Restoration of Century Grand Studio, Opinions welcome!

[goamules]

There was a thread on this board on the polishing of brass a while ago. Someone who works at a museum said they conserve/preserve by polishing then waxing. I'm sure it depends on the item, a 1000 year old bronze sword is not polished. A 200 year old telescope is.

From a more practical standpoint, I see tarnished lenses usually sell for less than a bright one. The same as a tarnished antique brass trumpet or other instrument, a tarnished brass headlight fixture on an antique Model T car, a tarnished old silver tea set. I notice antique telescope collectors have no problem with, and pay more, for a nicely polished telescope. Ship collectibles like binnacles or portholes are always worth more polished.

Here are some special brass items with patinas you would never touch: Tiffany Lamps or other Arts and Craft era items - the patina was factory applied and you will kill the value if you remove. Guns - the patina is something collectors expect (mostly steel, but some brass).

What I want to reiterate is originality is everything. If a lens is rare or has most of it's original varnish (which is actually quite tough) you should not touch the finish. If a lens has been polished dozens of times during it's lifetime, what is the harm in doing it again if it's been avoided for 10 or 20 years? And the polishing should be with a non abrasive method, I do think it detracts from the value when I see someone has used emery paper or power tools. You would not use that on badly tarnished silverware, so don't on brass optics.

These are the thoughts I have.

[Mark Paschke]

I have held back because other were saying sensible things! But! These lenses were not in the danger area for further tarnishing. They were a very healthy colour - showing they have been well stored the last century. The only lenses which deserve surface treatments are those that been in unheated/damp stores for decades. These have deep pits and signs of green copper oxides/carbonates and sometimes the reddish copper showing up as the zink is leached away. These will continue to deteriorate and new finishing is a good idea.

I like the way you are going about the bellows, though!

I think the wood looks fine as it is. I note a few areas of wood damage rather than darkened lacquer and crazing. If you strip and refinish, these areas - which can't be repaired - will look much more out of place.

Actually my Voightlander 5 was in need of cleaning and it took awhile to get it by hand. Notice the area from the V down to the B the rusty color, that was a good several coats of brasso and a soft cloth. Also if you look where the lens attaches to the lens board between 6 o'clock and 8 o'clock, even in my AFTER picture theres still so remaining. That area is a little tough to clean but I'm working on it.......Im bellow building now since the wife FINALLY showed up with my Fabric marking pen, had to take a break after an hour of doing layout!

[Mark Paschke]

Well after cutting all the stiffiners as per the directions of that web site, Im finding that Im not sure how this type of bellow can be sucessfully mounted to a square frame. My guess is this wont work and its too bad because I really like the look as compared to what my originals looked like. Maybe Im just too tired but I see no practical way this mounts properly to a perfectly square frame without splitting a pleat in half and even then I dont think it fits into the century when compressed

[Steven Tribe]

The result looks very good.

Just one question - was the "original" bellows folded this way with "diagonals"? All the Century Studios I have seen - albeit later models from Century/Eastman and Eastman - have square type folds.

[Mark Paschke]

The result looks very good.

Just one question - was the "original" bellows folded this way with "diagonals"? All the Century Studios I have seen - albeit later models from Century/Eastman and Eastman - have square type folds.

Hey Steve, thats not my result, I wish it were I really love the look as compared to my originals. If you read my post again Im saying I cant figure out a way to make this style work with a square frame in the confines of the Century Camera because with this style a pleat ends in a rectangle, not a square. The people mounting these on square frames must have opposite sides sticking out past the square frame, Im not beaten yet, just losing the battle in my feeble mind.

Last night I stopped at this point, I sure wish I could make this style work

[Mark Paschke]

Actually I think I can still make this style work, theres enough room above and below on a Century for the extra 1-1/4" pleat to tuck into when compressed, I just have to make sure my math works out. Only out time and my last peice of poster board if it doesnt work

[Steven Tribe]

Sorry, I jumped straight to the illustration and missed the text above! "Square " bellows are much easier to fit into the framing rims.

[Mark Paschke]

Sorry, I jumped straight to the illustration and missed the text above! "Square " bellows are much easier to fit into the framing rims.

My problem was I layed out an exact layout of my original and used the other guys math to cut my stiffeners. Hopefully Im thinking correctly here in the fact half my stiffs are still good and I have to increase the sides 2-1/2" making the bellows a perfect square at a seam ( on my original frame)

It seems to work laid out, and in my head but please someone jump in and say NOooooo if they see otherwise!

[Steven Tribe]

I can only measure my own bellows which are a professional replacement in the original style and these are NOT absolutely square. The across dimension is 29cm and the down is 33cm. The overlap of material under the bellows is about an inch. Hope this helps rather than confuses!

[Mark Paschke]

Well, I snuck down stair a few times and popped these guys out, they're sitting under weight right now but I was highly satisfied after my initial folding.......these things are pretty easy. Frames fit flawlessly as well, Im pretty pumped it didnt fail and was pretty fast for a first shot