Here we go, Century 8x10 Restoration [Archive] - Large Format Photography Forum

ic-racer

27-Sep-2007, 09:10

Here is some history on the camera. I was about 14 years old when I found it at a Flea Market in the mid 70's for five US Dollars I was excited about the find, because at the time just about any wood camera was worth almost $100 USD. It has been a 'display only' camera for many reasons. There is no ground glass. I was never shure when I was younger if this was a plate camera or not. I have kept an eye out for a lens for this camera all these years, however, I never found one that I liked for less than ten times what I paid for the camera (that would be $50:p ). And the bellows was shot.

All of these mentioned problems can potentially be solved to turn this into a usable camera. However, the main limiting factor in restoring this camera is the destruction of the focusing rail, causing the front and back standards to wobble:( .

Here is a picture of the rail.

ic-racer

27-Sep-2007, 09:17

I have restored many wood, metal and electronic items in my lifetime, however, I don't have any fancy wood working equipment. Primarily because my workshop shares space with the darkroom and I am very dust conscious.

Anyway, I thought I could use my Dremel with the router table atachment to route out a new slot (assuming I filled in the existing missing wood with new wood).

The smallest bit made by Dremel with a 1/8inch sank is a 1/8 inch plunge bit. This would make a channel that is too wide.

After an extensive internet search, I was able to locate a 1/16 inch bit with a 1/8 inch shank at Stewart MacDonald guitar repair supply shop.

Other research indicated that the Dremel router table may not be sturdy enough to get a good straight route in anything harder than balsa or soft plastic.

My other concern was in obtaining wood for the project.

ic-racer

27-Sep-2007, 09:33

Internet sourcers seem to indicate the base is made of Cherry wood. It turns out that the model supply company Midwest Supply, carries small strips of Cherry wood.

In fact, based on the extensive selection, I thought I could just 'build up' the rails with the pre-cut mini-lumber:cool:.

Here is a cross sectional view I drew with old-fashioned pencil and graph paper. This shows my idea of using the pre-cut lumber.

I am still deciding on how to make the cuts into the existing wood to lay in the new lumber. If I do the cuts by hand I would then use epoxy to hold the new wood in place, because the wood does not have to fit super tight and there is some 'fudge factor' that I can get away with. I can use the quick set epoxy and just hold it by hand in alignment until it sets. One potential problem with this is a possible build up of epoxy in the slot.

If I use 'wood' glue then I think I need to have a more exact cut in the existing wood so that I can get a real tight fit. In this case the cuts in the existing wood would probably have to be made with a router.

In both cases the glue joint should be stronger than the wood (I hope!)

Vaughn

27-Sep-2007, 10:27

I wonder if you would need to pin (dowel?) the new lumber on for strength?

I woodworking skills are about limited to hammering like lightning (I rarely hit the same place twice).

Vaughn

Martin Miksch

27-Sep-2007, 10:54

IMO epoxy gives much more strenght, so use this.
Regards
Martin

Edit: beside the strenght the big advantage of epoxy is that you can mix it up with kinda dust named microsheres and it fills all uneven surfaces.

John Kasaian

27-Sep-2007, 13:25

Since you've got the hardware and this is supposed to be a 'restoration' I'd be inclined to visit my local high school and talk with the woodworking teacher. Tell 'em theres a bottle of Jack Daniels in it if they'll make you new rails. Oherwise find a wookworking club---check with a local fine wood supplier or local woodworking tool store (the big box outfits won't know what the h*ll your asking for) or even a community adult school) and speak with someone there. Maybe they won't make the part for you but they can supply the expertise and tools.

John Schneider

27-Sep-2007, 14:15

I'd have to agree with John; try to find a shop teacher or woodworker who has a shaper. Once they put the correct cutters on the shaper, they can turn out feet and feet of wood with the proper contour in less time that it's taking me to write about it.

Epoxy is the adhesive of choice for jobs like this. Microspheres were developed to thicken epoxy when applied to styrofoam at the start of a layup; they weaken the epoxy too much in other uses. A better thickening agent is flocked (or milled) cotton (available through epoxy suppliers like TAP Plastics), which gives a very hard and durable surface. Styrene-based dyes (like for surfboard layup) can be added to the epoxy to better match the wood. I epoxied up battleship-gray 5x7 Ansco, and used gray dye to closely match the paint.

Randy H

27-Sep-2007, 14:27

The camera is over 100 years old. Most of it has faired very well. With the repairs done properly. it should last another 100. Key word here is "properly". I attempted the "repair" on teh rear section of railing on mine, and found out the first ime I used it, that a "patch" looked good, but didn't work well. I was able to take a spare extension rail and make a new rear rail section.
As others have advised, find someone that has the equipment and expertise, and have a new set of rails made. You wouldn't need to refabricate the metal parts, only the wood.

ic-racer

27-Sep-2007, 21:36

I wound up getting the router attachment for the Dremel and also got a 1/4 inch plunge bit.

Wow, this thing makes it easy compared to doing it by hand;) . Don't know how I got by so long without this.

ic-racer

27-Sep-2007, 21:38

This thing was 'repaired' many years ago with some small tacks. No glue at all!

ic-racer

27-Sep-2007, 21:45

I still could not find the corect size lumber from the local hobby shop, so I will try to order the small cherry timber directly from Midwest Supply.

In the mean time I re-glued the areas where I still had the original pieces. I used epoxy and made a 1/16 inch shim with some basswood covered with wax paper to keep the slot open. In fact I wanted epoxy to get into the slot and re-form the correct dimensions. Even though I had the major chunks of wood, there were still smaller pieces missing from inside the slot.

This picture was taken AFTER it was set. I held finger pressure for about an hour just to be shure it wouldn't shift after releasing it. (30 min set epoxy).

ic-racer

27-Sep-2007, 21:47

I wonder if you would need to pin (dowel?) the new lumber on for strength?

I woodworking skills are about limited to hammering like lightning (I rarely hit the same place twice).

Vaughn

It would be possible with a 1/16 inch dowel (toothpick perhaps?). I'll see how the glue works and if I have to re-do it, I'll consider pinning it.

ic-racer

27-Sep-2007, 21:55

local high school and talk with the woodworking teacher.

If I can remember my High School experience it seemed lucky to get within one quarter of an inch. Maybe they have computer that CNC machines now. But I really don't think they could reproduce this piece.

The mortise and tenon joints holding this thing together have upper and lower fingers that are only 4/64 of an inch. It really made me think that in the 'plastic age' we don't have precision crafted wooden items any more. In fact, I was hard pressed to find any wood object in my home crafted with the same precision. Perhaps a 3 grand classical guitar. But even in that case the sawing of the fret slots is really the most critical in terms of measuring accuracy.

Vaughn

27-Sep-2007, 22:37

It really made me think that in the 'plastic age' we don't have precision crafted wooden items any more.

I am cleaning and re-glueing a bunch of century-old half-plate glass plate holders (for glass plates 4.25"x6.5", not sure if that is half plate of not). I marval at their simple, but precise (accurate?) construction.

Vaughn

ic-racer

29-Sep-2007, 08:34

FINISH on the WOOD

Here is what I have figured out so far on the wood finish. The upper part of the camera confirms to be Mahogany and it appears to be un-stained. The grain is filled with some grain filler. The finish seems compatible with nitrocellulose lacquer (this does not say much because I think shellac and varnish are both compatible with the lacquer).

The base is cherry and it IS stained to match the mahogany.

I stripped one part of the front standard and the problem is that the stripper took off the grain filler also. This just means a lot of work and sanding to re-do the grain filling and then use some sanding sealer, then the clear coat.

