Hi guys
I want to make a couple of spring backs for my Gandolfi. Looking at three backs I have on other cameras, I see they all have grooves on the non moving part, (the actual back of the camera), see photos. What is the benefit of this? I can't see it has anything to do with the T distance as that is down to the sprung moving part.
Thanks
John
I've seen this too. It would act as a baffle to stop low-angle reflections, but I doubt that is why it is there. Rather, its reason may be related to the easiest way to make a wooden frame.
Maybe to hold a ground glass cover? I cannot tell from the photo, but if it is on the inner frame, it could also be for a sliding blind that would allow two images on one negative. I occasionally do something similar with black foamcore to get two or four images on a sheet (like for a diptych, or when I'm running out of film on a trip, or doing portraits of my wife's extended family cause everyone wants a shot from the big camera.)
You peaked my interest, and I had to go look at my cameras ( one is a 1994 Gandolfi ). Neither of my cameras has this construction, so I’m going to go with Eric’s assessment.
For a Fresnel?
Lachlan.
You miss 100% of the shots you never take. -- Wayne Gretzky
Interesting thoughts. I'm not sure it's any of them tho.
Eric, I would think it adds complications to making the back but I'm no camera maker.
Tim, I' can't see it holding anything. It's pretty inaccessible when the back is on the camera. There are also no witness marks from any moving parts. If it was designed to hold something it would be a permanent addition.
Lachlan, it can't be for a fresnel as that need to be in contact with the shiny side of the GG screen on the moving part of the back to work.
Conrad, that is an interesting observation. I'm waiting for my Gandolfi to arrive. With it comes a half-plate international back which I'll adapt for 5x4 as the holders' external dimensions are the same.
The three cameras for information: an 8x10 Deardorff, a half plate back from an unknown Kodak and a 5x7 Kodak tailboard.
I think it reduces the tendency to warp or change dimensions with changes in temperature or humidity??
On side note my Dad made me an 8x10 back for an old camera (decades ago), he used thin slats of Hickory for the springs, it worked great.
Now that's an interesting thought.Originally Posted by Duolab123
That's interesting. I used to struggle to find springs for backs, but in the meantime was making bows from hickory and osage. If I ever make another back I'll give that a try.
Don't you take the back off to change orientation? The fact that their is no wear in the groove may just mean it was never used to hold a blind; that the groove itself is a vestigial reminder of an earlier time when sliding backs were common in portrait studios and a groove for a sliding blind would allow shooting school portraits with two portraits on each sheet. For example, for a class of 32 you could take eight holders, shoot 16 portraits on the left side of the holders, open the back and shift the slide, then shoot 16 more on the right side.
A real sliding back allows you to shoot two portraits on the same sheet without changing the direction the camera points to, meaning the only adjustment needed for pupils sitting in a chair might be rise or fall, whereas using a screen would require you change the direction of the camera either left or right when you shift the screen. But a screen is a lot cheaper than a sliding back, so could be a cheaper alternative. To work with gravity, the groove on the top would need to be deeper than the one on the bottom so you could slide it up into the top groove, then drop it into the bottom. If the grooves are equal depth, you could still use something sprung in place. Or, I could be totally wrong!
I don't think it is to prevent warpage, as I'm pretty familiar with cabinetwork, and I've never heard of doing that, and also a back is held in place in all four corners, so not much chance to warp.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks