stuart_pratt

Thanks John that’s helpful. What a great site! Looks like they became part of the Simms Group in 1961. Quite an eclectic mix of stuff they made, so enlargers doesn’t seem so strange really.

Can anyone tell me anything about the company that produced this enlarger? I bought it from eBay about 7 years ago. A Google search has revealed nothing enlightening. It’s a condenser enlarger and I would guess from the look of it and the build quality, it dates from the 50s or 60s. Built like a tank, it was a strain getting it in my loft where the darkroom is. I don’t have any original neg holders, but I have an omega one which does the job. Thanks Hopefully, the photos are the correct way up when you view them. On first upload from iPad, they were upside down, so I flipped them and reloaded. Look OK on my screen! Ive emailed these people, who I assume are the same crowd, in defence, heavy armoured and tracked vehicle defence. Might explain why it’s built like a tank. https://horstmangroup.com/contact/

I have an early Vb and it stops automatically.

Have we lost the ‘Go to first unread’ link?

I was gifted one some years ago by a very generous acquaintance with the same 50mm and a 24mm. I couldn’t believe my luck! I had similar electronic issues with the meter and sent it away for repair only to have it returned with a huge dent in it! Ahhh! The ‘sensiswitch’ I never quite got, but it was certainly a well put together and unusual camera. I think I have a repair manual for it somewhere on the computer if it might be of use?

I suffer the same left eye viewer issues as others have pointed out. Classic Nikon’s are sadly a no-go area for me, other than the auto everything F100 which is great, if a little sterile. Whilst I researched my Leicaflex SL before purchase, and knew it had a similar switch in the advance lever, it has a two position lever with a just open, perhaps 10 degree offset to turn on, and a position with the arm at 90 degrees to the body for ‘rapid fire’ situations where you want to wind on quickly, and where the meter remains on. This latter position just clears the side of my head, and doesn’t poke out my eye so I’ll be sticking with this one!

I often wondered why they were called the Brownie…

A very cool Camera: Carl'S Ice Carl Zeiss Ikoflex Ic Tessar75/3.5 Camera Medium Format Rank

I come here almost every day, but confess I don’t post much. For one, I’m busy and I always feel that any post should be well researched, considered and polite, which I struggle to find the time for. This isn’t the case here very often, and might be true of other sites, and the forum phenomenon in general, but if you post something that isn’t considered, or inadvertently pointed or controversial, you need to be prepared to get flamed for it. Some of us like a fight, others, me included, don’t. That is one reason I don’t comment on things I don’t know much about. Whilst I don’t comment much, I have learned a huge amount and very much enjoy a ‘thread from the dead’ and believe it helpful to have the definitive article one one camera or lens in one place. Doing an internet search on a related topic will often find pnet threads close to the top of the list and I’ll normally search including ‘photo.net’ in the search terms as John suggested some while ago just to filter out the pnet threads. Perhaps traffic here has slowed but it’s still a great resource. Do we need to include results from a camera write up? I’m not sure posting 1000 pixel wide images that have been through who-knows-what software really helps determine if that camera/lens combo is any good or not but a review without them seems a bit like a soap powder advert without the white tee shirt at the end to me. Some of us perhaps are collectors, but most of us here I think are users, so we want to see what you got and your thoughts on ergonomics etc. I agree with Bruce and suspect younger film users are attracted to slightly less dry sites than this one here, but we do see quite a number of ‘what do I do’ threads from new film users asking questions we all know the answer to. This tells you that they come here for an answer to a question, rather than to contribute to lively debate. It might take some confidence to get involved in a forum where the technical knowledge is so high and perhaps that might be daunting for some? I read a thread recently (not here) where someone was asking how they got that ‘cool’ bright orange light leak look down one side of the frame! Most of us here are of a certain age, and all shuffling forward in the queue, and would have rolled our eyes just as I did, but the correct response in my view is to tell that person how they do it, then perhaps politely ask what they are trying to achieve. Personally, I’ve got some very cool photos. Anyway I look forward to your XM review John, (one which I owned and one which was a PIA) with or without pictures, or stuck on the end of a thread from the dead. Oh, and where’s your pint of Guinness gone?

They always seem to be that kind of price. Check out eBay. Just the same. I got lucky and got one attached to a cheap lens, but I think you'll find this is normal.

I couldn’t help but dwell on the Aberfan photo. So beautifully composed, yet so tragic. Thanks for the link.

Dead right.I asked an Italian friend. Published by Anderson, premises in Via Giorgio Arceola, 6a to 6b. A quick look on Google street view tells me the premises is not still there, but that the Italians drop as much litter as we do here in the UK.

Sadly, I'm old enough to remember those, hanging in plastic see-through pouches in sea-front shops!

I'll write this all out again, as I had the dreaded 'you can't post this for 318 seconds' warning! Thanks for all the extra info, I can pass this on to the owner. I think I have both the generic types and some private images. There are one or two hand tinted colour ones with type face lettering on them suggesting the former, but the hand written descriptions read, in general, something like this: Edizione ANDERSON via Giorgio Arceola - NAPOLI (then the location). Suggests to me they were taken by one Giorgio Arceola for a Mr and Mrs Anderson, who perhaps were doing 'The Grand Tour'?

Thanks Alan, that helped a lot. Not sure why I didn't make that link myself, but saved me some searching!

Thanks JG. From what I can tell from pictures I can find on line of the same scenes, they are correct viewed from the emulsion side, so presumably reversal processed.

Thanks Joe for the additional info, which I can pass on to the owner. One or two have type face lettering on the bottom (see attached) and this would suggest the mass produced variety. Although, the hand writing (generally something like - Edizione ANDERSON via Giorgio Arceola - Napoli (then the location) suggests to me they were taken by one Giorgio Arceola for a Mr or Mrs Anderson, so perhaps I have some of each, but the generic ones are 'badged up' by Girgio Arceola. I found another of Giorgio's photos on line. Anyway all helpful stuff, so thanks.

Thanks kmac, very interesting and indeed of assistance

First Scan

Can anyone help with the type of process used to produce these positive glass plates? I’ve been asked to have a go at printing them (when told they were negatives), but I’ll scan them instead. They appear to be two sheets of glass sandwiched together, with the positive emulsion side in the middle. Taken in Italy, not sure when, can anyone advise? They are about 80mm square, and in a cardboard box marked ‘Tensi Diapositive’. One or two of them look of great quality, nice and contrasty with superb shadow detail. Wish my negs looked this good! I'll post a scan once I've done one. Thanks

I’ve been using this lately. Not sure if you can find it your side of the pond? BelliniFoto EURO HC (110) ~ HC-110 Substitute Producing Exact Same Results ~ NEW!! - Nik & Trick Photo Services

I’m on Holiday, so I can’t really just use ONE camera, can I? Restricted myself to one classic (Rolleiflex Automat loaded with FP4) an F100 with Foma 100, my classic D700 for the less important stuff, and a waterproof point and shoot for wet stuff.

Nikon F100 and 24-85 G VR

I always thought this was rather pretty