The original finish is actually not that bad and I was able to rub out a few areas with very good results. Another option is to not use chemical stripper and just sand down the finish and apply new lacquer over the existing finish. This will save me from having to the grain filling.

Jim Galli

29-Sep-2007, 13:30

I have some extra body and extension rails that I have never identified. Where the slots are they are not flat, they are sort of bi-level on the side, rather like your sketch. I wonder......

Frank R

29-Sep-2007, 13:58

the stripper took off the grain filler also. This just means a lot of work and sanding to re-do the grain filling

Grain filler is a product that you apply, let dry, and then sand off. It is not just dust left over from sanding. Mahogany was usually filled with a dark grain filler.

Randy H

29-Sep-2007, 18:25

Jim, Century made two types. One had two slots. One upper slot for the front standard and one lower for the rear standard. The upper slot was just slightly above the lower in order for the back part of the front standard to pass above the rear. The top was just a tad narrower than the bottom portion, again for the same reason. They also made a rail with three slots. Two configured as above, and then a third near the bottom for the tripod slide-block. This one also had a brass strip on the very bottom of the rails, to the outside edge. Fiberq site has a good detailed pic here:
http://www.fiberq.com/cam/century/centview.htm

ic-racer

30-Sep-2007, 16:40

Grain filler is a product that you apply, let dry, and then sand off. It is not just dust left over from sanding. Mahogany was usually filled with a dark grain filler.

I guess what I was implying is that I'll be doing a lot less sanding if I don't remove the original finish.

I had an extra can of tinted filler for a Les Paul guitar I am just finishing, but wound up returning it just before I stared this camera projet :(

The piece I stripped is so small, I think I can just build it up with sanding sealer.

ic-racer

30-Sep-2007, 16:49

Here are some before and after of the swing plate. The knobs and screws are not polished at this point. If I have some extra time I'll polish them, but this is going to be a 'user.';)

The wood was re-coated with lacquer and the brass was polished and then also coated with lacquer.

ic-racer

30-Sep-2007, 19:54

Surprisingly little hardware was missing from the camera. Mostly screws. The main items I needed to re-manufacture were a keeper for the ground glass and a lock for the back tilt on one side.

A local hardware store had a good selection of brass hardware (first picture). I bought more than I needed, I can always use the extra stuff.

I made a new keeper for the ground glass out of sheet brass (second picture)

One lock for the back tilt was missing and I made a new one out of stuff from the hardware store. I'll probably put the new one on both sides to make it symmetric.

The rivet holding the rear frame to the rear brass standards needed to ground down to get the thing apart.

Randy H had a great idea in that he drilled and tapped the existing rivet. I was prepared to do that but I found these nice connectors that were pre-drilled and tapped to accept a good sized screw. They fit perfectly except for a small ridge on the existing rivet that was re-created with a black nylon washer (made from some plastic tubing).

Randy H

1-Oct-2007, 08:16

but I found these nice connectors that were pre-drilled and tapped to accept a good sized screw. They fit perfectly except for a small ridge on the existing rivet that was re-created with a black nylon washer (made from some plastic tubing).

I have another 5X7 conley that I am "slowly" working on. and that is the route I chose on it also. They do work well. The female part was nearly exact size of original. I found a brass flat-head carriage screw that was near to original size of the rivet, and fit the female part of the sex-screw. I just had to shorten it a bit.

IC, she's lookin good so far. Makes me miss mine even more!!!

ic-racer

1-Oct-2007, 20:19

I really don't have time to make a bellows, so I just want someone to make one for me correctly, so I figured I would just 'pay up' and get it done right.

However, I didn't realize it would be almost $400!:eek: So, so back to the internet to re-read all those pages on making bellows...

My plan was to spend a lot of time getting the mannequin just right, then copy all the pleat stiffeners verbatim. Then, just wrap the inner layer, paste on the stiffeners (as long as I have the correct number and the correct mannequin length I just need to space them evenly), then wrap the outer layer and I'm done.

Until I opened up my bellows to see what I would be dealing with in terms of a wooden mannequin and raw materials. Well, that bellows is huge! I honestly don't have a work area big enough to lay out the raw materials for this thing:( .

And then there is the problem of covering material. I'm not going to spend that much time to do it right (and re-do it as needed to get it right) and then use some garbage covering materials. I'd want to use 'real' bellows material (what every that happens to be, I have not found a source:confused: )

I honestly don't know how 'good' this camera is going to be in actual use. I don't want to spend a lot of money on something that will wind up being a rickety old contraption which I use once or twice for the 'novelty' factor.

Maybe this project will go the way of my 6x9 project. I spent a lot of time piecing the best parts of 3 folders, even swaping lenses and shutters to get a real nice Kodak Tourist with 4.5 Anaston and Kodamatic shutter. So, what did it do? I used it a few times, liked it, and went out and got a Horsman VH-R and now have all 8 lenses with cams.

...So maybe I should just put that $400 toward the Horseman 8x10 that I eventually am going to get anyway:D

ic-racer

1-Oct-2007, 20:43

I always imagined I would use this camera with a barrel lens and my hand or the lens cap as a shutter. This seemed like it would be an essential part of the whole experience (and would likewise influence the outcome of the photograph).

Then I did some calculations and figured with TMX at EI 50 my F64 exposure would be about 1/4 of a second. I think that is too fast to reasonably expect to get right without a shutter. Of course not all my shots are going to be in 'bright sunlight', but I don't want to be limited to shooting in the woods or on overcast days.

Anyway, I was a little surprised to see that I had won an auction for a Symmar-s 210, in a supposedly functional Copal #1, for $128. This should be fun to play around with and I can't believe this is going to be any worse than one of those uncoated, lightly mycotic, brass lens in barrel. Though maybe this lens will be 'too sharp' and the vignetted corners will just look 'bad.'

I have always thougth of Linda Connor's work when I imagined actually using this camera. In fact I read once that her 8x10 was also a Century.

Well, we will see when the lens gets here...

Turner Reich

1-Oct-2007, 20:54

One of the things I find most aggravating is finding another split in the wood after an extensive glue up. I'm working on a Seneca back that has more spits than Dairy Queen. If I can get the back done I can use the camera. I wish I had the original black finish formula, nicely polished black sheen. I got lucky and had some mahogany to patch with and it matches the original. All will be covered with black paint.

lenser

1-Oct-2007, 23:35

On the bellows, you might check with Mark Kapono in Hilo, Hawaii. I haven't used him yet, but have heard very good things and his prices seem quite reasonable.

I have restored both 5x7 and 8x10 Ansco flat bed cameras. When I did so, I carefully noted where everything came from and then waltzed the brass works down to the local musical instrument repair shop. A couple of weeks later, I had the whole thing reassembled with brass that had been stripped, polished and re-lacquered with an expertise that I could never had done. Twenty-five years later they still shines like they were brand new.

The same guy also reworked the brass on a huge Dallmeyer, and two Conley lenses after I removed the glass. Every other photographer that sees them has expressed jealously.

Good luck.

Tim

Turner Reich

2-Oct-2007, 16:56

I hope the camera turns out real nice.

ic-racer

2-Oct-2007, 20:43

Got some black felt for the area just behind the lens board. The black velvet is for the area where the film holder slides in. I hope this stuff does not 'shed'.

As I am doing the film back I probably need to get my hands on a plastic 8x10 film holder to check its fit and/or modify this frame so it seats well.

I see a number of vendors selling reasonably priced 8x10 'ground' glass on e-bay. I wonder if anyone has any experience with any of these products.

ic-racer

2-Oct-2007, 20:47

The craft store that had the felt and velvet also had some small lumber. Although I have some real cherry wood coming in the mail, I picked up some of this 'unknown' wood to make some mock ups. This wood is probably basswood and spruce. I guess if my cedar never shows up it would probably work fine.

