| Author |
Message |
    
Edward8
Tinkerer
Username: Edward8
Post Number: 2
Registered: 03-2010
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Monday, April 12, 2010 - 07:09 am: | 
|
Hello all.
Just a note to introduce myself. I began on a newspaper in the 1960s using Leicas. Being young and stupid, we lusted for Nikon SLRs. Kit then was a couple of M2s, a set of lenses, all in a fitted Leica leather case. The "big cupboard" contained additional kit, if required. Darkroom was all Leica. I was taught.
Work now involves archival stuff using, hurumph, pixels. Nikon.
I'm not a collector of cameras, but it seems I have become one by default. My film cameras - a couple of F4s,an Fe,F2,F3,an Olympus OM1 - rest in my drawers unused. Sad, really. I have no wish to sell them. I know their foibles, which would be difficult to explain to a novice.
Anyway. I enjoy reading this forum and take heart that some out there care for photographic history. |
Clay
Tinkerer
Username: Clay
Post Number: 29
Registered: 12-2006
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Monday, April 12, 2010 - 07:17 pm: |
|
Welcome Edward. Run some film through that F2, I
still use mine with MD-2 motor drive.Been using
film since the 1950's. Some would kill for a
Leica kit as described by you.
Best regards,
/Clay |
Marty
Tinkerer
Username: Marty
Post Number: 67
Registered: 11-2008
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Tuesday, April 13, 2010 - 12:56 pm: |
|
There are probably nearly as many reasons to collect old cameras as there are collectors. For me, I'm attracted to the simple mechanical nature and appearance of antique cameras, along with some amount of nostalgia for the simpler world they existed in. I even enjoy the wet fingered, hands on, nature of darkroom work over the more modern techniques of computer manipulation. This has led me recently into accumulating more antique darkroom equipment... Oh, the stuff an old man can latch onto... |
David_nebenzahl
Tinkerer
Username: David_nebenzahl
Post Number: 274
Registered: 12-2009
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Tuesday, April 13, 2010 - 02:15 pm: |
|
Ain't it great that the great masses of sheeple have bought into digital as the only allowable type of photography? Makes all those old Omegas, Beselers and Dursts dirt cheap. Hell, I've seen enlargers put out by the curb for free in my neighborhood! |
Edward8
Tinkerer
Username: Edward8
Post Number: 3
Registered: 03-2010
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Tuesday, April 13, 2010 - 09:25 pm: |
|
Thanks, chaps, for your responses.
Clay: The F2 with full drive is a formidable beast and a joy to use! Next best thing to a Gatling gun, methinks. Also handy if set upon by neer-do-wells in a dark alley after midnight. As our resident yobbo, Crocodile Dundee, might have said: "Now, THAT'S a camera ..."
As for the Leica kit, yes, I was fortunate. It was at a time when newspapers were sensible and published proper B+W photographs. Also, as I recall, we were not issued with light meters. One was expected to know ... we were taught to read the light. Back-of-hand method.
Marty: Ah, the darkroom! (Please tell me to shut up if I seem to be wallowing in nostalgia!) Many magical things happened in darkrooms, in my experience. However, photographically speaking, I do feel sorry for the poor wretches trapped in a digital world. Never to experience the utter joy of seeing an image appear in a tray in a dark room ... and muttering to oneself: Yes. Got it. Page One.
David: Jeez. You must live in a toffy neighbourhood! The only items chucked out around here are rusty bits of utes, moth-eaten couches, broken bird cages, slabs of inferior concrete ... one looks in vain for a decent valve radio.
Seriously. I would love a large-format enlarger, one of those Fuji 6+9 rangefinders and a healthy stock of 120 or 220 HP5. That would be bliss.
Film is certainly not dead. I was talking to a bloke in our local camera shop the other day and, apparently, two major educational institutions around here run photography courses - using film. I find that heartening. With a bit of luck and a fair wind, they might produce a couple of photographers that actually know their, er, aperture from their, er, elbow ... as it were.
