drew bedo

<p>I do not have a deep technical or experiential knowledge of wet plate or Daguerreotype processes. Yet I suspect that a significant aspect of "The Look" is the requirement for the subject to not move for many seconds. A line of experimentation may be to use studio lighting that requires exposures from 5 sec upwards toward 30 sec and longer. This will allow for aperatures that will mimic the older lenses. If you are already doing wet plate and Dag imaging, you may already have vintage lenses. </p> <p>Another aspect of "The Look" to consider is that the spectral response of wet plate and Daguerreotypes was skewed towards the blue end with nothing at the red end. Perhaps this van be addressed with filtration.<br> Best wishes in your quest. Let us know how it goes.</p> <p>Drew bedo</p> <p> </p>

<p>James and John: Thanks for the info. You are correctabout the wrong S/N. Just double checked and the actual number on the lens is 1364121. The front element is prestene with a color cast from coating.</p> <p>This lens came to me in the mid 1980s in a plastic lens box along with a Leica III-G. The original owner had been a petroleum engineer during the 1950s. He bought the outfit new and took it to Venezuela. At some point he decided that the shutter needed to be adjusted and had the huberus to attempt it himself. The camera came to me in a cigar box with all the parts sorted into little pill bottles.</p> <p>I had no real idea what I had and sold the outfit, as found and still in the cigar box, at the first camera show I went to in Houston ~1987—for $400. I was a minnow—they were sharks.</p>

<p>Being a Large Format photographer I am not very familiar with the Leica world.<br /><br> I have inherited a 50mm/f-2 Summicron in collapsing LTM screw mount; S/N <em>4164121.</em> It has aLeica UV filter and Leica metal lens cap. In excellent cosmetic condition and working order.<br> Is this a radioactive lens? <br> Is it a desirable or collectable item? <br> What is its approximat value for insurance?</p>

<p>Maybe a better lens type would be one of the 90mm/6.8 press camera lenses.</p> <p>Schneider and others made these lenses in the Speed Graphic era.</p> <p>Maybe a 127,, from a Polaroid 110 A or 110B.</p> <p>These are smallish leaf shutter lenses that are more affordable than the Leica lenses.</p>

<p>Try one of the older collapsing screw mount Leica lenses in 35 to 50mm. I would shop by price, not specification.</p>

<p>What about a Gowland/Calumet Pocketview?</p> <p>Light, Folds up small and has about any movement you could need.</p>

<p>Last year I licensed an image to be used for the cover of a book, "Outing The Mermaid", by Ann Medlock. I clicked around on the net and found a few examples of licensing contracts, then selected one that seemed to be appropriate. The author and I negotiated a bit and settled on a figure that we both could live with and emailed the contract back and forth till it seemed right. She mailed me a check—I sent off a high resolution file. Its on amazon.</p> <p>The agreement is that the image may be used to brand the book in any manner for advertising as long as it includes the book title and my credit line. </p> <p>I would think that a similar licensing arrangement would work for the author's portrait.</p>

<p>Goodle does it every day . . . .I found my house.</p>

<p>There is/has been a lot written about these cameras. they do seem to fill a nichee and there are several outfits that still do the conversion. </p> <p>Some conversions are modified to use shorter or longer lenses that must be partially disassembled before closing the bellows.</p> <p> </p>

<p>Each sheet of film will have one or more notches in the top-left corner when the film holder is oriented with the dark slide withdrawing to the right and the loading gate opening to the left. This notch code is different for wach type of film. I commonly use Tri-X and Velvia and know them by feel. </p> <p>There must be somewhere online to research this . . .anyone know where?</p>

<p>J nanian" I see what you mean.<br> In any case, I am a low volume visyal artist working in large format photography. I own my gear and have never rented . For that matter, I've never worked with an assistant for loading film or hauling around my gear.</p> <p>I work in a traditional way with wooden field cameras (a Zone VI and a Kodak 2D) mounted on tripods. I would like to do some hand-held shooting to give my work a different look. I have thought about a Polaroid 110B based 4x5 camera, but they have been pretty high for me in the past and even now. I am hoping for a Wanderlust Travelwide (a P&S) later this year.</p>

<p>"<em>if septums aren't straight sometimes and film doesn't register flat, and the septums get jammed up inside the holder and that film number wheel is obnoxious.</em><br> <em><br /></em>Ok, now I understand the concern about registeration. these seem to be problems associated with damaged septums. <br> From other posts, it seems that the magazines were designed and manufactured to be fully compatible with camera backs designed for standard double-dark-slide film holders.</p> <p>I am still undecided on this due to weight considerations. My goal is to lower the weight of my 4x5 outfit. While Grafmatic magazines will reduce the bulk, but not the weight and will add complexity to the workflow.<br /><br /><br> So maybe not . . .</p>

<p>Rodio Joe: I am trying to simplify my 4x5 kit through reduction of bulk and weight. One thing I am looking at is the use of Grafmatics instead of double dark slide film holders.</p> <p>I posted a question about the pros and cons of Grafmatics on the Large Format Photography website (dot info) this morning and got a number of constructive responses, both pro and con. </p> <p>None of the Cons mentioned anything about light leaks not related to sloppy usage( also applicable to double film holders). None of the Con remarks spoke of any non-standard register or back focus problems.<br> Can youhelp me with this by please clarify your remarks?</p>

<p>I was comparing the rangefinders. Anyway; screw mount Leicas did not have a combined range/viewfinder, the shooter had to shift his eye after focusing.</p> <p>I have no experience with the Wista or Technika . . .do they have the cam mounted to the lens like the Leica system? Or do they need the RF cam changed separately from the lens?</p>

<p>Maybe try www.skgrimes.com<br> or</p> <p>www.professinalcamerarepair.com</p>

<p>+1 on the film-era telephotos.<br> Take a look at the technique known as "Eyepiece Projection" with telescopes and cameras.<br> Also take a look at using a mirrorless digital camera with a spotting scope (also refereed to as "Digi-Scoping"). </p>

<p>Karim: Please let us know what you have done.</p>

<p>Contact printing from paper negatives to make albumin prints can be at the lower end of complexity and expense.</p> <p>The internet is full of text and video. Avoid those who make it complex. </p> <p>Or you could use Photoshop to approximate the same look.</p>

<p>What about one of the Polaroid 110 conversions? The models based on the Polaroid 110-B have a coupled and parallax corrected, combined range/view finder . . .pretty much like a Leica. They come up on e-Bay pretty often.</p>

<p>WL: Thanks for this good info.</p> <p>Were there any serial numbering or other unique productionmarking or code for each camera?</p>

<p>It would be helpful to make note here of descriptions the 12 technical variations with production figures for each variation.<br> At least knowing how many of he earlier basic design were made, and how many of the "Perfected Parallelism" design were made.</p>

<p>This is all pretty good information from a collector's point of view.</p> <p>This might be a good post for the LFP.Info website too</p>

<p>What about one of the Polaroid conversions by Four Designs?</p>

<p>Respectfully I write: That is a lot of reading for me . . .So is this a film camera for instant pack film then? Will it accept a roll film back of some configuration? How is this camera intended to be used, that is, what niche does this fill? Is this as costly to produce as other high-end conversions?</p> <p> </p>

<p>I am sorry to say . . .I don't understand this thread and cannot make head nor tail of the responses. Can anyone help me with this?</p>