This picture shows a mock up of the composite wood strip I need to make. It is a 1/4 inch piece with a 1/8x1/16 piece on the bottom and a 1/4 x 1/32 inch piece on the side.

ic-racer

2-Oct-2007, 20:55

Here is the original bellows, removed from the rest of the camera. The back of the bellows is circumfrentially nailed to the rear of the camera with tiny tacks. The front is glued to a board that then screws to the front standard.

Still deciding on where to send it...:confused:

ic-racer

3-Oct-2007, 20:43

I finished up the front and rear sections. I wanted to get things back to gether because I don't like dissasembled things lying around. Things tend to get lost.

ic-racer

3-Oct-2007, 20:51

When I started this project I told myself I was going to use polyurethane for the finish, rather than toil away with nitrocellulose lacquer. Well, I wound up using the lacquer anyway. Mostly because I am refinishing a guitar now and I would have extra clear lacquer in the paint gut that I used up on these camera pieces.

I wound up NOT stripping the finish. This shows the 'battle scars' of almost 100 years of existence. It has a nice 'distressed' look. The finish is very shiny and I don't know how well that can be conveyed in these pictures.

The sequence was:

Sand
Cover with clear lacquer 3-5 coats (goes on thin)
Sand 400 grit
Sand 1500 grit
3M rubbing compound
3M "Hand Glaze" (gives it that wet look)

ic-racer

3-Oct-2007, 21:12

I was expecting the lens to be a 'project' lens, based on the price. I was prepared to pound out the dents, as they were clearly shown in the ad for the lens.

It turns out this glass is fantastic, and I rarely use filters, so cosmetics would be the only reason to go after this dent. The front element sticks out so much that it would probably need to come out to safely work on this.

The real problem was the aperture mechanism. It would bind right about at f45.

I have never taken down a Copal #1, so this was somewhat of a learning experience for me.

Nice design of the shutter, as the gears and such don't all fall out when the timing mechanism is inverted (it needs to be inverted to get the shutter blades back together)

After getting the timing plate off, I set it like an open book and transferred and fipped the shutter blades onto the back of the timing plate.

This exposed the aperture mechanism. One of the blades had jumped its track. I just took it all down and re-assembled the blades (If you have never done this it is very tedious) I used little tweezers so I did not get any finger oil on the blades.

Got it all back together (BTW the speeds all seemed fine), and now the aperture ring moves silky smooth.

This may have been caused when the lens got its ding on the filter ring, however, I have another theory. The 'index' screw on the back of the lens is right over the aperture blade that had jumped its track. The hole for this index screw opens right on to the aperture blade (you can see it move through the screw hole). This is a clean lens, but the index screw is all chewed up, like it came from some 'parts' bin.

My theory is that at some point the lens was mounted in a lensboard without an index slot and so the original index screw was lost or discarded. At some later point the lens was re-mounted and a screw that was too long was used as an index screw. This damaged the aperture mechanism. Later someone took that screw out and tried to fix the lens but bailed out when they found out you have to dissasemble the shutter blades to get to the aperture mechanism. (coming up with these stories is just as much fun as fixing the stuff:p )

ic-racer

4-Oct-2007, 06:39

This really worked. The rear lens cap was all splayed out, like it had been crammed on a larger lens for some time.

I put a hose clamp around the perimeter and heated it up with a hair dryer until the plastic was limp, then I put it under cold water and it held the new shape. Now the cap is nice and tight.

ic-racer

4-Oct-2007, 08:14

I suspect that the original shutter for this lens was swapped out for re-sale. The aperture scale on this lens was some home-made piece for some other lens. It's scale went from f8 to f90 (rather than f5.6 to f64 which would be appropriate for this lens). The scale was also placed incorrectly for the 210mm, so that it was about 3/4 of a stop off.

After some experimenting I discovered that my label maker would make a perfect scale.

In case anyone wants to try this, the settings on the Brother P-Touch were as follows:
Font: Brussels
Size: 9
Text: "64..45..32..22..16..11..8..5.6" and "5.6..8..11..16..22..32..45..64"

I suspect this would give the correct f-stop spacing for ANY Copal #1 shutter.

Next time I'm at the office supply store I'm going to see if they have any white letters on clear backing.

That last composite image shows the aperture scale that came on the shutter when it arrived.

ic-racer

4-Oct-2007, 08:42

Earlier I had stated that for many years I had been looking for a lens that cost less than ten times the price of the camera. The camera was purchased for $5USD in 1976. So using one of those 'inflation calculators' on the web I determined that this camera would cost $18 USD if purchased today.

This Symmar-S 210mm cost $125, so that puts it in at less than ten time the camera price. Yey!;)

On another topic, I measured the size of the opening for the lens board and it requires 3/32inch wood. I know I can get plywood in this size from the same supplier that makes the small wood I'm using for the focusing rails.

Scott --

4-Oct-2007, 12:57

Beautiful work!

ic-racer

5-Oct-2007, 07:57

Cherry wood strips came in the mail today...From the looks of the package it did not look like they survived. And on opening the package I was right, almost all the pieces were broken. The most important one, the 1/4 inch by 1/4 inch cherry, was broken into 3 pieces.:mad:

ic-racer

5-Oct-2007, 08:12

While the glue was drying on the wood strips that I had to repair I mounted the Symmar on the Horseman to check it out.

From what I could tell with an 8x loupe on the ground glass I don't detect any problem with the lens. It was very sharp, and my impression was that it will certainly be fine for 8x10 contact prints.

I shot some 4x5 TMX but have not processed them yet.

To see how this 210mm is going to behave as an 8x10 lens I am going to try the experiment in one-half size:

I have a 6x9 Horseman 105 lens that 'just barely' covers 4x5. Putting this lens on the 4x5 Horseman should give me a very good simulation of using the 210 Symmar-S on the 8x10 camera.

ic-racer

5-Oct-2007, 16:00

I was getting ready to send the bellows off to England when I realized I would be in a mess if the bellows were lost in transit. Therefore, I decided to collect all the info from the bellows, as if I were going to duplicate it myself, before I send it off.

So I need to trace some of the pleat stiffeners, and document the location and spacing of them, etc.

ic-racer

5-Oct-2007, 21:46

I broke the bellows apart at each end to measure the stiffeners. Then I drew this up on the computer so that I have a plan that I could use to make the bellows myself in case I had to.

The alternating black and white just represent two different stiffener heights.

ic-racer

5-Oct-2007, 21:55

This was the heart of this project. It looks like they turned out OK. The epoxy did a great job, it really is stronger than the wood. I still need to sand and finish them.

David Karp

6-Oct-2007, 09:11

This would be even more awesome if you turned it into an article and sent it to Tuan to include on the LF Home Page.

Ash

6-Oct-2007, 15:18

You're doing amazing. The camera parts already look good as new. The completed piece will be so sweet!

ic-racer

6-Oct-2007, 19:21

This would be even more awesome if you turned it into an article and sent it to Tuan to include on the LF Home Page.

Sounds like a good idea.

speanburgarts

6-Oct-2007, 20:24

I can offer some advice on the bellows problem. Go to a civil war reenactment or google civil war reenacting sutlers. Your looking for a "gum rubber" poncho. They made ponchos and rain jackets in the 19th century from canvas dipped in gum rubber. They are black and perfect for bellows, you may also be able to send your measurements to the source for the ponchos and have them make a gum rubber canvas for your measurements.

