diwan_bhathal

The following photo is of a side view of this camera with the Grafmatic.

 

As can be seen, the camera is quite thin and lightweight even with this Grafmatic. I did not weigh it, but I suspect that it can hold its own with a 35mm SLR.<div></div>

This is the Six-Shooter Grafmatic that I like to use.

 

The small locks on both sides of the adapter slide into the slots of the Grafmatic. This is very SECURELY held in place and is not going anywhere. The tension can be adjusted by turning the small bolts.

 

If the camera is zone focused, this Grafmatic allows very fast shooting ( relative to all large format ), and very practical, since it holds 6 sheets of film in one container.<div></div>

Another view of the film holder rubber band attachment method.<div></div>

The camera with a standard film holder. I like to use the Grafmatic six shooters, so I did not made any provision for regular holders. Then I found out that the rubber bands work fine, thus reducing the cost of the whole thing.<div></div>

View from the side, showing the back of the camera.<div></div>

This is what the camera looks with the Ground Glass holder removed. Looking down the lens.

 

This camera has a bellows from an old Pola. The lens is also from a roll film Pola. The casing is a Kodak Autographic 3 model C. The original bellows disintegrated while building this, so, this is what I found for replacement.

 

I had to change the original lens, 173mm to this one, 127mm focal, because the bellows that I have fitted was not sufficiently long.<div></div>

This is the GG for this camera. It is made out of a piece of glass that I frosted, and uses for container a Graflex Pack film holder. Notice that it has a mask for the 4x5 format, otherwise the edges of the film opening are hard to see.

 

To be used with a dark cloth. Once done, close the door, insert the dark slide on the other side and the glass is protected.<div></div>

I was looking to make 4x5 as cheap as possible. First with the $7

adapter then with this:

 

The cheapest ever 4x5 film format camera.

 

I hope that this will give you some ideas why 4x5 should not cost

any money. If you save lots and lots on the camera, then you can

spend lots and lots on film.

 

If someone can make it cheaper than this, please let me know.

 

This camera costs $20 to make including all parts.<div></div>

Rubber band attachment points for regular film holders.<div></div>

Retaining device for all Graflok type hardware. This is a "slider" that fits in the Grafmatic devices side ridge.<div></div>

Light trap for adapter and cut for clearing rangefinder cameras.<div></div>

How to cut the film holder clearance notch.<div></div>

Here goes another...<div></div>

Another view...<div></div>

Another...<div></div>

Another wiew of the adapter in a camera.<div></div>

The following photos are what this adapter looks like in practice.<div></div>

The image is of the dimensions for an adapter to 4x5 that can be

fitted to any camera that has enough space in its back for the lens

to illuminate 4x5 format.

 

This presupposes that this camera has a 4x5 lens coverage. This

adapter can be glued, screwed or attached by whatever other means to

the camera back.

 

Nevertheless, one has to be careful that the lens focuses on the

correct film plane, that is, the lens has been properly collimated

for infinity for the camera when using this adapter.

 

Once the adapter is fitted to the camera, by whatever means, goop,

black tape, bath caulk, liquid nails or chewing gum, please make

sure that all light leaks in holes and seams of this adapter are

covered.

 

The uses for this are to convert any suitable camera to 4x5 film

format:

 

 

-- Adaptation to any Pola roll film camera. This can be the 100

series models, 900, 85A...

 

-- Adaptation to any pack film camera, Pola series 100, 200, 300

and 400.

 

-- Any of last century Kodak autographic, 1A, 3A.

 

-- A box with a lens on the front and this adapter in the back.

 

-- A pinhole camera for 4x5 format.

 

...Anything that you can think of that you may want to convert to

4x5.

 

 

This adapter will accommodate:

 

--Grafmatic six-shooter ( with locking plates ).

 

--Regular film holders ( with rubber bands ).

 

--Any sheet film or roll film contraption.

 

--Any photo film holding device which is made for the Graflok back.

 

The adapter is made out of a plate of aircraft grade plywood,

available in the US at A.C Moore. The dimensions of this plate are:

6x12 in with a thickness of 3/8 in. The hole is cut with a fret

saw, keyhole saw, hobby saw. Perhaps this plate can be made of

separate parts joined together to same dimensions.