On a sadder note, however. The same camera shop is introducing a scheme to recycle metal cameras. Strip 'em, melt 'em down. |
Barnum
Tinkerer
Username: Barnum
Post Number: 162
Registered: 10-2007
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Wednesday, April 14, 2010 - 10:32 am: |
|
My attic became my darkroom, complete with a somewhat ancient set of folding steps to get up to it. I recall my first magical experience, when with some sleight of hand, the branch I had included in the camera viewfinder appeared before my eyes. I began going off modern cameras when instead of a nice bit of weight in ones hands, there was a nasty plastic shell. And of course one could always invite a young lady into your darkroom and introduce her to your enlarger... As for digital cameras,one is a must, since I have yet to find a way of plugging my AI jobs into any computor. |
Puderse
Tinkerer
Username: Puderse
Post Number: 52
Registered: 09-2006
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Thursday, April 15, 2010 - 07:22 am: |
|
There are plenty of old goats watching this site.
I too started with a Leica Kit but my next job was convinced that only 4X5 would do. Tri-X film packs for news and cut film for studio, a Rollei for color print and a Pentax for slides. This was when Ektachrome was only 3.
Eventually I bought a few Fs and have never bought another camera for my serious work. I do however admit to liking plate cameras and funkey old boxes. |
Barnum
Tinkerer
Username: Barnum
Post Number: 165
Registered: 10-2007
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Thursday, April 15, 2010 - 12:16 pm: |
|
Hello Puderse.
Less of the OLD!!! |
Edward8
Tinkerer
Username: Edward8
Post Number: 5
Registered: 03-2010
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Thursday, April 15, 2010 - 10:40 pm: |
|
Barnum: I'm with you! The weight of a camera is vital when shooting in low light. I don't trust plastic in the field. That's why the combo mentioned above by Clay - a Nikon F2 with full drive - was such a magnificent unit. It just sat, squat - not going anywhere. One could shoot handheld with confidence using shutter speeds well below 1/30th. As for plugging AI lenses into a computer, the pixel-besotted cameras I now use allow me to dial in the specifications of my old lenses. The MF 105mm 2.8 Micro Nikkor, the MF 35mm 2.8 PC Nikkor ... which is handy. However, the Mac computer I use refuses to cooperate with any lens manufactured before last Wednesday week. A fatal flaw in the otherwise excellent Apple enterprise.
At the risk of being guilty of prattling, a tale.
As a kid, I was taught competitive rifle shooting using World War 2 .303 rifles equipped with peep sights. Blacked with candle smoke. The object was to represent Australia at Bisley, in the UK. I was taught by a then old bloke who was a veteran of the Boer War.
Allow for wind. Breathe. The target moves, as one breathes. Squeeze. Gentle. It was, in hindsight, invaluable training for my later career in photography.
Don't, please, get me wrong - I loathe guns, but do admire the sheer brilliance of the mechanics.
Anyway. I never did get to Bisley ... I suspect that a mixture of photographic chemicals, dark and musty rooms - valve radios, jazz - and the young lady wot lived up the road complicated matters. My career as a rifleman was cut short, truncated in its prime.
Years later, during the Vietnam War, the Australian Army equipped me with - YES! - an SLR. And tried to teach me how to use it ... but that's another tale.
Puderse: Yes! Tri-X. We did some terrible things to that film. My shift was from 2pm to midnight. The paper went to bed at 11pm. There was a fleet of ancient vehicles equipped with valve-driven two-way radios. On a late-breaking news story, there would be the inevitable call - around 10.30pm - from the pictorial editor. "What have you got ... Do we hold ...how many columns ..." There was no faffing about here. It was either Yes or No. If Yes, the next call was to someone in the darkroom. A tray of warm developer, probably D-76. Paper laid out in darkroom. Grades 1 to 5. Bang. Crash. Wallop. Seconds in the developer. Counting. A quick fix. Shake. Quick look at neg. Yes. Print wet. To column size. My best time was seven minutes, from go to whoa. Good film, Tri-X.
Barnum: Your point is taken on the misuse and abuse of the word "old". This word has grumpy antecedents and is best avoided. Would much prefer "venerable", possibly "vintage". Certainly not "antique" which, following the British Standard and applied in Australia, denotes an item at least 100 years old. Correct me if I'm wrong, but the American standard for an "antique" is an item at least 50 years old. That's young, in my book!
