jerry_green1

<p>for several years now I have been scanning through my shoe-boxes of mostly family pics although I worked professionally for about 10 years around the 60s and still have contact sheets that bring back many memories of a simpler time. 120 and 35mm even some half frames, some better than others I'll admit but all retrievable with a simple scanner. The oldest were taken over 50 years ago and I can't help wondering how it will ever be possible to have an entire photo-life so safely and easily stored and accessed in the future. With digital advances being made almost every few months how can anyone but major archives or top pros hope to keep up. </p>

<p>you probably have to be English to understand dry humour, and she is always asking for old pics to post!</p>

<p>My closing comments --- I'm amazed that I seem to be only one who cares about old family related photographs. Its certainly not the case with every generation of my family. A niece has been researching our family histories for years, my living room photo wall features wedding groups from 1903 to 2002 and my daughter who is a Facebook idiot posted a recently discovered photo and story of a grand uncle who was killed in Palestine in the First World War and whose history was revealed by my niece after his campaign medals were found. Ancestry websites seem to abound so there must be a lot of people who do care about the past. 50 years from now things may be different when faced with the dross of tens of thousands of largely pointless digisnaps, that's presupposing they exist in some retrievable form. <br>

btw as far as I remember a box Brownie was fixed focus, single appature fixed speed and you only used it in good daylight. Flash I don't think existed then at homeuse level. Also btw we never dressed for dinner, I think you've got your classes mixed up, Downton Abbey was the aristocracy!</p><div></div>

<p>a clarification --- when I say 'too little thought' I don't mean every shot has to be a masterpiece but at least should be of something worthwhile and with some composition not aimlessly shot simply because you have the ease of operation and storage available. On digital archiving all I can say is I have an old Mac under my desk right now with files I can't retrieve and a friend was moaning the other day about inability to move files between recent PCs. In 50 years I suppose there will be some high end technology to retrieve old digital files providing the cards or hard discs haven't been long ago junked or memorable pics lost in a sea of pointless images.</p>

<p>It all started with the mass marketing of 35mm cameras in the 60s but because of price and complexity users tended to be more serious and the end of the roll always loomed. And everything got printed. Today with digital we have entered a truly mad world of happy snapping where everything is taken with little thought and little is saved; where will all these billions of images be in the years to come, come to that where are they now!<br>

I mourn the demise of the family photo album and treasure the few box brownie images that have been passed down. I wonder where families will find their visual histories from now on.<br>

I have boxes full of negs and slides from the early 60s and have been scanning my way through thousands of images, backed up of course, but honestly wonder if they will be retrievable 50 years from now. As I said the rot started in the 60s but at least we have negatives and slides that have survived in reasonable shape barring some bad processing here and there. As for digital it only seems it can get worse.<br>

I came from a middle class English family before WW2 and we had one box brownie. I should think we took one roll a year maybe two max and pretty well all pictures were special occasions and carefully composed. And most have survived and have value, more than can be said for the millions/billions of images from mobile phone cameras and digital point and shoots.</p>

<p> </p><div></div>

<p>my old Canon 4200F scanner finally jammed (I think) but it never liked Vista and I was surprised I managed to use it anyway for several years. My new 9000F is very impressive with Photoshop included and I'm glad I was forced to buy it. Point is while doing a bunch of newly shot OM4ti test scans it struck me how colour rich and 'thick' the pics were and I found myself thinking about film and my old vinyl records in pretty much the same way. There seems to be more than a subtle quality plus to film although they say there isn't. I have a Canon point and shoot 'computer' for family occasions and holidays and I don't think I've ever matched my OM results. All in the mind or maybe I need a more expensive photo taking computer!</p>

<p>what no one has said is that many many enthusiasts feel the somewhat quirky rollei 35 in its various forms is one of the great classic camera designs --- I have a SX too almost mint and bought new in Hong Kong during its brief production run ---I wouldn't sell it</p>

