Building a view camera. Which wood you choose? ..

[Rob_5419]

In a new year party, I met up with some guys who work in various disciplines - freelance photography, carpentry; draughtsman (CAD) and antiques whilst I had my Gandolfi plate camera with me (always a head turner).

Our conversation turned and turned on the subject of traditional view cameras. The carpenter had remarked on the build aesthetics and workmanship of the turn of the 20th century Gandolfi, and the antiques dealer went on a tangent about the value of specific antique woods, whereas the photographer suggested tangents about design pragmatics, detailing how the weight would be impractical for anything other than a drive-by shoot or picnic excursion.

It was a fascinating discussion, and finally the carpenter popped the question: why we didn't build one to suit all of our three disciplines, and the plans could be designed on CAD. It sounded like a great idea, and after deciding on a budget to work towards, we've been exploring options and features for a custom (non-commercial) view camera.

The carpenter brought over some ebony and showed us how a ball of ebony weighed twice that of standard woods, in addition to a non-floating solid black wood which equally weighed a ton (used to make police batons to knock people into concussion).
The only objection to the ebony came from the other photographer, who felt that its weight would be incapacitating for any task other than the studio or a picnic, particularly for a whole plate camera. The pragmatic consensus is that an ebony wood seems like a very poor choice given its specific density, although it has every other factor in its favour. Other non-warping and humidity resistant woods are available, and have lower specific densities, however manufacturers seem to settle on cherry, beech, rosewood, walnut and oaks i.e. medium weight woods, none of which show durability over a longer timescale (the interest of the antiques dealer).
Mahogany and redwoods like merbau seem to be the exception.


There's a lot more to the detail of the woods and their technical characteristics, however I'd be interested to hear from others here, what kind of wood they would prefer for a custom designed camera.

Which wood would you prefer to use for a view camera?

[Bruce Barlow]

Richard Ritter likes cherry and mahogany for their stability and ease of working, in that priority. They also happen to be lovely, easily available, and comparatively inexpensive. I want the 4x5 - 8x10 he's making for me to be cherry. Hear that. Richard??

[Colin Graham]

I've made them out of cherry, mahogany, rosewood, walnut and even fiddleback maple here in the US. All are very suitable, although mahogany tended to be the lightest per board foot, and also the easiest to work. Despite the open grain it holds a very nice profile and planes like a dream, but there are ethical considerations, I use only the certified renewable though I'm not entirely sure how much of a difference it makes, there's good arguments on either side.... Interestingly, the fiddleback maple and rosewood seem to be the most dimensionally stable, but also the hardest on tool blades and the heaviest. Still nowhere near ebony. The maple though seems to have the most 'hidden tension'. I've had this tension damn near explode boards when ripping and resawing them. Once it's trued-up though it is very very stable. I've used lignum vitae in small small quantities for inlays- lignum has a soapy self-lubricating quality that's great for runners and slides and bearing surfaces.
Personally I love cherry, and for the mot part would never use anything else after trying many different types, but the last time at the lumber yard the cherry was unnaturally heavy so I went with the mahogany. Anyway, your choices will probably be vastly different in England.

[Ernest Purdum]

There is a problem today finding high quality mahogany. The Gandolfi brothers were very conscious of this so maintained a stock of very old wood. My thought is that top-grade mahogany stands up better than cherry to the use of a busy camera, and that other woods are either significantly heavier or harder to woirk. I would nominate teak as being the hardest on blades. Maybe the ideal wood for a "non commercial" camera would be some from a 120 year old something saved from the wrecker.

[Sandeha]

I've just made a 4x5 point-and-shoot out of cherry that I got from http://www.modellingtimbers.co.uk/4520.html and the quality is pretty good. The last view camera I made (I'm thinking that'd be 'last' in both senses) I made with American cherry and it was good to work with. From the craftsman's point of view (possibly not the antique dealer's), and given a minimum stability, I think you'd lean towards whichever wood provided the greatest satisfaction in working and finish.

Rob, if you know of a better source for trimmed wood in the UK, let me know.