No. We are NOT "old", merely experienced. At the risk of boring everyone shiteless, another tale:
A meeting in Sydney. Preparing for a major archaeological dig. Discussing photographic requirements. Office was equipped with a couple of basic P+S plastic digitals. "Er", says I. "We'll need to shoot at least B+W neg stuff ..."
"No," says the director, glibly. "We can convert the digital to black and white ..."
From memory, I think I shot around 30+ rolls of T-Max 400 ASA on that project ... plus Sensia trannies. Plus some, erm, digital stuff for fun.
PS: I hope my ramblings don't offend any one. If so, please advise. |
Marty
Tinkerer
Username: Marty
Post Number: 68
Registered: 11-2008
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Friday, April 16, 2010 - 07:11 am: |
|
Your ramblings are very enjoyable, Edward8...
My personal memories of darkrooms date somewhere back to the early 50's, when my mother took a photography course. She shot my father's Argus C3. I was young enough to use a dead "D" battery stuck into an empty box of fuses as a camera, but I remember well the soft glow of the redlight, and the intriguing bouquet of the chemicals involved... Aside from some time spent developing Xrays, (not really the same...) my next time in a darkroom was in college when I took a course, (shooting the same Argus C3,) mainly due to interest stirred up by my growing accumulation of oldies. I loved it! I signed up for the latest shift in the darkroom and usually stayed until the campus police ran me out. I put a small darkroom in the basement at home, but now it's been 35 years since I've had a darkroom... Maybe someday.
Digital camera have their place, but more is lost than people yet realize. How many photographs stored on electronic chips will be available in even 50 or 60 years? I have negatives shot by my grandfather a century ago, and boxes of glass plates shot earlier than that. I have family movies shot on 8mm film from more than 60 years ago, and if my projector breaks, old ones are pretty fixable. A magnifying glass will show what's on the film. How many wedding films shot on videotape will be viewable in another 50 years?
As for guns, I happen to enjoy them, (caught me a little flak in the "The Big Question" thread in this forum..) Guns no more cause murder and mayhem than cameras cause kiddie porn. Evil is in the heart. I get offa that now...
On being "old." I'm 60. I don't think I'm particularly old, but some would. If so, I kind of like it. I don't want to be a "senior" or some anything of the sort. I want to be an OLD MAN.
No time to proof read this, gotta go to work... |
Mndean
Tinkerer
Username: Mndean
Post Number: 219
Registered: 08-2007
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Friday, April 16, 2010 - 11:26 am: |
|
I had a friend who laundered his digicam's memory card not so long ago. It was full, so he took it out and shoved it in a pocket, intending to put the images on his computer. Suffice it to say, nothing survived. He lost a lot of family pictures that he never bothered to store anywhere else. |
Barnum
Tinkerer
Username: Barnum
Post Number: 166
Registered: 10-2007
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Friday, April 16, 2010 - 12:02 pm: |
|
Og God, am I old enough to recall when the British Army were replacing the Lee Enfield .303 with the Belgium FN, otherwise known as the SLR,(self loading rifle))? Certainly though the same principle of accurate shooting applies to both weapons & cameras. An annecdote from my service days concerns the ripping off we took, when for some reason a rabbit appeared behind the targets we we shooting at,& it became the target for about eight squaddies. We missed it. Just as well it could not shoot back! I did some shooting as a civvy, but one changes over time. I found the same satisfaction in stalking and shooting something with a camera, and the subject remained alive after I had taken the shot! |
Marty
Tinkerer
Username: Marty
Post Number: 70
Registered: 11-2008
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Friday, April 16, 2010 - 02:08 pm: |
|
Actually, I'm not a hunter either, and I feel bad when I have to shoot a skunk that takes up housekeeping in my garage. (Although I do feel that properly regulated hunting is important to maintain the balance of nature in the presence human interference.) I've punched many thousands of .45 caliber holes in paper though, and tin cans tremble in my presence. |
Edward8
Tinkerer
Username: Edward8
Post Number: 8
Registered: 03-2010
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Saturday, April 17, 2010 - 12:19 am: |
|
Mndean: That's a terrible tale! However, I suspect, all too common. We were taught to respect a roll of film and to treat it with care. Know the rules - then break 'em. If necessary. But I fear that digi photographers lack a vital ingredient - a sense of history. The historical record will be sadly lacking 20, 50 or 100 years hence. However, we must plug along ... I try to shoot at least a couple of rolls of B+W or trannies per project, just for the record. Archival processing is, now, difficult to obtain and highly expensive. But old habits die hard - I still shoot CF cards in "rolls", 36 exposures to a card, no matter what the capacity. The cards are then safely stored. I regard them as my negs.