A good place to start would be this forum:

http://www.cwreenactors.com/phorum/

Perhaps Ray Morgenweck can help you, he owns Star Camera company and specialises in wet plate photography equipment.

by the way here are some shots of my Century No.1

http://i53.photobucket.com/albums/g56/atelierspeanburg/003.jpg

http://i53.photobucket.com/albums/g56/atelierspeanburg/01-1.jpg

speanburgarts

7-Oct-2007, 03:23

Here is a rubber blanket I found for $98 USD. You can use wood strips from a hobby shop and this to make bellows. I am not sure of the total size of the blanket thus you may want to ask before purchasing it.

h**p://www.njsekela.com//OSCommerce/catalog/product_info.php?cPath=31&products_id
=49&osCsid=e3a7d77fcefe619fb18a254fedc488e3

ic-racer

7-Oct-2007, 19:00

After reading these posts on the rubberized cloth, I happen to look down at my darkroom apron and it looks like excellent bellows material. Kind of like a silk fabric on the inside and rubberized on the outside. Now I know what to look for so...

There is a McMaster Carr outlet within driving distance of me. I see on their website that they have 4 potential black rubberized fabrics. I will drive there tomorrow and check them out.

Also, I'm going to pick up some polycarbonate sheet (Lexan) for the rib stiffeners. Why the Lexan? The technique I am planning would involve leaving the ribs all attached at the ends, with the space between them removed. Then, after gluing the center of the ribs in place I would lift up the ends and just do a zig-zag cut up and down the ends to free all the ribs. Since I would need to lift up the edges of the ribs I wanted to use a material that would just spring back flat.

The other idea I had was to make the bellows much smaller. I don't even have the extension rail that would allow use of the whole original bellows. Mine measured 810mm. I'm going to re-draw the plans at about 600mm and experiment with this smaller bellows.

ic-racer

7-Oct-2007, 19:03

by the way here are some shots of my Century No.1

http://i53.photobucket.com/albums/g56/atelierspeanburg/003.jpg

http://i53.photobucket.com/albums/g56/atelierspeanburg/01-1.jpg

Does the 'pendulum' on the side really work? Is it worth making (mine is missing) ?

Turner Reich

7-Oct-2007, 19:08

If the pendulum and index pin are positioned correctly they will indicate a perpendicular condition to the ground. It worked for ancient builders.

ic-racer

7-Oct-2007, 21:50

If the pendulum and index pin are positioned correctly they will indicate a perpendicular condition to the ground. It worked for ancient builders.

I know what it is supposed to do but if I duplicate it exactly, would it really work? It is so small that it seems the friction against the side of the camera and friction around the pivot would cause it to not swing freely:confused: .

ic-racer

7-Oct-2007, 21:58

Here is a 1/3 scale model of my bellows mannequin showing how I might mount the stiffeners as one piece, then just cut off the ends. In the full size model there would need be two cuts between the stiffeners, instead of one. In fact I'm thinking of using the router to make the slot between the stiffeners.

So the plastic sheeting would already have the correct length slots cut in it before gluing it down in the middle only. Then I would just use scissors to connect the ends of the slots on each side.

speanburgarts

8-Oct-2007, 06:25

yes it works but I rarely use it, if the subject is not level on the glass then I make adjustments anyway.

ic-racer

9-Oct-2007, 13:25

ic-racer

9-Oct-2007, 13:35

Before ordering bellows material through the mail (Porter's Blackout Material), I wanted to check out what was available locally that I could actually see and measure the material.

McMaster Carr lists rubberized fabric and I actually went to the warehouse to check the fabric. First off, the various fabrics they have were all very similar in outward apperance and thickness. The material has a coarse weave and the rubber coats both sides. It is NOT totally light proof. It also does not fold well and the 3M '77' spray adhesive reacts with the rubber so that it never dries and makes a mess. The material reminds me of a diver's wet suit. The thickness is 0.022 inches. (far right in picture)

JoAnne Fabric had some rubberized fabric in the closeout section. The rubber was coming off some of the fabric and it was discounted. It is a fine black woven fabric, however it is thicker than the original at 0.020 inches. (Far left in picture).

JoAnne Fabric also had many examples of vinyl, however, most all uppolstry vinyl was way too thick. The thinnest they had was 0.018. If you were to feel this material you would say "wow that is very thin," but on measurement, it is still twice as thick as the original. The original vinyl covering feels almost like paper it is so thin.

So, my sandwich of fabric, polycarbonate and vinyl comes to about 0.048 inches. About double the thickness of the original.

I think I will make a 'practice' bellows with these materials and see how it folds up.

John Hannon

9-Oct-2007, 13:37

It is really nice reading this. You are doing a great job and I hope to see the camera restored.

--John

walter23

9-Oct-2007, 13:42

I'm going to be building bellows soon, too, for 8x10 and 12x20. I'll probably use the porter's darkroom cloth. Keep us updated on any troubles you run into :)

ic-racer

9-Oct-2007, 13:52

On the computer I re-drew the bellows to make the extension 600mm rather than 800mm since I am going to try it with this thicker bellows material I want to still be able to fold the camera up for transport. I kept the height of all the ribs the same, I just removed some from the middle.

Here is the mannequin for the 600mm bellows, along with a partially cut out set of ribs. The mannequin is constructed of 1/4 inch foam core board, and held together with hot 'glue gun' glue.

ic-racer

9-Oct-2007, 13:59

I got the lensboard finished and I mounted the lens. I'm waiting on a ground glass from e-bay.

I went to my local photography store (which actually stocks 4x5 B&W film) and asked for some 8x10 film and they looked at me like I was from another planet...

However, I can't seem to get a film holder from e-bay...who is bidding on all this 8x10 crap??:mad: come on everyone "just go digital!" (and give me all your analog stuff...);)

rwyoung

9-Oct-2007, 14:46

I went to my local photography store (which actually stocks 4x5 B&W film) and asked for some 8x10 film and they looked at me like I was from another planet...

At least they didn't suggest you use 4 sheets of 4x5...:rolleyes:

ic-racer

10-Oct-2007, 06:43

After playing with the materials I realized it was really not going to turn out right if I used the thick inner and outer layers. I decided to try some kind of 'outer layer only' technique using the vinyl covering.

The problem would be that glue would 'show' between the ribs, and this could cause the bellows to glue itself together. Therefore I wanted some very very thin backing material. I chose that thin decorative paper that I found in my wifes gift wrapping stash. The paper is almost translucet and is almost as thin as tissue paper, but is much stronger.

So I put wax paper over the mannequin, then I placed the thin paper. I sprayed a line of glue down the center of each section and glued on the polycarbonate ribs. Then I clipped off the ends of the ribs to free them.

The last step was somewhat of a disaster. In my preliminary tests with the 3M 77 adhesive I was not impressed, it seemed to peel away easily. Well, doing the final wrap of vinyl around the mannequin was a different story. The stuff stuck REAL good. What happened is that I first layed out the material and cut and marked it so that it would wrap nicely. Then I sprayed glue on both the material and the mannequin. Unfortunatly I had no way of providing good counter traction to wrap the material tightly. I should have cut out the bottom of the mannequin to get my hand in there to help flatten it out.

As it was, I could not flatten things out until all 4 sides were covered and at that time I realized the wrap was a little 'baggy' and not tight. There was nothing I could do, it would not come apart again.

I was not shure how this would effect things until after the folding. I saw that excess material from the wrap being baggy caused some of the pleats to be too long and this distsorts the bellows (even though the sitffeners ARE all the right length).

ic-racer

10-Oct-2007, 06:58

Good: polycarbonate stiffeners; if I had used cardboard stiffeners it would have gotten all wrinkled during the 'folding' process. Some of the pleats underwent some dramatic contortions while I was folding. Fortunatly the polycarbonate always springs back to its nice straight shape.