 

Once the adapter plate is fitted to the camera, suitable spacing

needs to be provided for correct focus. This can be made out of

spacers or whatever comes to mind.

 

These are the dimensions that worked for me. I tried it with

regular film holders and Grafmatic six-shooters and there is no

obstruction of the film opening.

 

I hope that this will be informative to anyone.<div></div>

Mark:

 

My back was made with the intent to mimic the Graflok back. I thought that the Pola 110 model B were too "expensive" for experimentation. So I got a super dirt cheap 110 model A.

 

The wooden back is designed so that it accommodates the Grafmatic six-shooter that I have. I like the Grafmatic since it is relatively easy to use.

 

Also, I found a Graflex Pack Film holder to which I fit a GG. This thing uses the "clamps" on the top of the adapter for locking. Works wonderfully. Note: I mounted the GG right on the Pack film holder and did not bother for the added dimension of the tin of the pack itself.

 

As to regular film holders. Well... the rubber bands work fine.

 

I will post soon the measurements for this adapter. Basically it is a piece of "aircraft plywood" of 6x12 found at the Crafts shop ( AC Moore) with a hole in the middle. The thickness is 3/8in, but 1/2 in will work too. The hole is 1/2 in from the top and bottom and contains the "lips" to screw in the lock plates.

 

I glued the whole thing with JB weld and filled the gaps with same. Need also to plug all holes for the light leaks.

 

The infinity adjustment was done by removing the locking plate. Collimating infinity with my 35mm camera on crosshairs drawn on the GG and gluing the infinity locking plate on the bed of the camera.

 

Good to go...

 

Drop me a line if you want me to send you more detailed photos. The conversion is not a mystery.

 

I like the dual Composing/Focusing window, because the focusing window in the model 110A offers magnification, and I am getting older...

 

Yes, this technique can be applied to any camera that you want, as long as you have a lens fitted to it that covers 4x5. This includes old Kodaks, Polaroids 100, 200, etc... A box with a hole on one side and this converter plate on the other... Anything that you can imagine. It is cheap too ( $2.53 for the plywood plate ). I have tried this one unpainted, and it works fine too, can also not bother painting it.

 

Thanks.

All of this discussion is the most inane that I have ever seen.

 

The original question was not answered, as Dean pointed out. The subject of the thread was to share in the discussion of conversion techniques for a Pola 110 model type.

 

I would like to point out hat unless the science of Physics ( not patented ) is violated, there are no such things as:

 

100% parallax compensation on a parallel plane, unless geometry is violated, one of the two images will have angular distortion. This may not amount to much, but the 100% is not satisfied.

 

The cam for focal length of 127mm cannot be used for 150mm focal length lenses ( check your Optics physics book). The equations for lens distance to focal plane are the same but include a constant which is different for different focal lengths.

 

The improved focussing technique is bogus. Focussing implies a perpendicular translation of the lens to the film plane. The way that these cameras focus is more than fine. The only improvement in focussing can be made by adding a vernier scale, but this is only for indicative purposes, not for actual focussing. This camera is not autofocus, far from it.

 

There is no "secret science" about the conversion of these Polaroid 110 series cameras to 4x5, nor for any other camera. The lens needs to project a 4x5 format image on the film plane, the infinity stops have to be adjusted and some provision of securing the film holder to the back of this camera needs to be devised. This is the Camera Obscura principle.

 

All other improvements claimed to this conversion are cosmetic.

 

The results of any camera are dependent on the quality of the lens and on the parallelism of both the lens plane to the film plane.

 

Paul, you can still make yourself a $7 plus cost of the camera Polaroid 110 conversion to 4x5. I guarantee that the results will be indentical to all others claimed. Guaranteed ! No need to go through a major expenditure nor major scientific research.

 

The most important thing to know is what Dean stated: "There are many ways of achieving this conversion".

 

The 4x5 format is not patented.

 

Best to all.<div></div>

Hugh,

 

Sorry, I wanted to answer your other question.

 

When you change formats in a Pola, the 4x5 is bigger than the original that was 4x3 or something like that.

 

The film plane needs to be pushed bakwards due to geometry for the lens to cover the 4x5 area. Imagine a triangle with the base having the dimensions for 4x5.

 

It happens that if you install a 4x5 holder on top of the rear door of this type of camera, and add some extra distance to it, say 3/8in, then the lens projects the correct area for a complete 4x5. This is the reason for the adapter. Less than that, the image will be cropped.