Barnum/Marty: Just a note to clear the air. I was referring to the precision of rifle shooting, the techniques used and the relationship to shooting with a camera. Not all that different, really. Less blood, though. Maybe we should drop the gun stuff, eh? But, yes, SLR - in its other meaning - does denote Self-Loading Rifle.
A tale ... but true.
My first camera was a Box Brownie. My first "rifle" was a Diana slug gun, scrounged from the snotty-nosed kid down the road. My first image was of an Aboriginal kid, wild-eyed and bewildered, standing on the track to our house. That's what I remember. I produced a contact print and showed it to my mates. As I recall, the general comment was something like: "Why take a photograph of HIM ..."
My response should have been: "Why not ..."
But the Diana didn't work. Our back yard was infested with magpies, a large ill-mannered bird that darts upon and pecks schoolkids on bikes ...
This was close-range stuff. Box Brownie to one side, trusty Diana amidships ... alas. Diana squeaked, made some plopping sounds and expired. Much mocking from bloody magpies.
My next camera was a 35mm rangefinder, compliments of the oldish lady wot run the camera shop and stuff in our country town. She wore really red lipstick, which smudged, as I recall. My next rifle was a Martini Henry. The provenance of this unit is unclear. Suffice to say, it came complete with one hand-rolled, cigar-like cartridge - God knows what explosive - and a chunk of lead the size of a bus. To my young eyes, this was akin to a Saturn rocket. It was safely stored - under my bed. Along with the Box Brownie, the home-made, two-valve, short-wave radio that could, on a good night and depending on battery power, pick up Quito, Equador, South America. I told some of my mates about this, but they were not impressed. Never did understand why. Maybe some young people are born to be boring.
It was time to fly to coop. Never to return.
Years later, I discovered that my half brother - a despicable ingrate but a good bloke - sold my Martini Henry to the snotty-nosed kid down the road, now a well-heeled property developer.
The whereabouts of the explosive is unclear. |
Edward8
Tinkerer
Username: Edward8
Post Number: 9
Registered: 03-2010
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Saturday, April 17, 2010 - 12:37 am: |
|
Mndean: That's a terrible tale! However, I suspect, all too common. We were taught to respect a roll of film and to treat it with care. Know the rules - then break 'em. If necessary. But I fear that digi photographers lack a vital ingredient - a sense of history. The historical record will be sadly lacking 20, 50 or 100 years hence. However, we must plug along ... I try to shoot at least a couple of rolls of B+W or trannies per project, just for the record. Archival processing is, now, difficult to obtain and highly expensive. But old habits die hard - I still shoot CF cards in "rolls", 36 exposures to a card, no matter what the capacity. The cards are then safely stored. I regard them as my negs.
Barnum/Marty: Just a note to clear the air. I was referring to the precision of rifle shooting, the techniques used and the relationship to shooting with a camera. Not all that different, really. Less blood, though. Maybe we should drop the gun stuff, eh? But, yes, SLR - in its other meaning - does denote Self-Loading Rifle.
A tale ... but true.
My first camera was a Box Brownie. My first "rifle" was a Diana slug gun, scrounged from the snotty-nosed kid down the road. My first image was of an Aboriginal kid, wild-eyed and bewildered, standing on the track to our house. That's what I remember. I produced a contact print and showed it to my mates. As I recall, the general comment was something like: "Why take a photograph of HIM ..."
My response should have been: "Why not ..."
But the Diana didn't work. Our back yard was infested with magpies, a large ill-mannered bird that darts upon and pecks schoolkids on bikes ...
This was close-range stuff. Box Brownie to one side, trusty Diana amidships ... alas. Diana squeaked, made some plopping sounds and expired. Much mocking from bloody magpies.