Good: The 3M 77 adhesive wound up working well.

Good: Vinyl on the outside looks great.

Bad: Covering material I got are too thick. Even with this 'single layer' vinyl covering, this bellows is stiff and bulky.

Bad: The wrap was loose and this distorted the final shape of the bellows.

Well, here are the pictures. When I went to bed last night I really thougth the bellows was going to be too distorted and I would need to try again. However, this morning it does not seem that bad (the pictures shows the 'good' side).

Overall this was a lot of work and I was never able to get good covering materials. Although I think I could do a better bellows a second time, if I don't like this one I will probably just pay the $400 and have a commercial outfit make it.

Ash

10-Oct-2007, 07:30

That looks perfect now!

Geert

10-Oct-2007, 07:55

Overall this was a lot of work and I was never able to get good covering materials. Although I think I could do a better bellows a second time, if I don't like this one I will probably just pay the $400 and have a commercial outfit make it.

ic-racer,

From the folds, I can see you used too thick material as the corners don't fold well.

I make my bellows out of:

inner layer: rubberized liner of changing bags --> buy a lot on ebay, grouped they are inexpensive. Glue the cloth side
stiffeners: 150 g\m2 stiffeners
outter layer: bookbinders linen --> multiple colors available, mostly cloth, leatherette also available (I like the leatherette).

I used it for several bellows already, including a whole-plate restoration and its bellows is not thinker than the original.

There's a big advantage to using the bookbinders linen: it has a white paper backing to draw the scheme on. Furthermore it's paper-base allows for better gluing (bookbinders glue) and neater folding of the corners.
I'll post a picture tonight.

Greetings,
G

ic-racer

10-Oct-2007, 20:24

outter layer: bookbinders linen --> multiple colors available, mostly cloth, leatherette also available (I like the leatherette).
G

I bet that stuff would be great! Where do you get yours?

I think of the bellows I just make as kind of a super-deluxe 'paper bag' bellows; constructed rapidly from readily available supplies, to see if the camera is going to work for me.

I finally had the camera outside on a tripod. I don't have a ground glass yet, however, I used a piece of wax paper. I am really impressed with this lens, looks like it is going to cover without obvious vignetting.

Maybe someone can chime in here but I searched the internet on the 210mm Symmar-S MC and found one post somewhere that the MC has greater coverage than the Non-MC. Otherwise, all the charts indicate the Symmar-S (non-MC) covers 294 mm. I actually measured the opening for my ground glass and it is about 300mm, so I think I would see obvious vignetting if it were only covering 294mm. I guess I'll know for shure once I shoot some film.

ic-racer

11-Oct-2007, 14:50

Got the ground glass today and put the back together to try the camera. I took it outside on the tripod and gave it a workout to see what details remain to make it useable. This is just a random list of things that cropped up:

Lens rotates; ring is not tight
Lens board pops out too easily
Some internal reflections near the edges of the frame
Focusing rail takes a little bend downward at the hinge; need watch to ensure front standard is perpendicular (bubble level needed?)
Lock for rear tilt needs some work
Need a carrying case of some type
Front standard is still real tight when moving back to fold the rail
No latch to keep the front rail in folded position
Clothes pins to hold focusing cloth left marks on the wood's finish
Tripod screw bushing rotates a little (glue it?)

I should have these things fixed by the time my 8x10 film holder arrives (of course I have to win one first:( ....)

Geert

12-Oct-2007, 09:51

ic-racer

12-Oct-2007, 13:08

Ic-racer,

sorry to hijack your thread, but I wanted to show you (and others) the pictures of a bookbinders linen bellows. The camera is a Lancaster 6.5 x 8.5". It is not fully restaurated yet.

I used a deep burnt red for this bellows. Before & after pics:
(flash made the wood look much too dark in the last pic)

Greetings,
G

That bellows looks great.

I did some searching under "Bookbinding Cloth" and found some great coverings. Found one here that I like (http://www.hollanders.com/supplies/ViewProduct.aspx?ProductID=fbafac28-e721-42eb-bf0f-18aa3a77f6af&CategoryID=f0ca807c-ebac-4530-bd5d-0b3fc3e308ff) it kind of looks similar to the pictures on Mark Kapono's site (http://www2.hawaii.edu/~mkapono/belimg/4315.jpg. It might try that if this bellows falls apart.

ic-racer

12-Oct-2007, 13:26

I have recieved quotes from almost all that I requested.

Camera Bellows was about 375 USD
Richard T Ritter about 400 USD
Goretite about 200 USD

I spoke with the Goretite rep. on the phone to find out if this was a 'real' camera bellows, or some industrial plastc/rubber contraption.

He said it is a standard 3 layer bellows that is hand folded. He said it WAS NOT made of Goretex. The outer layer is 0.006 inch neoprene, the stiffeners are .010 mylar (polyethylene) (I used .010 polycarbonate in mine) with an inner layer of 0.010 "NC". The rep was not sure what the "NC" was but said he could find out for me.

ic-racer

12-Oct-2007, 13:28

ic-racer

12-Oct-2007, 13:36

So, after thinking it over I decided to mount this home-made bellows permanently on the camera.

There is no real bellows 'frame,' the bellows mounts right on the camera. In the front there is a 4x4 inch board that the bellows ends fold over and these are glued with contact cement. Ideally, I should have done this with the bellows still on the mannequin, as after I glued on the board, the first folds did not fold right.

The rear of the bellows is folded around a 1/8 inch strip of cardboard. Then small tacks are used to tack the perimeter of the bellows to the inside of the camera (the tacks go through the cardboard). I saved all the tiny tacks when I took out the old bellows and used a small wooden mallet to drive them home. I used a 'nail punch' to get the 4 corner nails in place.

This picture shows me gluing the small cardboard strip that helps form the rear frame of the bellows.

ic-racer

12-Oct-2007, 13:42

Just getting this fragile contraption from the workshop to try it out side was an ordeal. I needed a good way to carry this camera.

I found some thread on this forum, but most of the suggested carriers were quite expensive:( . The last thing this project needs is a $350 USD carrying case.

So, I just went to the discount store and searched around.

I found this nice padded bag for $14 USD:cool: . Again, this is to keep the camera all in one piece while in the car or in the house. It should work for short hikes also, but I don't expect to use it for moutain backpacking.

ic-racer

12-Oct-2007, 13:49

Just restoring the film back is a little project in itself. Here I am putting new velvet lining on the seal for the film holder. This needs to be held on very well to withstand the constant sliding in and out of the film holders. It was originally held on with that 'white' glue, and again I used the same for the replacement pieces. It is important to get the strip of velvet toward the opening tucked in the groove, so that it does not catch on the lip of the film holder when it is inserted.

These velvet strips were a little wider than needed and a sharp blade was used to trim the inside opening after the glued dried.

ic-racer

12-Oct-2007, 13:52

The last piece of the camera body to get polished. Again, this wasnot stripped, it was sanded, then shot with clear Lacquer (5 coats) then wet sanded with 400, then 1500, then 3M rubbing compound then 3M Hand Glaze.

ic-racer

12-Oct-2007, 14:02

Polishing the first few pieces of brass was fun but I must be on piece 100 by now :) (actually about 75-80 pieces total, of which 50 got polished) I really think that if I am going to get into a project like this again I will get a nice polishing wheel. I don't have one because my workshop has to share space with the darkroom and a polishing wheel is a dusty, messy thing.

I use this 3M Marine Metal Polish in the little tube. I got some "Brasso" but it is not as good. It does not polish up to as nice of a shine. The 3M stuff is the best I have ever used.