 

In addition to this, the infinity setting of the lens needs to be readjusted to have the same lenght from the lens "center" to the film plane. If not done, the lens will be projecting "focus" in the same location as before, and the image in the new configuration will be blurry.

 

Good luck.

Hugh,

 

Sorry, my mistake. These are called Graflex Pack Film Holders or adapters.

 

It is basically a box with a lid on the top side. On the bottom side, it looks like a regular film holder with the opening for exposing the sheet film.

 

This is the same as a Polaroid film pack, but for sheet film. This is not longer produced. I happen to have one of these, to which, instead of the film pack, I inserted a GG in that space.

 

The GG is in the same position as the film would be. It also happens that this holder works with the Graflok retaining system. Again, this device puts the GG in the same place where the film goes.

 

This is the way that I use it:

 

Insert the Pack film holder as if it were a regular film holder. Then open the top ( it hinges ) and focus and compose. Once this is done, remove the whole pack film holder and insert a holder with film.

 

The only thing that I had to do was to make myself a GG that will fit in the inside space of this pack film holder. I do not have a picture of it, but if you look around, maybe you can find one somewhere.

 

This is an alternative to having a GG from a Toyo or otherwise. Took me a half hour to make. Got the holder from your favorite auction place.

Hugh,

 

If you get hold of a Graflex film pack holder it is possible to insert a sheet of ground glass inside as well as a Fresnel lens. This will fit any Graflok back. It is another way to hold a GG. The film pack cavity is bigger than 4x5 sheet film and it has a spring inside that is used to hold the GG.

 

Keep in mind that you may have to trim the glass and the Fresnel to fit. Otherwise this should work.

 

If you insert a sheet of 4x5 in this camera, you will not get 4x5 format. Also it is needed to go to a darkroom/changing bag to reload. Not very practical.

 

Anyhow, there are multiple ways of adapting this camera to 4x5. Just a question of choice. The idea is to come up with a new and lightweight way of doing this.

 

With this camera, if you use the GG all the time, then you are automatically parallax corrected ( self-evident ) and it is possible to focus at less than 3ft and also to use the magnification lenses provided for this camera.

 

This camera makes 4x5 photos as good as any other camera fitted with the same lens. Nevertheless, hand held shots are tricky sometimes if you use slow film and slow speeds... but this is also true for any other camera.

 

Good luck !

Gentlemen:

 

Please, can someone tell me how you can stuff pieces of newspaper in the back of the camera pictured above in this thread.

 

This is a total mystery to me.

 

Can someone tell me why the photos of this camera "test" are not totally fogged.

 

This is another mystery to me.

 

Thank you.

One question:

 

Above, in this thread, there is a photo of a converted Pola with a Graflok back. This equipment is attributed to be made by Dean.

 

This photo shows the seam of the back of the camera to allow a newspaper sheet to slide in it. This is for both top and bottom.

 

---- Can someone EXPLAIN to ME HOW can one SLIDE a piece of newspaper in the seam between the Graflok and the body of the camera.

 

I have never seen this particular camera ( Dean's ), but I can tell you that the junction, once the Graflok screwed to the back of the camera is VERY TIGHT ( not light tight, but VERY TIGHT, mechanically tight, -- a close tolerance that is, and much smaller than the thickness of a sheet of paper. ).

 

The back of this camera has two "rails" where the Graflok is applied, these are MACHINED FLAT. The Graflok back side, the one that does not take the film holders is MACHINED FLAT. Once these two parts are mated together, and pressure applied by the screw, the tolerance is TIGHT !

 

-- Also, there are two photos of this camera's light leak. Can someone explain to me WHY the light leak is slight, if as stated, that a piece of newspaper fits in the upper and lower seam.

 

Shouldn't the whole film be FOGGED by such an amount of light ??? Given that the seam can accommodate the whole thickness of a newspaper, this is for both upper and lower seam, it seems to me that in this configuration, a lot of light can get in. Is it not ? It does not seem to me that this is so.

 

I will be grateful for an explanation.

 

Diffraction, light scattering and Gamma radiation are not valid answers. Film cooling neither, even though that in the Austral latitudes this needs to be considered.

 

Let's find out what happened. Thanks.