<p>Many thanks for such a complete answer -- I've bookmarked the manual for future reference. I think the self timer is screwed however but it doesn't really matter</p>

<p>I have a Fuji 1.9 half frame (from new in 1967), on the right side of the viewfinder is the exposure needle but there is an extra half line on the extreme right edge with the figure 64 at the top. No matter what I do the number never changes --- logically this shows a film speed (but why not Din too as its an option on the dial). Something broken? The selftimer is stuck too any suggestions not that it matters much. The release lever feels unconnected. Would welcome any help Jerry</p>

<p>Nearest to an obsession would be dogs, had them since 1968, only bought one and he was a mutt, 14 lived with us over the years 13 were rescues best kind of dog I've found, Another 6 or so I passed along to good lives I hope --- one went from Hong Kong streetstray to visit France and Austria (in the snow) on the way to a fashionable London wedding and then to Trinidad with his family -- I've the pics to prove it 'cept they are stuck in my old Power Mac.<br>

I read a lot usually 3 or 4 books from the library at a time. I mainly like any old good stuff -- travel before tour groups and widebodies, my real Saab, a Vmax mc, a Rolex GMT now about 30 years old, Montblanc pens, Bach, the Beatles early stuff, FleetwoodMac, James Taylor, Brubeck etc --- nothing new worth listening to these days --- yes I'm an old guy and a lot of things really were better back when getting a loan from a banker was really hard.<br>

And if you like dogs too try Googling HKDR and read Sally's daily blog, it'll inspire you</p>

<p>I know there are a lot of odd balls who rave about old stuff, I'm one of them - apart from my OM4ti and Rollei 35 I also drive a classic Saab 900 that's nearly 20 years old and has probably cost me at least 2 new cars in repairs over the years. That being said I really can't believe people wasted their time with the ultra small formats that became a fad starting in the 60s inc 110s (a bit later?) and half frames one of which I still have but regret ever buying when ever I see the hundreds of pics I took that could have been so much better in full 35. What were we all thinking about! And don't even mention that terrible disc format. I'm pretty sure at the time, I believed in this new high tech world of picture taking but frankly looking back which is of course always easy to do, I wish they'd never made a format smaller than 35.</p>

<p>I recently had my OM4ti serviced to fix manual metering which wasn't showing up, also film advance was slipping. Had an old roll of 200 slide film lying in a draw, don't remember how old. Ran it through and whole roll inc the edges and spacers and the pics themselves are uniformly pale magenta with a misty look overall. The exposures seem all the same. I'm guessing its the old film and not another camera fault but would like opinions Many tks in advance Jerry</p>

<p>I'd be interested in any personal experiences and opinions on the above lens. I bought it new years ago when it was current and only used it a couple of times but was disappointed at the difficulty using it without a tripod, I even bought a pistol grip but still got shake. I'd be interested in opinions on the minimum speeds for hand held and grip use and any other views on this lens. Tks Jerry</p>

<p>I was surprised to see one example at $145 although it also had a cardboard box, seems a lot extra for a rather tatty original box eh?</p>

<p>the above is mint condition with original leather case --- also as new Nikon L39 52mm filter I believe the viewer is quite expensive these days --- any suggestions of best way to dispose of these would be appreciated jerry</p>

<p>Light years ago I had a grey Rollei TLR Tessar, if my memory serves me right -- long gone but I have just found the above close up attachment pretty well brand new in case. Only problem is at some time it seems to have been taken apart as I have a black plastic washer that is graduated thin to thicker. I assume this is something to do with focusing but where does it go, how do I put it back jerry</p>

<p>I have an OM1n black body but the shutter always jams. Have had it repaired twice by agent years ago but jams again almost immediately. Trouble started when I slipped on wet icy wooden steps of ski hire shop in Les Deux Alpes and fell on backpack with camera inside, Its in pretty good cosmetic cond but it seems they are worth very little on ebay and I also have an OM4ti and an OM10 plus a Rollei 35 but I love the simplicity of it and can't bear to throw it away. Whats to do --- is this type of incurable shutter problem after a heavy shock common?</p>