My next camera was a 35mm rangefinder, compliments of the oldish lady wot run the camera shop and stuff in our country town. She wore really red lipstick, which smudged, as I recall. My next rifle was a Martini Henry. The provenance of this unit is unclear. Suffice to say, it came complete with one hand-rolled, cigar-like cartridge - God knows what explosive - and a chunk of lead the size of a bus. To my young eyes, this was akin to a Saturn rocket. It was safely stored - under my bed. Along with the Box Brownie, the home-made, two-valve, short-wave radio that could, on a good night and depending on battery power, pick up Quito, Equador, South America. I told some of my mates about this, but they were not impressed. Never did understand why. Maybe some young people are born to be boring.
It was time to fly to coop. Never to return.
Years later, I discovered that my half brother - a despicable ingrate but a good bloke - sold my Martini Henry to the snotty-nosed kid down the road, now a well-heeled property developer.
The whereabouts of the explosive is unclear. |
Clay
Tinkerer
Username: Clay
Post Number: 33
Registered: 12-2006
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Saturday, April 17, 2010 - 06:51 pm: |
|
Ah , target shooting. Been a competitive shooter
with handgun and rifle for 45 years.Same set of
inputs as in photography: Breath control, sight
{viewfinder) control, trigger (shutter) squeeze,
call your shots, stance (hold them steady), etc.
Reload my own ammo, and bulk load my film, ha!
Best regards,
/Clay |
Tom_cheshire
Tinkerer
Username: Tom_cheshire
Post Number: 304
Registered: 04-2009
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Sunday, April 18, 2010 - 05:14 pm: |
|
My entry into photography was a hand-me-down camera after the family camera had been upgraded. I took photos once or twice with it but hadn't a clue what I was doing. Thankfully, the camera was "box camera simple".
When time marched on a bit more to my early teen years, photography took on a new fascination. Mainly because these were the only magazines and books that had nudes in them which could get past our strict family framework. 
There were those moments when I actually had to read some of those magazines/books, particularly when someone was hovering near. So, in short order, I became very familiar with all the technicalities of photography. It was about then that used cameras seemed to pass into my hands quite easily and they took on something of a status symbol meaning besides photographic tool.
Eventually, I became the "Roger Willoughby" of photography. I could talk the talk but never took any photos. (Roger Willoughby is the fictional fishing pro who wrote fishing guides and was considered an angling expert but he had never gone fishing even once in the movie "Man's Favorite Sport?" 1964). Yes, everyone sought out my advice in photographic matters and even begged me to shoot their events (like weddings) but I was always able to wiggle out of such engagements which, oddly, only added to my mystique and professionalism in everyone's eyes.
In time, I actually moved past all that and developed a sense of composition and photographic understanding leaving the "Willoughby" stage to focus on serious photography.
And, as an aside, it now seems that so many books on nude photography have so many photos that are technically perfect in terms of lighting, exposure, elaborately staged backgrounds, etc., but are complete failures as photographs. The result looks like a photo of a naked person but not a nude.
Sorry, no guns, no motorcycles, no hounds, no wallabies, no sport cars, no military service, and never shot into orbit in my bio. |
Marty
Tinkerer
Username: Marty
Post Number: 71
Registered: 11-2008
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Monday, April 19, 2010 - 08:04 pm: |
|
Tome Cheshire was saying
Sorry, no guns, no motorcycles, no hounds, no wallabies, no sport cars, no military service, and never shot into orbit in my bio. :-)
Well, this forum is mainly populated by guys, so every once in a while we have to have a thread on blowing things up, drinking large amounts of intoxicating beverages, and large, dangerous things that go fast. |
Tom_cheshire
Tinkerer
Username: Tom_cheshire
Post Number: 305
Registered: 04-2009
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Monday, April 19, 2010 - 09:17 pm: |
|
Ha, ha, ok, Marty, I spoke too fast. I wear Wallabies (suede desert boots) and for the "large, dangerous and fast" category I was into amateur rocketry (hence the "never shot into orbit" quip).
