Here we go, Century 8x10 Restoration

[ic-racer]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

That's really nice, I like the first

Glad to see your project has fruit to bear!

[ic-racer]

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.in...ad.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]

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