Controlling the Packard Shutter!

[Asher Kelman]

As one looks at the work done by LF photographers with lenses outside of the fitting for regular shutters, the resourcefulness that is so commonly used is remarkable.

Using the Packard shutter, Jim Galli can adjust his pressure and release to get 1/4 and 1/8 of a second as he mentally times the shutter to the sound of his Nikon! in using B&W, even over exposing by 4 stops is no block to him getting pictures as he just controls the subsequent processing of the film. Now I'm wondering what advances may have been made by finer control of the air/vacuum piston that opens and closes the Packard shutter. If the incremental cost is not out of my range, say $500-$1000, then I'd go for more repeatable and finer control. I need a Packard shutter of minimal diameter 4" and for safety might go to 4.5 " and they are available off the shelf brand new.

It's intriguing to read on the Packard Shutter website (http://www.packardshutter.com/): "Clippard Air Cylinder, Reverse operation and upside down applications are ALL Custom Built. Each requires separate R&D time. Engineering fees will apply." Has anyone used such air cylinders? The company has very impressive capability (http://www.clippard.com/Customsolutions/)!

I'm perfectly happy with using a Packard synchro shutter as is, but it is interesting to know what others have done to make it more accurate/repeatable.

Asher

[TheDeardorffGuy]

30 years ago New Packard shutters were not too dependable. It was the way they were finished. The blades had rough edges and the piston / cylinder were "rough"
I prefer an old one that I can polish the piston and hone the cylinder. That done I then paint the inside of the metal shell with glossy black paint. That stops the fine rust that builds up on the metal. Reassemble and you have a shutter that will last decades IF you keep it out of dust and grit that will foul the piston.Anyone with practice and a smooth running shutter can get very accurate speeds. Another fun thing to do do is add a micro switch a red and Green LEDs, batteries and mount them to a board. When the shutter is open you get a red light and when it is closed you get green. I mounted a setup like this in a Deardorff Packard shutter adapter box. It is very slick.

[Asher Kelman]

30 years ago New Packard shutters were not too dependable. It was the way they were finished. The blades had rough edges and the piston / cylinder were "rough"
I prefer an old one that I can polish the piston and hone the cylinder. That done I then paint the inside of the metal shell with glossy black paint. That stops the fine rust that builds up on the metal. Reassemble and you have a shutter that will last decades IF you keep it out of dust and grit that will foul the piston.Anyone with practice and a smooth running shutter can get very accurate speeds. Another fun thing to do do is add a micro switch a red and Green LEDs, batteries and mount them to a board. When the shutter is open you get a red light and when it is closed you get green. I mounted a setup like this in a Deardorff Packard shutter adapter box. It is very slick.

Ken,

I love your website and all the info on Deardorff's. Great dedication. So how accurate can you make the Packards work? Are you actually cleaning up the inside of the piston like cleaning the pistons in an old ford? Have you looked into this option of changing the piston for a precise and cleanly machined modern one, so that timing could be made accurate for a series of different speeds? Anyone you know tried this? Do you have a diagram for the circuits and list of parts required? I'd love to see pictures? Do you make and sell shutter boxes too?

Do you know how fast the shutter closes? Is it faster than it opens? Have you timed it accurately?

Other shutters I've looked at ~ 90mm in size, take 70 ms to fully open. I'm wondering if anyone has any idea of the timings for the Packard.

Asher

[TheDeardorffGuy]

The ones with the T-I pin close slower than opening. But not by much. I put the piston in one of my lathes and spin it up. A paper towel and Brasso does the trick. Same w the cylinder. A wood dowel ,a wrap of towel and a elec. drill. Wash it out and you are good to go. I tried to replace one with one I machined. Mine had tighter tolerances and it made no difference, These shutters were made first when ASA 25 was fast!! Keep that in mind. I see no reason to better them other than rounding the edge of the blades and the paint and polish. Oh and a really good squeese bulb. Blood pressure ones seem fine. The ones the last owners of packard had dried out rapidly.
Glad you likes my site.

[Michael Kadillak]

I find packards fit a particular segment of photography that is 8x10 and larger for a reason. The reason is that there is a wide range of optics that fit this segment of the business with cost effective and fairly reliable mechanical shutters. Once you move up in formats beyond 8x10 and reach for older lenses that do not mate easily with conventional shutters this is where I feel the Packard is perfectly suited.

That said the critical issue in this application is getting film for these larger cameras at a film speed that could use such shutter speed. When you use ASA 100 or 25 speed film at its effective film speed and add any filtration and stop down to f32 at a minimum you are going to be using the bulb setting for longer exposures anyway so why engineer something that is not going to come into play? The Packard is fine for timed exposures and has been for a very long time. Work up your reciprocity relationships and make some images.

Just my $0.02

[Asher Kelman]

When you use ASA 100 or 25 speed film at its effective film speed and add any filtration and stop down to f32 at a minimum you are going to be using the bulb setting for longer exposures anyway so why engineer something that is not going to come into play? The Packard is fine for timed exposures and has been for a very long time. Work up your reciprocity relationships and make some images.

Just my $0.02

Michael,

These are good points. The fast speeds are really needed using wide open soft focus barrel lenses outdoors in bright light without resorting to ND filters.