And, yes, I had the original RocketCam and later RoCam (both are cameras built into rocket nose cones) but never the CineRoc (which really was a Bolsey 8 in the nose cone). |
Edward8
Tinkerer
Username: Edward8
Post Number: 11
Registered: 03-2010
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Monday, May 10, 2010 - 06:56 am: |
|
Hello all. Apologies for not responding to your responses. Been out doing necessary stuff to earn a quid. Archival. Jeez, I hate digital, especially the post processing.
Enjoy the tales ... keep "em coming! I'm sort of looking forward to my dotage. Tom mentioned nudes. When I was growing up, nudes were not exactly thick on the ground. Snakes? Yes. Wallabies? Yes. I have never regarded photography as art, although the play of light on a nude female figure is certainly a joy to behold. On those occasions, I normally don't pack a camera.
Anyway. Have dug out the stainless-steel developing tanks from the shed. Have sussed out a supply of chemicals. Film supply is okay.
We live in a small, close-knit country town. Population 900. One woman in this community is 94 years old. She is a lovely lady. What a great age!
As a photographer, I somehow feel obliged to record this event. With respect. I wish to take her portrait, but do not wish to invade her privacy. A dilemma that only I can solve, I fear.
Regards all. Edward |
Marty
Tinkerer
Username: Marty
Post Number: 75
Registered: 11-2008
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Tuesday, May 11, 2010 - 01:06 pm: |
|
Welcome back off the road, Edward8. I mentioned earlier in the thread that I'd been picking up more old darkroom stuff... Just recently I scored a Model E Kodak Developing Machine, circa 1902-5. Not too much competition in buying old darkroom stuff. To keep it somewhat relevant to the forum, I cleaned it's fitted box with Murphy's Oil Soap, then gave it thin coat of Renaissance Wax. I used Simichrome to shine up the metal "tank." Fun stuff... |
Dragunov
Tinkerer
Username: Dragunov
Post Number: 160
Registered: 10-2007
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Monday, May 24, 2010 - 09:52 pm: |
|
speaking of old geezers and old cameras, I recently got a 1962 Leica M2. that's thirty years older than I am.
oh, and it wasn't cheap: $360, and it was a real beater. and I had to replace a curtain, too. and then another $100 for an Industar collapsible and adapter...
but, man, it is nice. does pretty much everything I want, and it's pretty small. it's heavy enough to make holes in my pockets though...
cheers. |
Edward8
Tinkerer
Username: Edward8
Post Number: 12
Registered: 03-2010
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Tuesday, May 25, 2010 - 02:46 am: |
|
Marty:
You mentioned earlier about blowing things up and consuming beverages of an intocicationg, hic, nature. Another chappie here mentioned shooting with a TLR and the methodology required to avoid "blurry photos". Put together, these disparate thoughts lead to a small tale. If I may.
Dragunov: Jeez, you know how to make a bloke feel old! In the year 1962, I was a young buck prancing about with, yes, a Leica M2. For a newspaper. Great fun. Learning. The "old" blokes on staff stuck to their Speed Graphics and pretty much scorned the Leicas. Nikon was a dirty word! I'd had some experience with medium format and ... winged it. A Yashica 635. But, more later ...
Tom Cheshire:
Roger sounds like a worthy of my ilk. Nice tale. Ta. There's a smallish novel in there, somewhere! The title alone would probably sell ... "Roger's hints on Nudes" springs to mind ... however ... room for improvement, methinks. How about "Nudes, with Roger". Nah. I'll bow to peer pressure on this one ...
However. To serious matters.
HOW TO FOCUS A TLR USING WARM SHERRY. LESSON 1:
In a once-civilized country not a million miles from Australia, there was a very proper Governer-General. Complete with monocle. A jovial chap, probably harmless.
The assignment was to go out, check it out - and return with a pic. The young reporter was given similar instructions. Some words, would do. Easy.
What happened was this: The G-G was delayed. Huge reception area - with a table covered with small glasses. And bottles of sherry. We said: "Oh, ta, just the one ..."
And waited. "Oh, thank you, yes, I'll have another small one ..."
Then, when the waiter left, we opened another couple of bottles and had a quiet yarn about the state of the world, as we knew it. And checked out the waitresses and stuff ...
Then the bloody G-G had the gall to lob! We were, of course, safely tucked away in a corner with the warm sherry. And a couple of waitresses.