[Kuzano]

Few people know woods like someone who builds guitars for a living (or other stringed) instruments. The wood have to be light, unchanging once built, and undergo the stress of strings trying to collapse the instrument. Guitars and other stringed instruments have to be built with woods that never move (if possible) for a long span of time.

I'm not saying there aren't some knowledgable people making cameras, but a verification of the lightest, highest strength woods could be confirmed this way, and you might actually find some fairly exotic woods that have excellent qualities for your project.

[Pete Watkins]

Rob, If you want a real laugh use MDF and tell people it's a Gandolfi. Imagine that, a cardboard camera! I'm sure that your antique dealer friend will be extatic!
Pete.

[Rob_5419]

Hey guys - thanks for the responses.

Let me go through how far I've got...

Bruce - cherry and mahogany are very easy to work with. The sheer lines are clean and the grain is beautiful and easy to dovetail. In many ways, these are too conventional although perfectly acceptable. I think we're going for a more specialist project.

Colin - that's a good point about the biosustainability of the wood, however a lot of mahogany tailboard wood is available, often as sections from other projects. Generally the size of the mahogany required for a camera is miniscule compared to the sizes of the logs used for furniture. As this isn't going to be a large scale project, I hope it's eco-friendly too.

Ernest - you're spot on. Teak is superb, and this is something the antiques dealer pointed out to me - Alaskan cedar; Australian lacewood are all prime choices because of their durability and resistance to termite attacks, as is Milo wood, and Malaysian Tualang with the advantage of not shrinking over time. The lacewood or teak are particularly good as oiled woods which resist humidity and deterioration in humid conditions. The photographer amongst us prefers the Australian lacewood which has a specific hardness greater than mahogany yet is just as light. I like the mahogany, but then that's what I've already got. The idea of aged mahogany is good, but its resistance to termite is not good.

Kuzano - thanks for the comment. Following your logic, we would then be better approaching a Stradivarius violin maker, right?

The tables for wood specific densities, bending, flex and warp are all available everywhere on the internet. The practical problem of knowing how well the qualities of the wood serves is another matter.

We are currently split between two woods: one is Manchurian Pearwood (guess who suggested that?) and the other is Southern American Purpleheart.

I'd never heard of either woods until shown a catalogue of some of the amazing furniture designed in these woods. Two of us are gravitating towards the he Manchurian Pearwood as a foundation for the camera. This is a sumptuously gorgeous wood used in traditional chinese antique furniture and has a very striking and classy appearance. The carpenter on the otherhand is keen on the Purpleheart - I find this intoxicatingly gaudy however no denying it - it's incredibly distinctive. Remember that none of these woods need staining nor dying.

Sandeha - it's easy to import a block of this stuff, but not through regular suppliers. Where did you buy all your fixtures then? I guess titanium fixtures aren't going to be easy to source (or will blow the budget out).

Pete! Over to the naughty chair right now! MDF is so 1980's
I suppose that could be another marketing venture.......the new MDF Holgofi or Gandolga........

[Scott --]

Pearwood is expensive, and purpleheart is dense (and has interlaced grain, is heavy, dulls tools, and the dust is a sensitizer...). That said, purpleheart is so purty. And I think its additional weight would be negligible in the quantities used in a camera. You know it only stays purple when freshly milled, right?

[Rob_5419]

Scott -

Manchurian pearwood is gorgeous!!! The only think holding us back from this is sourcing a huge big lump and getting it imported back to England. It's a lot cheaper
at source than through import agents (so I've found for every single wood).

The purty purpleheart is dense with tight beautiful interlacing grain - but have you weighed how light it is compared to ebony?? Yes - it is negligible even at whole plate dimension size. It's a huge improvement in weight although it would be heavier than the pearwood.

The carpenter showed me a ball of purplewood which was psychedelic purple all over. Is it the lacquer or veneer which stops it from fading? I know some woods, particularly oiled woods and medium grain woods tend to fade in sunlight. I wasn't aware that the purpleheart would do likewise. I'll double check on that since it would be a big no no....