westphoto

Wow that's really impressive. I didn't think a latent image could last that long. I think I'll try running a roll of the black and white since I have enough of those to care. I suppose the chromes will just stay as a reminder of history

Have a bag of goodies. It includes a few rolls of Kodachrome 64, a roll of Kodachrome 25, a roll of Ektachrome 64, and a roll of Ektachrome infrared. They all have process-by dates in '85. Being so slow, is there any way any of it is still usable? Am I correct in thinking there's no where that will process Kodachrome anyway? There was also some C-41 process black and white Kodak without the boxes. I'd guess similar vintage.

<p>Peter, thank you for the obvious solution that I always seem to forget.<br> Craig, sorry, you're right. They're probably fluorescent, although they're fairly old apartments, so they could even be sodium. I'll take a look at whether or not I can pop the cover off and take a look, because I've been wondering just what would put out so much green myself. And I definitely have the unnaturalness of green in mind. It's certainly just an idea and not a perfectly formed shot in my head. Just trying to flex my creativity and see shots in various forms of light that are easily accessible to me. I'll be sure to post back if anything comes out alright.</p>

<p>Given that I shoot film, I don't tend to have the image that was visible in my viewfinder still floating perfectly in my mind once I get to see the final result. I was just wondering after taking a shot this morning, does the DoF in the viewfinder match what you should expect in your image (assuming DoF lockdown or whatever equivalent on your camera), or is there some reasonable amount of differentiation between the two. I've always thought of the viewfinder as a perfect representation of final product ("always" being the few years I've been photographing), but I just thought about the idea of the size of your medium effecting the DoF, and the viewfinder is much smaller than the film. Or is the focusing screen the size as a 35mm frame, and that's what matters? Apparently I have a lot of questions :)</p>

<p>So I was looking at the very green lights outside our door and actually had a good idea for a portrait. My question is what should I expect from fairly green light on daylight balanced film? This isn't green light bulbs, but just some very green halogens or something.</p>

<p>It would be very good for you to spend a few minutes reading through the manual for the AE-1. It will make a lot of things more clear.<br> http://www.cameramanuals.org/canon_pdf/canon_ae-1.pdf</p>

<p>Definitely check that screw (plate-thing) on top of the rewind lever. It will be very easy to tell if it's loose. You'll be able to turn it in with just the pressure from your thumb. It it's loose, just find something like needle nose tweezers like Jim said. It would be pretty crazy for something to have busted internally, but very likely that it's just the retaining screw. Mine likes to come loose every once in a while.</p>

<p>I'm not seeing any gap in the outside of the shell, just that tongue that mates with the grove in the insert. It definitely looks like an intentional gap, as I'm not seeing any wear on anything other than on the latch itself, and that seems minimal. Again, the hinge is rock solid. Looking closely at the residue from the foam that used to be in there, it really looks like it spanned into that gap I'm referring to on the hinge side. I think I'll add a little bit to the seal and give it another run. Try and get through it a bit more quickly this time :)</p>

<p>There are similar gaps on the hinge side as well.</p>

<p>I'm seeing 0.05" play in the latch without the insert. The hinge feels rock solid. And I'm not feeling any play anywhere on the insert. I think the top plate is lining up with the film plane like you said, but I'm not sure. They appear to be pretty well parallel.</p> <p>I'm noticing that there is a 0.05-0.06" gap in the edge on the housing that mates into the groove of the insert at the hinge and latch points. I cut my yarn so that it just spans the channels on the sides. Should it extend to cover these gaps? I'll try and get a picture and upload it.</p><div></div>

<p>I assumed if I posted to my old question, it may never be seen, so I'll force a bump.<br> I asked a while back about the light seals on the Graphlex roll film holder. I have since run and processed my first roll (what a lovely experience). I'll upload a "contact sheet" so you can take a look at the minor leakage I got (you're welcome to comment on the photographs as well, if you like). It appears to just be a little burny in general around the top and bottom, but that may have to do with my lack of film rolling experience, maybe not. There are a few places were you can see a fair leak, frames 4, 6, and 10 in particular. I had already put black yarn (I think 2-strands) in the side slots where there used to be foam before I loaded this roll. Any new input on the condition of my RFH and what steps I should take? I have two rolls of Fujichrome burning a hole in my refrigerator and I don't want to go burning anything there.</p><div></div>