Better take a pic, sez I. Details are somewhat hazy. Marched up to the G-G, went clunk, twice, with the Yashica 635, bowed, and withdrew, hopefully, with some dignity intact.
Anyway. On the way back to the office we felt the need for a cleansing ale and stopped off at a friendly hotel ... to, of course, shout the waitresses a drink or two ... ahem.
Lost the reporter. Got back to office. Developed 120 roll. Felt need for a little lie down. To put it bluntly: Tired as a newt. Had a wee kip.
Next day. Page One. A genial pic of the G-G, with byline."Portrait by ... etc."
And it was sharp. Was it the warm sherry? Was it the attentions of the attractive waitress? Was it all down to the excellent qualities of the Yashica 635? Was it pure instinct? Or was there an addled brain cell at work in there, somewhere?
We will never know.
However, a warning. Warm sherry and focusing, in the home environment, is best avoided. That is: Do not try this at home.
Regards, all. |
Edward8
Tinkerer
Username: Edward8
Post Number: 13
Registered: 03-2010
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Tuesday, May 25, 2010 - 02:49 am: |
|
Marty:
You mentioned earlier about blowing things up and consuming beverages of an intocicationg, hic, nature. Another chappie here mentioned shooting with a TLR and the methodology required to avoid "blurry photos". Put together, these disparate thoughts lead to a small tale. If I may.
Dragunov: Jeez, you know how to make a bloke feel old! In the year 1962, I was a young buck prancing about with, yes, a Leica M2. For a newspaper. Great fun. Learning. The "old" blokes on staff stuck to their Speed Graphics and pretty much scorned the Leicas. Nikon was a dirty word! I'd had some experience with medium format and ... winged it. A Yashica 635. But, more later ...
Tom Cheshire:
Roger sounds like a worthy of my ilk. Nice tale. Ta. There's a smallish novel in there, somewhere! The title alone would probably sell ... "Roger's hints on Nudes" springs to mind ... however ... room for improvement, methinks. How about "Nudes, with Roger". Nah. I'll bow to peer pressure on this one ...
However. To serious matters.
HOW TO FOCUS A TLR USING WARM SHERRY. LESSON 1:
In a once-civilized country not a million miles from Australia, there was a very proper Governer-General. Complete with monocle. A jovial chap, probably harmless.
The assignment was to go out, check it out - and return with a pic. The young reporter was given similar instructions. Some words, would do. Easy.
What happened was this: The G-G was delayed. Huge reception area - with a table covered with small glasses. And bottles of sherry. We said: "Oh, ta, just the one ..."
And waited. "Oh, thank you, yes, I'll have another small one ..."
Then, when the waiter left, we opened another couple of bottles and had a quiet yarn about the state of the world, as we knew it. And checked out the waitresses and stuff ...
Then the bloody G-G had the gall to lob! We were, of course, safely tucked away in a corner with the warm sherry. And a couple of waitresses.
Better take a pic, sez I. Details are somewhat hazy. Marched up to the G-G, went clunk, twice, with the Yashica 635, bowed, and withdrew, hopefully, with some dignity intact.
Anyway. On the way back to the office we felt the need for a cleansing ale and stopped off at a friendly hotel ... to, of course, shout the waitresses a drink or two ... ahem.
Lost the reporter. Got back to office. Developed 120 roll. Felt need for a little lie down. To put it bluntly: Tired as a newt. Had a wee kip.
Next day. Page One. A genial pic of the G-G, with byline."Portrait by ... etc."
And it was sharp. Was it the warm sherry? Was it the attentions of the attractive waitress? Was it all down to the excellent qualities of the Yashica 635? Was it pure instinct? Or was there an addled brain cell at work in there, somewhere?
We will never know.
However, a warning. Warm sherry and focusing, in the home environment, is best avoided. That is: Do not try this at home.
Regards, all. |
Edward8
Tinkerer
Username: Edward8
Post Number: 16
Registered: 03-2010
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Thursday, May 27, 2010 - 12:20 am: |
|
Er, oops. Didn't mean to post my prattling twice. Seems an F3 motor drive somehow attached itself to my finger, resulting in an unfortunate burst. Anyway, that's my story ...
