I have not seen a Voigtlander #9 in my over fifty years of looking. OP, good for you. Collectors should go wild!
In my opinion from my own adventures with my #7 Voigtlander, its imaging qualities are underwhelming and other less expensive lenses do olde times better as Jim Galli's images evince.
I have to wonder if more than just a few #9s were ever sold.
The crate says J.C. Stephens, Tyler, TX. I wonder if it was the J.C. Stephens mentioned in this Tyler, TX agricultural report from 1912:
https://books.google.com/books?id=de...0texas&f=false
Cameron Cornell
Washington State
It likely is the same man. I searched for his name associated with photographers in Tyler, Texas, but came up dry. If he was a peach farmer I wonder why the lens was sent to him, or if the crate was onlynised to store it as it was moved from Tyler to Galveston before ending up in Houston.
This is too big a lens to have been used by an ordinary portrait photographer, not just in Texas, but anywhere!
Tyler cannot be the first owner, in my view, unless - as someone mentioned - he used his earnings in the pursuit of stars and planets on his estate!
An institution of some sort must have been the first owner. Many of the super large optics of the 19th century are still attached to astronomical instruments. Judging from the condition of the lens, I would guess that this was a purchase made in error, as there is no sign of use or special mounting that would have been necessary for telescope use.
Now Denmark is a little country and all the strange things that happen to items which are owned by Public Institutions (Scientific Establishment, Museums and so on) which are no longer on display/use and placed in store rooms, have often become public knowledge.
One super example is the State Museum of Art. Here thousands of paintings have been in store for over 60 years. Long ago, A Minister of Culture decided that these paintings should be seen. A system of loan to Schools, semi-indpendent Government institutions was arranged - a kind of long term loan Library system. Record keeping was very poor, but a check about 20 years ago revealed that approximately half of these works of art were no longer traceable. A few were discovered to have been sold at auction years before and many were found in private "Ownership"!
An analysis of a few cases showed that it was not simple theft. A typical sequence of events was.
Office manager gets a canvas on loan from the State art depot.
Office manger gets to like "his" art.
Office manager retires and takes his art with him home.
Office manager dies.
The artwork is considered as part of his legacy by the family.
Artwork is sold/attempted sold at auction.
It is possible that this lens has been disposed of officially, without the real value of the lens being judged. There have also been periods when this lens would have been considered as a piece of old useless optical junk from the 19th Century and could have bought for very little. I am sure many readers here would still share this view! If the person on the box had paid a lot - or even used this lens - I am sure that his heirs would have known about it and it wouldn't have ended up in a non-specialist shop in Houston. The Icelandic Nicola Perscheid lens mentioned here last week shows that the later generations do have a good knowledge of Photographers in the family.
I am not suggesting this lens is somehow tainted by a questionable past - that looks very unlikely in this case. I am just trying to figure out how such a unique lens ended up in Texas.
Please do not underestimate what us Yankees may do. Attached is a smaller petzval pressed into service by the Naval Observatory fellows who devised such a camera to photograph an eclipse event about 100 + or - years ago. The link to the larger file that was posted at Shorpy is here.
I'm happy with my #7. At least I can use it on the 8A.
I have also been wondering what that lens might have been purchased for. I understand most of the larger ones were essentially showpieces, made by the big lensmakers to prove they could, as props for their showrooms, advertising, etc. But this one is just small enough that it might have been intended for use. I just can't imagine what a Texas photographer might have wanted with it, and it's far too expensive to have been ordered by mistake or just to display in the front of a shop. I've seen period ledgers detailing house construction for roughly the same amount ($750).
An early attempt at telephoto photography? Was there some contraption built to use this monster with smaller plates for some special purpose? Or was someone trying to establish himself as a dealer and this was his sample?
Another person with a #7! I'm happy to know that.
Yeah Jim, a man named Clyde Tombaugh used to live near me in the 1990s in New Mexico. He built his own telescopes too. It seems he discovered some strange body in space, called Pluto!
At 29" Voigtlander with 6" diameter glass was used at the Lowell observatory in 1905 in Flagstaff, AZ. That glass was replaced by another type. This telescope is now the finder on the big 24" Clark:
Eventually it was replaced by a 66" Cooke triplet, with 13" diameter glass, to search for and find the "Planet X." Here it is:
Garrett
flickr galleries
Bookmarks