were made to be used, not collected.

 

*Unless, of course it was scratched into the lens. Now THAT would have been dumb!<div></div>

[dan_fromm2]

JDM, I was well aware of the used camera market in the late '60s. Looked at then from the used camera market's perspective, marring a piece of photographic equipment made no sense.

 

And looked at from the buyer of used gear's perspective, buying a piece of equipment with someone else's SSN engraved on it made no sense either.

 

I was there. You may not have been, but I was. Where were you in 1969?

 

I thought the idea was idiotic then and I see no reason to change my mind about it. It is still idiotic. The sensible thing to do is keep receipts, the better to prove ownership, and a list of serial numbers to be entered, if necessary, on a police report.

[JDMvW]

Well, Dan, I'll bet I was there in 1969 before you were, and of course, I meant to say "jerk in the 21st c" but mistyped, but I guess it was right after all. Back then, when you got a camera with a number on it, you merely scratched it out and put your own number on it. I still say cameras are for taking pictures, even though I too collect them. In those days, the police would even have "ID days" where you could bring in your gear and mark them with a graver. Of course, the police like every one else then were idiotic too. How could they not have thought about those future collectors and buyers?

 

I bought my first Praktica FX in 1963 in Harvard Square when I was in graduate school as a backup for B&W to my then 3-year old Heiland Pentax H2 camera. I don't think I did put any numbers on them, but I may have. I don't ever recall thinking at all about future resale value--but I did know I wanted to make my cameras as unattractive to a thief as I could.

 

Of course, I'm sure that your judgment then was so much much better than other people, just as it seems to be now, eh? Congratulations on your foresight and wisdom. Politeness, however, you could work on.

[bcostin]

Collectors get very upset about this, don't they? It seems like they would be grateful that there's a good supply of imperfect equipment handed down from all those previous generations of idiots. After all, if someone's going to do something really insane - like removing the camera from a display case and actually shooting photos with it (!) - isn't it best for everyone if they use a previously defaced example and leave the perfect shelf queens unmolested?

 

Frankly I love engraved and labeled cameras. Not only is it a bit of history, as others have said, it also repels collectors like garlic does vampires. And that keeps the prices on good equipment down where mere users, like me, can occasionally afford these hallowed treasures.

[JDMvW]

Hear, Hear!

 

Those of us who both collect and shoot, and also collect camera history and not just dead bodies, are perfectly happy if the "minty" collectors stay away from those auctions.

[chuck_foreman1]

Hi,

 

My two cents....

 

A lot has been banted about the good or bad etc ... I thought about a scene in Toy Story where our hereos go to a large toy store and suddenly there are multiple Space Rangers... all identical...and

the real Buzz Lightyear identifies himself by winking and lifting

his boot where his owner had scrawled his name "Andy" ...

I'm in the camp that it adds character and doesn't necesarily

devalue equipment. One of the messages of the film is... "you're a childs plaything....and that sure beats sitting on a collectors

shelf in some faraway place"

 

Amen Woody!!

[lee hamiel]

Interesting post Jeff - Thanks

 

Dan - I also remember going to Olden's way back - good memory.

 

 

Nancy: "Like I said.. the guy I knew who did this in the seventies has spent his entire life Hi on drugs and has failed at every single venture he has ever attempted."

 

Nancy - I question this as most users would want to have available ready items for sale just in case of needed quick cash - hence putting your ss # would take too much time + more engraved cool designs would have surfaced in the resale market. Buy a bag or an engraver? ... :)

 

As a last note - My dad was a longtime photo guy - 50 plus years with a lot of really nice stuff - he also never engraved a single piece of equipment with his name or ss number. He did however engrave all of his tools ...

 

Engraving scribers were a big item back then - today we would take something to a shop to have it done properly :(

 

Maybe I should order a Leica MP & have Solms engrave it with my Paypal account ID & password:)

[carl_williams]

Just looked back on here after a LONG absence (during which time my photography has

improved somewhat, I *must* update my pix :-) ) and this thread caught my eye, mostly

'cos I was looking for the "my equipment" section, where I'd painstakingly recorded my

bodies and lenses with their serial numbers. I only ever had one item stolen, a lovely

50mm f/1.4, but I'd foolishly neglected to record the serial number. Don't expect I'd have

got it back *anyway* but at least I could have logged it stolen on some websites, and

hoped.

 

However, the section seems to have gone? At least I can't find it... Most annoying!

 

Re: engravings/markings on gear, I too think it adds to the "history" of a camera, if not

done in too ugly or horrible a way. As many have said, cameras are to be used, not kept

pristine in glass cases. A mint unused collected camera is a wasted camera, as far as I'm

concerned, unless it winds up in my camera bag after a disinterested relative of its

deceased owner has flogged it at a boot sale for a fiver. I don't think I've ever brought

myself to *sell* a camera, all mine are *used*. Very used, in some cases. Got a lovely

Nikon FM2 with memories attached to every dent, it still works a treat.

 

I wouldn't engrave my SS number on a camera, out of a very modern concern about

identity theft, but I wouldn't ridicule those who had - some of the attitudes on here are

astonishing! "This guy engraved his SS number on his cameras and he was a druggie and a

failure" "He'd devalued the only thing of value he had" - get a life, people! There's a world

out there, y'know, where folk USE cameras, for work, for politics, for art. Who the hell are

you to pass judgement on someone else's life? These things are highly subjective. GWB,

say, isn't a "failure" by some measures, far from it, but in my estimation he's spent his life

thus far vastly more destructively than the average dopehead, and I'd certainly be less

disposed to give him the time of day, or p*** on him if he were on fire. Say.

 

One person's "druggie failure" is another's wage-slave binge-drinking stockbroker with

massive personal fortune and, in photographic usefulness terms, a cabinet full of Leicas

which have never seen a film.

 

Loved the comment that the "de-valuing" effect of a scratched on name "depends on the

name", hehehe!

 

But where's my list of serial numbers?! Waah!<div></div>

[carl_williams]

Answering my own post above (bad form, I know) - found the equipment listing. Under "my

portfolio", where it probably was before, thinking about it - s'been a long time, as I said...

 

Still, re: numbers on cameras, I agree with everything the idiot who couldn't find the my

equipment" section said :-)

[johnny_martyr]

you guys have certainly covered the spectrum of opinions and history on the ssn

engravement but one thing i thought i'd add that i haven't seen (maybe i missed it) is that

engraving is not bad for a camera for just cosmetic reasons.

 

engraving requires concentrated vibration. this is really bad for any electronics or delicate

mechanisms behind the plate that's being engraved.

 

i once tried to get a gift camera engraved nicely (not all sloppily like you see on most

classics). i called about 5 different shops and nobody would do it even though i offered to

remove the bottom plate, have the engravement done on that, then slap it back onto the

camera.

 

engraving was typically done on the back of the top plate which, if someone was really

nuts about your camera, could be replaced and houses alot of sensitive electronics in later

cameras.

 

i don't have any working cameras with engravements though so i can't attest to how

detrimental it is to the functionality.