Any one know how to delete? Cheers. |
Markd
Tinkerer
Username: Markd
Post Number: 1
Registered: 07-2010
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Friday, July 16, 2010 - 07:51 pm: |
|
This is a great thread!
I'm a new member and can't help but add a comment to this glorious thread.
I'm 44 and started collecting cameras after borrowing a beat up AE-1 from my brother in the mid-90's. I lost count of my collection but I tend to collect Canons and have many of the film SLR's.
I wanted to share a quick story with you: a coworker was a Navy man and was traveling by train in Europe, had his prized Voigtlander Vitomatic IIB with him. Two young ladies entered the compartment and the three struck up a conversation. While 'distracted' my friend left the camera on the train since the ladies were leaving at the same stop. He didn't realize the error until hours later. That was in the mid-60's. I happen to mention at work one day that I collected cameras and he told the story and said he missed the camera, but had no regrets. (hehe)
The gentleman is a good friend and willing to help everyone in any way possible so I decided to go on a quest to find him a camera...unbeknown to him.
It only took me about a month (via ebay) and I located a near mint Camera, complete with case.
I took it into work one day and handed it to him..
"Here, I found your camera...and those ladies were really, really old...you should be more careful when you travel!" He howled and I explained that it wasn't actually his but he was tickled anyway. He asked if he could pay for the camera...I said "Heck no, I just want to see some of the pics you take". |
Msiegel
Tinkerer
Username: Msiegel
Post Number: 192
Registered: 03-2008
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Sunday, July 18, 2010 - 11:20 am: |
|
HI,
great story - and even a much greater idea getting your co-worker that camera!
I fear that for me times are gone when I got distracted enough by two young ladies to forget an old camera in a train ;-)
rgds
Martin |
Edward8
Tinkerer
Username: Edward8
Post Number: 39
Registered: 03-2010
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Monday, July 19, 2010 - 08:29 am: |
|
Markd. All greetings.
A good tale you tell. Glad you enjoy this thread of old geezers postulating of things past, opportunities missed in the dim, dark ... (Oh, jeez, we're not THAT old ...)
There is a popular misconception that large cameras equate to performance. This is a misnomer. One hesitates to tell tales out of school ... but a neat Leica M2 was useful in my day. I did use it as a girl magnet. As a gentleman, I will not reveal details. Suffice to say, the Leica, combined with a forlorn and lost expression, worked wonders ... leading to a mutual satisfactory conclusion. However, I would warn. Do not try this trick at home. There be dangers!
+++
To explain: Darkrooms are dark. Intricate. Most of the real work is done by feel. Magic fingers. That's the key The neg. Once the neg is done ...
+++
But. Anyway. And get this right. This has nothing whatever to do with me. I was not there. I was in Poona, at the time ...
+++ |
Jayd
Tinkerer
Username: Jayd
Post Number: 74
Registered: 06-2007
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Saturday, July 24, 2010 - 11:44 am: |
|
Welcome Edward
I to learned Photography in media as a publicity shot guy for TV stations and multimedia producers.
In those days there was no such thing as photo shop and post editing of video to speak of.So it did not matter if B&W or color print,slide or video you were expected to bring it back Air ready.
You did not control process and printing usually so you better get it right according to the senor man's way: he said how film was processed and printed. We were low budget so we had Nikormats when I bought my own SLR for freelance multimedia work I bought the Topcon RE Super which I still have and use It just did what I need better than the Nikon F series of the time. Now I enjoy the the Kodak Retina IIc the most of all the cameras I have. Yes i use digital but I still love film and the mechanical marvels that use it. |
Edward8
Tinkerer
Username: Edward8
Post Number: 41
Registered: 03-2010
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Thursday, July 29, 2010 - 06:29 pm: |
|
Hello Jay
Yep, getting it right the first time should be drilled into every young aspiring photographer!
BTW, the Nikormat - or Nikkormat here in Australia - is a fine camera. Fond memories here of that beast.
You're right - these old cameras are mechanical marvels, which I'm now beginning to fully appreciate. I've been following the saga of the Yashica shutter on the Restoration forum - fascinating! Had no idea the assembly was so intricate.
Cheers. Edward. |
|
