No, I think its fair. I care. I bought an Ansco Studio camera 3 weeks ago. My paint is in poor shape. Its really a cool camera. I have considered stripping it but worried about the stripper hurting the glue.
Just today I mounted my Vitax lens to it. You should see the gg... but maybe nobody cares...
I had an Ansco 8x10 and now have a Kodak 2D. It never occured to me to even wonder what wood was used. What's the difference? Seriously? I'm not being rhetorical. Sincerely, how does it matter? Im obviusly missing something important.
The OP is currently restoring the camera. I don't know whether he may replace any wood parts, but if he does, he may want to replace it with a matching wood. Or maybe the type of wood will determine the stain or finish he uses. Or maybe he's just curious to know more about the camera he's restoring and intending to use. Are any of these such offensive reasons you feel the need to insult him for wondering?
Three of your last six posts, printed in their entirety. I've just noticed that your posts are as likely to be insults as not. And your next post in another thread after saying "but I get your point" was simply a "rolls eyes" icon. Just sayin'...
"I love my Verito lens, but I always have to sharpen everything in Photoshop..."
Here's through the ground glass. I inverted to show the image upright.
So to the point, how does the restoration look, rusackson? I bet mine is primarily cherry. The natural wood versions are beautiful. Believe it or not, the painted version was the more expensive option. The Vitax looks like a cannon on it.
That must be the 16-inch Vitax. A wonderful lens, and it should be right at home on that camera! I'd strongly suggest replacing at least a couple of screws with little machine screws that go all the way through the lens board and have nuts on the back. That lens has a lot of weight and leverage to pull screws out, and it would be a shame to watch it crash to the floor...
"I love my Verito lens, but I always have to sharpen everything in Photoshop..."
Hey rusackson
Seeing how your Studio #5 outfit had the deluxe sparkle grey finish that makes yours a later model. I know they did not offer this finish in the 1930 Catalog but it is offered in the 1938 catalog and they give all three woods being used in the 1938 catalog. Therefor I would consider your camera/stand to follow the cherry, mahogany and basswood construction. If ever they made the entire camera/stand out of mahogany or Cherry (I'm pretty certain they did) it was long before they started painting them.
As far as which is which on your camera /stand, I would think the camera standards will be mahogany The rails cherry and the stand mostly basswood . I certainly could be wrong so if any camera builders out there who may know please speak up.
I go to the Ansco #5 most times over my Century studios for a couple of reasons. One being that you can slide the camera forward on the platform when your using lots of extension. They designed their stand and camera this way by making the platform stop block small enough to slide between either of the front extension rails.They claim this way "the operator" you can reach all the controls from behind the camera.
BTW- You can't do this with a Semi-Centennial.
I also like the Ansco stand a little better than the Semi Centennial as it just seems smoother and the tilt mechanism is tops.
Anyhow post some photos of your camera as soon as you finished with the restoration.
Here a shot of the camera slide forward on thew platform and a couple others
Louis, the pictures of your beautiful Ansco makes me want to strip mine to natural. I haven't shot it yet but I have only had it three weeks.
Mark, I have to admit. I have no flange on my Vitax. I cut the hole in the lensboard pretty accurately and the lens threaded into the plywood. I then wrapped the inside (of the camera) barrel with a thick leather and used a hose clamp. It is totally bogus but seems very stout. I am very very careful with it and will be looking out for a flange.
Louis, thanks for the tip on the front block. It never occurred to me that the camera would fit over it instead of behind it. Good point!
I wonder how common this camera is now? I read that there were studio cameras in just about every town back in the old days...
Bookmarks