After polishing, each piece got 1 or 2 coats of Lacquer. I believe this is the same way it was done back in 1907.

Geert

12-Oct-2007, 14:09

The first time in 30 years the camera has been outside on a tripod. Still using the wax paper ground glass in this picture.

This picture was taken at dusk, it just looks like night time because the camera flash required a smaller f-stop than required...wait, this is a photography forum, you know all that...;)

the clothespins are funky!

I really admire the way you handled the finishing of the wood. I'm thinking about lacquering mine too.

G

ic-racer

12-Oct-2007, 14:15

There were a number of options for Ground Glass.

At first I was contemplating 'lined' glass. I checked some other cameras lying around and found that the Horseman 6x9 glass has black painted or silkskreened lines on the ground side of the glass. The Horseman 4x5 glass has 'clear' areas for the lines.

I wanted to avoid the 'hand lined' glass from e-bay, because I could just to the lines myself.

I thought the best value for lined glass would be the professionally done Canham glass that was very reasonably proced about $60 USD at Midwest Photo.

Since this camera does not have enough movement to really line things up, I thought the lines would not be needed (I do use them a lot on my 4x5 though).

With the lens that I have I wanted to be shure I got glass with clipped corners to check for coverage, so in the end I got 'un-lined' glass from e-bay for about $30USD.

This picture shows me test fitting the ground glass before screwing it in. The glass is exactly 8x10 inches and it fits perfectly.

ic-racer

12-Oct-2007, 14:56

From a negative processed in October of 1976 came this old photograph that I recently found. As I recall, I had tried to 'restore' this Century back in 1976. I was 15 at the time and did not have the resources to get a ground glass, bellows or lens. So the camera sat on the 'camera collection' shelf for all these years.

This is not the first time I have 'taken a new look' at these old cameras. About 3 years ago I realized you could re-spool 120 onto 620 spools, and that these old folders shot 6x9. So, after years of sitting on a shelf, I fired up one of those folders. (I liked it and wound up getting my first view camera, which was a Horseman VH-R, which led to a Horseman FA 4x5 which led to where we are now...where are we now anyway:confused: )

BTW: The cameras I used back then were a Fujica ST701 (traded for a Rollei in the 80s) and a Yashica 124G that I still own. This picture was taken with the Fujica.

Dave Wooten

12-Oct-2007, 15:00

Lovely!

ic-racer

12-Oct-2007, 15:23

In keeping with the nature of a $5 USD camera restoration ($18 USD with inflation) here is the list of minimal expenses for the restoration of the camera:

Cost of camera (2007 dollars): $18
Lens: $125
Lens Board: $1.15
Bellows: $4.00
Ground Glass: $30 with shipping
Lacquer: $5.00
Brass: $2.00
Cherry Wood strips: $2.50
Case: $14.00

TOTAL: $201.65

Turner Reich

13-Oct-2007, 19:39

Did the felt fit into a dado or was it glued on top of the wood and does this affect the t-depth? What is the t-depth of the ground glass holder? Did you measure it?

ic-racer

13-Oct-2007, 21:40

Did the felt fit into a dado or was it glued on top of the wood and does this affect the t-depth? What is the t-depth of the ground glass holder? Did you measure it?

Good question.
Actually these are velvet strips, which are different than the felt material used behind the lens board. The velvet is thinner and less compressible than the felt.
The velvet is glued right on top of the wood. Both the ground glass frame and the film holder would ride on top of the velvet without wood-to-wood or wood-to-plastic contact. Presuming both press down the same amount on the velvet, the t-depth should be the same when switching between the two. The only catcher here is that with the film holder in place there is slightly more spring tension pressing on the velvet. In real life I suspect the velvet compresses very little in either case.

So this is a little different than my Horseman 4x5 in which case the film holder and the ground glass frame have a metal-to-metal or plastic-to-metal contact, and are not directly supported by the light proofing material.

I just won some modern plastic film holders on e-bay but they are not here yet to measure. Now that my ground glass is mounted I get a t-depth right at 6.6mm which I believe is the right number to match contemporary film holders.

To test my cameras I have done a 'real life' test by shooting a landscape at infinity wide open and do a series of images varying the focusing slightly. Then I examine the negatives with a magnifier to find the best image and if it is not the frame that was supposed to match what the ground glass shows, I consider adjusting the ground glass location.

With the price of 8x10 film etc, I may just go wtih what the calipers say on this one.;)

I know, FALSE ECONOMY; saving a few sheets of film so I can waste a whole box on out of focus images....:rolleyes: .

ic-racer

15-Oct-2007, 09:19

The flat black portions of the inside of the camera were re-painted. The 'flattest' black I have is Testors model enamel, and this is what I used.

This picture shows the ground glass back in place. All I need to do now is put the finish coats of lacquer on the focusing rails and I am done.

I should be getting 5 holders from various e-bay auctions. We'll see how good or bad they are.

I ordered 25 sheets of Ilford 8x10 film and the plans for processing the film would be to do it in trays.

Since I don't have an 8x10 enlarger, I will contact print. The plans are to do panoramas with 2 negatives side-by-side on a 16x20 sheet of paper. Kind of a 'poor-man's' 8x20 camera. With the 210 lens I hope the results will be dramatic.

walter23

15-Oct-2007, 09:28

That really looks good.

Turner Reich

15-Oct-2007, 12:13

The Testors flat black is a very good choice, one that I use on my equipment. The camera looks very nice indeed.

Sandeha

15-Oct-2007, 13:14

Excellent courage, IC. Nice work and a fascinating write-up. :)

ic-racer

18-Oct-2007, 21:25

As you may have suspected, I am not going to go and get new film holders for this project. I got some from e-bay for about $25 a piece. Here is what I got:

3 reasonable good holders but with 2 marginal darkslides. 2 poor quality holders with 2 poor darkslides.

I took all the holders and darkslides and separated them. Then I cleaned the dirt off of them and arranged them from best to worst. The best holder got the best darkslides, and so on. That left me with 3 great complete holders, and 2 repair projects. The last holder is missing theh locking tabs, and I will just call that one 'junk' and put the worst darkslides with it.

So what do we have to repair? One holder has a crack right near the "Fidelity Elite" name. The other problem is a darkslide that is coming apart at the top (the black and white pieces are separating at the top). There is also a 2 cm crack in the darkslide. One holder is missing a white marking tab.

To repair the crack in the film holder I wanted to use a 'melting' type of glue. Model glue would probably work, but the Kodak flim cement is more liquid and brushes on, and will work its way into the crack. This worked great.

Next was the broken darkslide. The black and white pieces were 'welded' back together, again using the Kodak film cement. Again this worked great.

I don't have a good fix for a cracked darkslide. I think a bad crack is a terminal condition, but I am always trying stuff. This crack was already light-tight, and probably didn't need a repair anyway, but I wanted to try something. I used some cyanoacrylate glue and it seemed to work.

I wound up using the worst holder as a donor for a white marking strip. These strips clean up super white with some lacquer thinner. Be carefull getting the thinner on the black plastic becuse it melts the black plastic (though this effect can be usefull, see below)

The new white piece was held in place with industrial contact cement (rubber cement).

So, overall this gave me one more nice holder and one junk holder. So that puts us at about $31 a piece for the 4 good ones.

The light traps on all 5 were fine, so nothing to do there.

There is a trick with the lacquer thinner in that it can be wiped on beat-up areas of the fllm holder to re-juvinate them. This, of course can mess up a good holder, so I do this only on the worst ones. When this is done right it leaves the plactic with a nice luster, almost like new by melting the plastic a little. It can also smoothe out rough edges so the holder slides in and out better. I also wiped the area of the repair to smooth this out.

