murrayatuptown

Thank you

I gave it another try. No, it doesn't seem to do anything well other than CA. Most images I desaturate and exploit the focal shifts...it's given me the old 'snapshot' look from when I was a kid. Or there is something defective other than engineering.

Hello: I have an Industar-24 lens in Moment-24S (MOMEHT-24C) shutter from a Moskva-5. It's been apart for awhile & I'm trying to put the back cover with rear lens on. I've misplaced the three screws that hold the back to the shutter. Other than 'probably same as used on Super-Ikonta-C or some Compur shutter', does anyone happen to know what thread I'm looking for? It looks like they're flathead since the case holes are countersunk). Thanks

Wondering if anyone still finds these posts useful, I realized I just did. I searched and found my own forgotten thread. So I'll update it. 1) I have experimented with 95/150/160/800 style shutters to understand how they work. Repeatedly cycling them while watching can allow spring retainers to creep out of position until the spring flies across the room! The shutter cocking spring is the first to go and the B/I (Bulb/Instant?) spring. So beware. I left one springless specimen permanently open, glued an M42 extension tube to the back & used it on at least one digital camera. Awaiting an M42/E-mount adapter this week to try it on another. Some would say (not ask) 'what's the point?' I like the images I got enough to keep doing it. Like Bart Simpson burning his hand on the stove...ow...ow...ow... 2) The 95/150/160/800 shutter (I haven't looked up a proper name for this kind of mechanism as I like my analogies...pinball-machine-shutter, time-of-flight-shutter, etc.) If yours bounces open a couple times after firing, it's because a small piece of foam rubber at the end of the shutter's at-rest position has decomposed. IIRC, it's inside a helical 'bumper' spring. I think there is also a magnet to capture it also. I tried various types of foam...too thin and it bounces. Too thick and it doesn't close all the way. What worked best for me was the really thin sheet wrap foam, probably no more than 1/16" (1.5 mm) thick. I used a folded piece about 1/8" (3 mm) wide, maybe 3/8"-1/2" (~9-12.5 mm) long. Not critical...the attempt that works it the one to use. Watch out for springs creeping out while testing this with the back half of the lens/shutter cover removed. (Implied steps are to remove and retain the screws holding the bellows to the rear shutter cover, which has one lens element attached, then remove the 4 (?) screws holding it to the rest of the front of the camera which serves as a combination of front 'standard', lensboard and shutter assembly). 3) If you have cameras with shutters of this type screwed up by previous invaders, or suffered the above calamity during your own investigation, and resign yourself to a permanently-open specimen for digital camera usage, you can just pivot the shutter plate slightly open and use a piece of tape or contact cement to make it stay open. Both are more or less reversible.

Does anyone remember what the II Yellow and III Red designations meant on aerial photography filters? I have some for 6" Metrogon Lenses with these Roman numeral markings. Red 25A requires 3 stops of exposure correction, which may be coincidental. I have seen 25A red filters without the vapor-deposited center spot filter on Aero-Ektar lenses. The red appears to my eye to be the same color. The yellow also looks like the same color as other non-spot filters, but 2 stops of correction seems a bit much for that yellow color. I'll take a guess that the II and III refer to the filters not having equal light transmission across the diameter...or that II and III refer to stops of exposure correction for the spectral response of aerographic black & white film under the conditions seen from an airplane (different from sea level). One of the red filters also has a marking 3' (read like '3 feet' or '3-prime'). Thanks Murray

Thank you. I've reached out to UCR with a couple questions. Murray

I have a Rochester Camera King 8x10 camera with no lens board. I can measure a 4-1/4" square opening that steps down <1/8" (0.112") to 4", then there is the front bellows 'frame'. I have seen these lens boards described as 3-part, but have not found pictures. I am familiar with a single step cut on other lens boards Does anyone have one they can show a side view of? If there was a 3rd dimension for light trap/baffle, I'm visualizing something like a recessed lens board, but for different reasons. Thanks for any assistance... Murray

Thanks, Dave, on confirming the film fit. About glass plate in bottom of tray, the reason the other person did that was so it was smooth to avoid scratching bottom-placed emulsion. He drained the tray and added the next liquid, so the handling of the negative was minimal. I don't recall any wording about flipping the negative. I can only remember that he was an African photographer living in France. His still life macros were gorgeous, on all types of film he used.

Maybe John Minnicks who modifies old cameras into his Aero Liberator cameras.

The only medical X-ray film I bought was not sized for camera film holders. I also bought some 8x10 x-ray film for industrial rather than medical/diagnostic use. I haven't used it yet, so I don't know if it's literally 8"x10" or whatever nominal size is for the film holder. The industrial type had single emulsion. I'm told double-emulsion reduces the required duration of exposure for living things being x-rayed. Someone told me he puts glass in the bottom of his developing tray, and uses a Japanese hake for the 'brush development technique'. He also never had any problem with the 2nd emulsion scratching. I also think he said he dumped the tray and changed the chemicals rather than moving the negative from tray to tray. Odd that English speakers call those Japanese hakes 'hake brushes'. 'Hake' is Japanese for 'brush'. They are very soft, wide brushes with a felt or other textile material instead of bristles, and thread stitching instead of a metallic 'clamp'. The non-metallic construction makes them good for alt-processes that might not like aluminum or iron.

That really does look like a surveyor's/transit tripod. The spiked feet and no leg 'restraints' are not very good on hard surfaces, but good in dirt, turf, etc. I bought an orange one from a hardware store that was closing...I asked what the weight rating was. He thought that was a really dumb question...'a transit'. He also couldn't think outside the box for repurposing. It had a huge bolt with a screwdriver-style handle...I think it was 5/8"-13 or thereabouts. I had to find a tap that size to make a plate for my usage.

probably mid-1951 from Schneider s/n charts

I finally opened the boxes today! One Energy, two Intro's, one Tank (in a wrong box). The Intro's have manuals and sealed plastic bags with a few red gears and a metal plate). The power cords have broken rubber bands, but one cord holds its folded shape. I suspect they never got used. The Tank module in an Intro box had a mouse nest and some gnawing on the clear rubber tube which is taped in place. Broken rubber band with that cord also. No manual, but other than the evidence of former rodent residence, it looks clean (as in no chemical stains/residue). There is a single red gear in a sealed plastic bag with that module. The Energy module just has some dust on the box. If the heating elements show signs of 'cooking' with use, I'd assume little if any usage. At the top of the element there is some orange/yellow material that looks more like electrical insulating varnish to me than residue...or I'm wrong. Anyway, the point of this update is that I would like to inquire which rollers are notorious for sticking together. The Intro modules seem to have free-rolling light grey rollers. The Tank module has harder light grey rollers and softer black rollers. The gearing is pretty high (as far as my fingers are concerned) so I cannot tell whether the gears should make the 'helix' rotate continuously in the same direction, or if it oscillates back & forth over a range of motion. It rolls so far and seems to want to stop (again, based on resistance to finger rotation). If the rollers were stuck together, I would think I could not achieve a portion of a rotation of the rollers, or the soft material would pull off as some describe on the 'web. I would like to learn how to assess the condition of the rollers or any other 'weak link' areas...to determine if these are in questionable or pristine condition. I do not anticipate using them but prefer to identify the physical condition as accurately as possible if I offer them for sale somewhere/somehow. I would rather honestly identify any problems than use the 'I don't know anything about this' excuse. I'm on a roll now...it won't be another 11 months for my response! Thank you Murray

Ha...been 12 years, so I will not ask the same question. Time to clean the garage. Haven't made use of it in the last 12 years...probably won't in the next 12. :)