<p>Well I have a Graphlex Century Graphic that I've enjoyed using, and one day I'll get myself an RB67 or maybe if the stars align even a Hasselblad. But I just really enjoy bringing old "dead" cameras back to life, showing that they can be just as useful as the day they were made, especially with something as old as this beauty. Also, have you seen the shots that come out of one of these 2 1/2" x 4 1/4" folders on 120? Kind of have to have that :D</p>

<p>Thanks for that, John. This may very well still end up being a shelf piece. I'm just trying to get my head fully around the tasks required to make it shootable, being the replacement of the bellows and one or another form of bamhoosery to use 120 in a 116 camera.</p>

<p>My wife was kind enough to find me a No 1A Kodak Junior Model A, I'd say 1922 given the patents on the inside back. The shutter took some toying with, but is happy as could be now. The outside of the bellows is in pretty bad shape, 50% or more peeled off (but still hanging around). The corners are all pretty bad. But the stiffeners and cloth inside layer are just fine. Is it possible to just replace the outer layer after everything else has been folded for so long, or will it need all new bellows?</p>

<p>Good ol' Coke, the best household cleaner around, and great for your innards too :D</p>

<p>All good points, Glen. The shop I use does indeed charge the same independent of length, so the 12 and 15 shot rolls are probably pretty well suited to some other purpose. Would be good for practicing loading a developer reel when I get that kit. I've shot some 400 Kodacolor Gold from back in the 90's before and it turned out alright, if a bit fogged. I'd bet the 200, plus my additional experience since then, should turn out decent pictures.</p>

<p>I appear to have led everyone to the misunderstanding that there are three rolls of the same stock. The box is Fujicolor Super HR 100, 12 exp. The roll that's obviously not been through the camera (given a perfectly stock curve to the leader) is Kodacolor Gold 200, 24 exp. And the roll that was in the camera (loaded and sitting at shot 0) is Agfacolor Mini XRC 100, 15 exp. The internet (or at least Google) doesn't really seem to believe in XRC. It keeps wanting to show me XRG.</p> <p>The Fujicolor does appear to be from Portugal, given it has Portugese/Spanish translations as opposed to English/Spanish. Apparently the official film of Expo '92</p>

<p>Sure sounds awesome, though XD</p> <p>I think I'm going to assume it was never exposed. As for the counter being at 0, the AE-1 is one of the odd cameras that actually counts down when you're rewinding, so it's possible that it was shot and then rewound just to 0, but that sounds remarkably unlikely, and I would assume they would just go ahead and pull the film out.</p> <p>The boxed roll has a date of 1994 on it, so I can assume all three rolls are around the same era. They're all around 100ASA. Do slower films handle age better than faster ones, or would 20 years make any color negative film a crap-shoot?</p>

<p>I've heard they aren't particularly pleasant. I was kind of hoping adjusting the aperture ring might be a fairly easy task, but maybe not.And honestly, it works just fine, and may even be exactly as it should be. It's just the second nFD lens I've had, the first being an eBay beater, and perhaps all of the breach lock lenses just feel that much better.</p>

I picked up a bag of camera goodies at an estate sale last week, including a few old rolls of film. One is certainly not exposed because it's still in its box. Then there are two more, one in a standard black plastic canister, and the other in the camera. The camera was at 0, so I don't really have any way of knowing if it's been exposed or not. Are there any tricks to figuring out if a roll has been exposed?

<p>Came across a newFD 50 1.8 last week. It's in good shape, but the aperture ring seems to be fairly stiff, at least in comparison to all my other lenses. Does anyone have any words of wisdom on breaking this down to add oil, or any other advice on the subject?</p>

In fact I have. The original adapter ended up being very easy to open. Moved a wire and now it does just what I want it to do. If I ever find myself in the unlikely event of wanting it in original condition, it will be easy enough to put back as it was.

<p>So I've paid a little more attention and done a little more research, and I'm now under the impression that the shutter is not cocking.</p> <p>Again, if anyone has any details on disassembly or how this auto-winding camera is supposed to operate, I'd love to hear them.</p>

Sorry, I haven't run any circles. Everyone else seems to want to do so, though

I don't think there's anything to be had on Amazon. I'll just have to get it somewhere else