Afterwards all the holders were vacuumed with a brush attachment on the vaccum. I even used pipe cleaner to get that dirt that collects way down on the inner edges of the darkslide slot on top.

Well, these holders are now probably cleaner than they ever will be again;) . Tomorrow I hope to take some pictures!

ic-racer

20-Oct-2007, 09:15

Processed the first negatives last night and sure enough there is a light leak in the camera.

My mistake was to use a WEAK flashlight to check for leaks. I used a smaller "Mini-Maglight" and did not find any leaks where the bellows contacts the camera frame. I should have been suspect of these findings.

I re-checked witih a the big 4-cell Maglight and, shure enough, there were multiple leaks at the front and back, where the bellows attaches. The bellows itself was fine and the ground-glass back was also fine.

I filled the gaps with this black silicone.

To process the film I just used some trays. The tip of those hemostats grabs the rebate and is very strong. Nearly as strong as a pin going through the film. I tried just leaving the hemostat attached for the whole process (including drying) and it worked fine. I didn't have to get my hands in the chemicals, or put on gloves.

I used Delta 100 in T-max (non-RS) developer. The package says 8 minutes. I ran a piece of film under the Wejex sensitometer and got a Gamma of 0.99! at 8 minutes at 'room temp' which was about 22 degrees. Looks like I will be doing around 6 minutes, but may need to run a few more test strips. I'll be contact printing with a VC head light source, so the development time does not have to be 100% perfect to match #2 paper.

ic-racer

22-Oct-2007, 22:00

Contact printing is turning out to be somewhat of a pain. I probably need a good printing frame with clean glass, but I am suspect of my ability to keep the dust out.

Here are some comparisons of 3 methods of printing (scratched, dirty glass used to emphasize effects)

1) Enlarger at top of column, stopped down, NO glass over negative/paper sandwich
2) Same but with GLASS pressing on negative/paper sandwich
3) Same but with DUFFUSER plastic and then GLASS pressing on negative/paper sandwich.

The pictures show the results, but since resolution is lost in the scans, here is the summary:

SHARPNESS: 2>3>1
DUST & SCRATCH SUPPRESSION: 1>3>>>2

The first composite picture is an impressive example of how big scraches in the glass and shadows from dust DISAPPEAR when a plastic diffusor screen is placed over the glass/negative/paper sandwich.

The second composite shows the same magical dissappearance of a smudge on the glass.

The third shows that even though tight negative/paper contact is needed, in the presence of collimated light you can still get a sharp image by just the weight of the glass alone. Or conversely, when using diffuse light, the weight of a piece of glass is not enough to get good contact.

I need to think about these results to decide where to go next.

ic-racer

24-Oct-2007, 08:13

My local office supply store did not carry the Brother p-touch 'white on black' tape, so I had to order it.

It came yesterday and here is the f-stop scale I made with it.

Seemed to come out nearly perfect with this sequence:

5.6[space]8[space]1116[space]22[space]32[space]45[space]64 (notice no space between 11 and 16)

Font: Helinski
Size: 12

ic-racer

24-Oct-2007, 08:35

The original bellows has three layers:

Inner layer: 0.008-0.010 inch, fine black woven fabric with a black coating on the side toward the ribs.

Middle (ribs): 0.012-0.014 inch, very firm and brittle cardstock.

Outer layer: 0.008 fine woven fabric with a textured vinyl pattern in burgendy color.

Total thickness with glue, etc. = 0.028 to 0.035 inches.

As and update, and to put things into perspective: The blackout material that Porters sells measures 0.007 inches in thickness. If I made another bellows, I would agree with the recommendations to use this for the inner layer. I would like to get my hands on a sample of the 'book binding cloth' becaue if it is in the 0.007-0.010 range it would probably be my first choice for out layer. (but I'm never going to make another one...;) )

Ash

24-Oct-2007, 08:39

Wow! That use of the tape looks great! I still need an aperture scale for the Dagor 180/6,3 in the Prontor press shutter. Might have to look into something similar myself :)

Rob_5419

24-Oct-2007, 09:34

Wow!

There's so much geekiness going on this forum I'm impressed!

I use a contact glass frame too - no extra diffuser either on a cold cathode head (probably explains it).

I like the glass only option best. You seem to lose a lot of the contrast with the diffuser instead of bringing out the detail required for a contact print. Dust treatment is a pain, but if you use a negative anti-static cleaner it shouldn't present much of a problem.

ic-racer

24-Oct-2007, 12:07

Wow! That use of the tape looks great! I still need an aperture scale for the Dagor 180/6,3 in the Prontor press shutter. Might have to look into something similar myself :)

I don't know if completely posted how I calibrated that but I used 3 things the 'triple check' the accuracy.

1) measure the size of image of the entrance pupil
2) Use a Horseman TTL light meter to check against other lenses
3) Collect images from the internet of the exact same lens and shutter. It just happens that with Symmar-S in the Copal #1, the f45 is exactly opposite the "8" or the "4" on the sutterspeed indicator (4 on the top scale, 8 on the bottom scale)

ic-racer

21-Nov-2007, 21:41

After working through some headaches with contact printing, I finally got some images to share.

You can see that this 210mm Symmar-S MC has full 8x10 coverage.

This camera does have an advantage over the other 8x10 cameras out there. It is very light and compact. Getting down into this gulley with the camera, tripod and 3 film holders was no problem.

Using the camera requires a careful touch. For example one learns that when the camera is tipped down, the extra weight of the film holder will cause the rear standard to tip forward just a little. So one learns to apply a little forward pressure to the standard when focusing. Also, the weight of the dark cloth tends to be a problem, so I use the cloth for framing then take it off the camera for focusing and 'movements,' and eventual exposure. All, in all I was impressed with the lack of focusing glitches in the final negatives.

Other subtleties about the Symmar-S, setting the rear swing is a little tedious, because with the lens wide open, the far edges of the image circle don't focus at the same plane as the center. Not unexpected using this lens to cover 8x10. This improves when stopping down but the field does not get perfectly flat. I suspect on a resolution test using a FLAT target, the edges would read low, but in a 'scenic' image, frequently I find SOMETHING falls into the curved focal field (like rocks or grass in the foreground) giving the impression of total field sharpness. Which is to say the corners are way sharper than they need to be for a contact print, but only when the subject matter accommodates the slightly curved field.

ic-racer

21-Nov-2007, 22:19

Another nice thing about the simplicity of this Century is that it is quick to operate (as view cameras go, that it...)

I actually have found that the saying about view camera being a slow and careful task really not that applicable to some things I have observed. So many times have I seen 'good light' that is so ephemeral. In my work LIGHT is everything, it is the foundation of the power of the image. For example, in that second picture, the original print shows what I would call a 'theater lighting' type of feel. This lasted only a few moments. The light was coming throught the trees like a focused ellipsoid.

Although the diffuse light in the first picture looks very stable, during this outing and other times when I had visited this place with the 4x5 and other cameras, it has started to rain.

Ash

22-Nov-2007, 00:56

That's really nice, I like the first :)

Glad to see your project has fruit to bear!

ic-racer

13-Feb-2008, 20:48

I finally got an enlarger to restore so that I can enlarger the negatives taken with the Century. Kind of extremes in age, as the Durst 8x10 enlarger is one of the last models ever made. http://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/showthread.php?t=32852

So far the sharpness of the enlargements is phenomenal. That 210mm lens is really great on the Century, and the somewhat shaky standards have not shown to be a problem.

ic-racer

5-Sep-2008, 07:34

After about a year of using the restored Century I realize that it has become more than just a clean-up project for a display camera. It is a very usable 8x10 field camera. Its light weight and simplicity would be difficult to match with a contemporary camera.