I just want to be able to use lenses like the f 4.0 Visual Quality P&S in the outside light and so will need faster speeds. At present, my plan is simply to make a box for one ~4" Packard shutter to slip over a dedicated front mounted adapter for each of 7 barrel lenses. Some will be for my 8x10 Chamonix and others for my huge lenses for the Camera Obscura I'm building. The box will have a front-mounted, integrated large Lee filter holder. For outdoors, I'll use ND filters and for inside I just need UV and color correction filters for use with lighting for Cibachrome tungsten continuous lighting and/strobe.

Meanwhile, for fast barrel lenses for the 8x10 camera, I'll research a more advanced air piston, since if Jim Galli can adjust his thumb pressure to choose 1/4 or an 1/8 of a second, then there could be a simple mechanical way of doing the same. In the meanwhile, I'll go with the best ND filters I can find.

There are sophisticated mechanical focal plane shutters available, but at over $6,000. An iris (multiple blade) electromechanical shutter 90 mm size is ~$2900 plus $700 for control electronics and the shutter opening time is 75 ms! So I see no other immediate mechanical solution.

For the visual Quality lens, however, it might be worth my while to buy a large aperture classic shutter, even if it cuts the aperture to 12 ~ f4.7 or so.

Asher

[Michael Kadillak]

Michael,

These are good points. The fast speeds are really needed using wide open soft focus barrel lenses outdoors in bright light without resorting to ND filters.

I just want to be able to use lenses like the f 4.0 Visual Quality P&S in the outside light and so will need faster speeds. At present, my plan is simply to make a box for one ~4" Packard shutter to slip over a dedicated front mounted adapter for each of 7 barrel lenses. Some will be for my 8x10 Chamonix and others for my huge lenses for the Camera Obscura I'm building. The box will have a front-mounted, integrated large Lee filter holder. For outdoors, I'll use ND filters and for inside I just need UV and color correction filters for use with lighting for Cibachrome tungsten continuous lighting and/strobe.

Meanwhile, for fast barrel lenses for the 8x10 camera, I'll research a more advanced air piston, since if Jim Galli can adjust his thumb pressure to choose 1/4 or an 1/8 of a second, then there could be a simple mechanical way of doing the same. In the meanwhile, I'll go with the best ND filters I can find.

There are sophisticated mechanical focal plane shutters available, but at over $6,000. An iris (multiple blade) electromechanical shutter 90 mm size is ~$2900 plus $700 for control electronics and the shutter oping time is 75 ms! So I see no other immediate mechanical solution.

For the visual Quality lens, however, it might be worth my while to buy a large aperture classic shutter, even if it cuts the aperture to 12 ~ f4.7 or so.

Asher

Well you have some very unique applications for your image making so now I can understand your goals.

[Len Middleton]

Asher,

I think there was an article in view Camera a few years back on how to adjust the speed of a Packard shutter. I believe it involved the use of a pneumatic flow control valve that would allow more consistent control of the speed of the shutter for use with the instantaneous settings below the standard 1/25th of a second.

There was a long write up but basically I think it was just being able to adjust the flow control to a repeatable point for consistent exposure.

Hope that helps,

Len

[Asher Kelman]

Asher,

I think there was an article in view Camera a few years back on how to adjust the speed of a Packard shutter. I believe it involved the use of a pneumatic flow control valve that would allow more consistent control of the speed of the shutter for use with the instantaneous settings below the standard 1/25th of a second.

There was a long write up but basically I think it was just being able to adjust the flow control to a repeatable point for consistent exposure.

Hope that helps,

Len

Thanks so much, Len! View Camera is a great work of love! I wish I had those old copies. Is View Camera searchable?

If anyone can find that, it would be so helpful!

Asher

[polyglot]

Are electrically-actuated Packards available, i.e. with a solenoid instead of piston, even if it's a retrofit? If so, it would be pretty easy to make up an electrical controller to support standard speeds, limited only by the shutter's mechanical actuation time. I suspect that 1/15 ought to be achievable, even if it means the shutter starts closing as soon as it's open.

[Asher Kelman]

Are electrically-actuated Packards available, i.e. with a solenoid instead of piston, even if it's a retrofit? If so, it would be pretty easy to make up an electrical controller to support standard speeds, limited only by the shutter's mechanical actuation time. I suspect that 1/15 ought to be achievable, even if it means the shutter starts closing as soon as it's open.
I'm not sure where the best place to work is, improving the air cylinder/(piston) or its activation. I'd imagine that everything can be done in one go with just a more sophisticated pneumatic control. However, for sure, someone has already worked this out!

Asher

[polyglot]

The point is that fiddling with pneumatics is, well, damn fiddly. Electronically, timing is really stupidly easy. While you could squeeze a bulb with a solenoid and have that drive the piston, you're rapidly entering Rube Goldberg territory.

A quick google reveals that Packard sells 'em new with solenoids, plus there are plenty of old ones out there on the market, particularly from enlargers and process cameras, though those often have mains-rated solenoids that would need to be replaced with low-voltage DC ones for field use.

[Asher Kelman]

The point is that fiddling with pneumatics is, well, damn fiddly. Electronically, timing is really stupidly easy. While you could squeeze a bulb with a solenoid and have that drive the piston, you're rapidly entering Rube Goldberg territory.



The Clippard company that makes the air cylinders has very sophisticated pneumatic controls and therefore the solenoid would not be needed. They seem have much more precisely bored cylinders and pistons as well as the means to activate them to any degree. I'll call the company and find out more. I'll also look into actuators to do the same. The limiting factor might be the time for the shutter to open or close and that may be a function of the friction between the blades. However, the blades can be made of different materials if one wishes.

Asher