<p>Thanks for the posetive comments about the pic, there were altogether 6 frames and only one was obviously a bit special so I guess being a good photographer in my case was more a question of recognising a good opportunity and then seeing the only frame that was worth anything. By the way the little dog as far as I can remember, was not the slightest bit put out by the new arrival and lived many more years doing pretty much exactly as he pleased. In fact he coexisted with several rescue dogs, the little girl went on to work for London's most famous dog rescue charity and married a vet -- so you can see how dangerous nurturing can be. BTW I'm going to check out the Epson scanner Ralf suggested. Many thanks.</p>

<p>Yes I know its cheating but recently I've been scanning colour and black and white negatives from around 40 years ago. I've been surprised at the quality I've been able to achieve from these old negs using just the most basic tools - I use a Canon ArcSoft 5.5 scanner from a few years ago. These long ago images would have been lost to me and my family for ever without this technology. For several years at the end of the 60s I was hooked on half frames using a Fujica 1.9 which I still have almost as new except for the self timer. I also use a Rollei 35 Schneider K and an OM4ti which has recently had the electrics replaced. I shoot mainly black and white these days, I love the look of b/w. One half frame is attached for interest, the baby girl is now 40 and living in Dubai, she loves this pic</p>

<p>I have the original and never used pack that came with the flash. There are 5 slots that seem to allow batteries to be inserted and it also appears that 2 batteries can be inserted in one of the inner spaces making 6 in total. There is only 1 space that sort of lets me push a battery in, the rest seem a little too narrow. is there some trick to loading?</p>

I decided to resurect my hardly used F 280 and (I guess) not unexpectedly it has a problem.

When ever I switch it on the FP sign on the back starts flashing and soon starts popping

of a series of small flashes. I find that by pressing the red test button and also switching it

off and on a few times the FP sign stops flashing and the charge loads and the red light comes on.

 

It seems to operate normally on camera with the under over and flashing little square all working as they should

but the FP and Normal signs on the back of the flash never come on after firing to confirm correct exposure.

 

Has anyone had experience with this Thanks in advance

couldn't find the ideal forum for these comments, this seemed to closest

in terms of likely reader interest. So here goes.

 

I have always wondered why I find b/w photos are so much more 'real'

than colour, should be the complete opposite. Perhaps its because b/w

photos are a little surreal at least in this day and age but maybe b/w was

always a bit unreal. Life is not b/w. I feel I can step into old black and

whites. One of the best examples of stepping back in time can be found

on heddamorrison.com ---her Rolleiflex photos of Hong Kong in 1946.

 

I first arrived in HK 14 years later and already much urban scenery had

changed hugely yet there are always the timeless seascapes and familar

hillsides to put one in place.

 

I note that quite a few forum members are from HK and I hope they will

enjoy this mine of images and find them inspiring. Wish I still had my old

Rollei. It would be interesting to hear how these photos come across to

those who have never been here

I have had a Rollei 35 for many years and I always thought the

meter was so hit and miss that so long as you know how much

over or under a 1.5v batt will indicate just allow a stop or speed

up or down. Theoretically I would assume that a more powerful

batt will result in over exp Jerry

after falling backwards onto my backpack which had my OM1n inside, the

shutter jammed although I couldn't see any sign of external damage. I

have had it fixed twice and still it has jammed after a few clicks. Any

thoughts about the problem as it looks like an unfixable fault. I don't want

to throw it away as it is otherwise in very good shape. Jerry

thanks for the site, according to their prices it is spot on and

cheap for an official repair. If it was just another old camera I

would probably not bother but the 4ti really seems to be a bit

special among 'old' cameras and I have a lot of bits and pieces

for it. Seems like its worth doing --- will it ever be another Leica?

Jerry