At one point I figured this camera might just be a springboard into 8x10 and I would wind up getting a contemporary 8x10 camera. However, I think I can fine tune this camera (at the expense of 'originality') to make it a good usable camera.

Issues are:

1) Standards are a little shaky
2) Rear tilt mechanism binds and limits use

ic-racer

5-Sep-2008, 07:42

Here is a picture of the rear tilt mechanism and, for some reason unknown to me, it provides more forward tilt than rear tilt due to the off-center location of the locking nut. This certainly is the way the camera came from the factory, as these standards were riveted to the rear frame.

http://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=16585&d=1220120765

ic-racer

5-Sep-2008, 07:46

Now that screw-post rivets are used to attach the rear standards to the rear frame, reversing the rear standards to provide more rear tilt was simple.

With the 210mm lens, there now is more than enough rear tilt to get the foreground and background in focus in a typical landscape scene requiring a Scheimpflug arrangement of the standards.

seawolf66

5-Sep-2008, 07:52

ic-racer: If it were me. I would choose of the two ways ,one would johns way or I would buy a bunch of cherry verneer shts and build it up one at a time and would rotate the grain each time, like they do with plywood for strenght and stablity, and the last piece I would try to blend with the grain of the present piece ! I know its a lot of work, but does give you a lot of control :

ic-racer

5-Sep-2008, 08:49

W K Longcor

5-Sep-2008, 17:22

Ok, but did you realize the thread was started almost a year ago! :D .

Yes, but since you started this before I joined the group -- I'll add 2 cents worth. You mention black paint for the interior wood parts. STOVE BLACK available a old style hardware stores or new wood stove places is a great super dead flat black. Works great! Super job on the camera - by the way.

C. D. Keth

5-Sep-2008, 21:51

Beautiful job! I love seeing that old thing given the royal treatment. Is the nitro laquer finish holding up well?

ic-racer

6-Sep-2008, 07:24

Beautiful job! I love seeing that old thing given the royal treatment. Is the nitro laquer finish holding up well?

In the deepest recesses of the brass there is evidence of continued oxidation, in spite of the lacquer coating. I suspect this could be prevented by machine buffing (rather than hand buffing). But I was at risk of loosing structural brass, as some of the pits and scratches in the brass are quite deep.

In terms of the wood parts, the lacquer is holding up fine. Just to clarify, my research 'after the fact' indicates that the camera was probably originally covered in shellac or varnish, rather than lacquer ( http://www.fiberq.com/cam/general%20trends%20finish.htm )

Since I did not remove the old finish, and I know the nitrocellulose covers shellac without problems, I suspect the camera was originally finished with shellac.

ic-racer

6-Sep-2008, 13:29

No pictures to show for this one, but while I had the camera apart to flip the rear standards, I bent the brass pieces that ride in the focusing frame's grooves. This firmed things up nicely and now there is little or no wobble in either standard.

I did not do this when I initially had the camera apart for restoration, because I didn't know if this was going to wind up on the collector shelf or be a 'user.' If it was going to wind up on the collector shelf, I did not want to bend or damage any of the parts. Since it is turning in to a fantastic user camera, I went ahead and bent the pieces, realizing I may have to face some consequences. Turned out there were no ill-effects (ie the focusing is still smooth, though, expectedly tighter.)

ic-racer

11-Sep-2008, 12:50

UPDATE:

The rear tilt is enough now for almost any situation. The standards are sturdier now also. I never did get any camera movement or 'focus surprises' in the past, but now I have more confidence in the camera.

Frank Petronio

16-Nov-2008, 10:46

What a great thread, thank you for the inspiration.

Erik Larsen

16-Nov-2008, 11:44

jb7

16-Nov-2008, 13:25

Great to read back over all of this again-

j

ic-racer

16-Nov-2008, 17:57

Ic-racer,
I am having the same limitation on rear tilt with my 11x14 which looks similiar to your setup. To be clear, did you just take the struts that hold the rear standard and flip them to opposite sides or am I missing something. I would be happy to do the same if that's all it takes.
regards
Erik

Exactly. The wood bar to which they are attached at the bottom had some non-symmetrical components on it, so the supports had to be unscrewed from that and swapped. Luckily the screw holes were symmetrical, so they screwed back on to the wood bar without any problem.

Erik Larsen

16-Nov-2008, 18:27

Exactly. The wood bar to which they are attached at the bottom had some non-symmetrical components on it, so the supports had to be unscrewed from that and swapped. Luckily the screw holes were symmetrical, so they screwed back on to the wood bar without any problem.

Many thanks Ic-racer, I'll have to give it a shot!
regards
Erik

ic-racer

28-Aug-2009, 14:10

The original whimpy little brass tab did not do much to hold a heavy modern lens and lens board in place, so I made a locking bolt with a blind nut to help keep the the lens panel in place.
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v670/ic-racer/DSCF4703.jpg

Michael Cienfuegos

1-Sep-2009, 15:11

I was reading through this thread, you did a wonderful job restoring that old camera. I recently picked up an 8x10 Kodak 2D View. It is in need of a lot of TLC, and after reading thorough your experiences I know that I can get this project done. It may take a bit of time, but I am really looking forward to it. It has a 5x7 back at present, I will need an 8x10 back, but for now I will adapt an Ansco 8x10 back with a few shims so as not to damage either the back or the camera.

Thank you for sharing your experiences.

ic-racer

30-Sep-2009, 13:03

Here is the latest picture of the camera. I got a Shan Hao to use with the modern lens and now will be using this nice Anthony landscape lens on the Century.

In keeping with the low budget nature of the project, the lens was $5 at a flea market.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v670/ic-racer/centurywithAnthonylens.jpg

Michael Roberts

30-Sep-2009, 16:14

What a great thread, thank you for the inspiration.

Still a great thread--I heartily agree!

Jason_1622

25-Aug-2010, 12:13

Excellent!

ComicDom1

22-Sep-2010, 02:19

I hope my Century No 2 turns out as well as your Century has. I just received it yesterday and I have already started working on it. All my hardware seems to function properly. I am missing one clip that holds the ground glass in but the three I have seem to do the job. I took it today to a buddy of mine who is more experienced that I and he said the camera looks to be in pretty good condition but he did not think I had the proper glass in the camera. Since he used to run the camera store for the local college he said he has several sheets of ground glass and is going to cut me a new one for the camera and it will be ready in a couple of days. The bellows is going to take some repair or replacement. I inspected it a couple of nights ago and the bellows certainly has some pin holes. My friend suggested that I use Black Silicone RTV, gloves, and rub a thin layer on all the creases. He also said if I am going to use the camera outside I needed to look for a replacement bellows.

Jason

ic-racer

24-Sep-2013, 20:43

I finally got around to making some negatives with that Anthony lens. Here is a sepia toned print on Ilford Warmtone:
102370

ic-racer

6-Jun-2019, 18:08

pepeguitarra

6-Jun-2019, 21:47

This thread had many, many pictures. Wonder where the went? Here are some pictures of the camera before restoration. Right after restoration with a Symmar-S 210, and recently with a 300mm and an Anthony Brass lens.
192147
192146
192148
192149

And to think that I waited 10 years to see these photos. :mad: Did you make the rail/base, or you purchased it? Also, did you get the extension? I have one which, I restored last year, but does not have the extension. The bases are special, they have double railing, one for the front standard and one for the tripod block.

https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/47684321141_e9af1d8951.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/2fDGBnX)MEET&GREET BY Tri Tran (https://flic.kr/p/2fDGBnX) by Palenquero Photography (https://www.flickr.com/photos/palenquero/), on Flickr