I found the slides last night and tried to align them myself, in searching for a possible already completed version, or higher resolution copy of the images (I failed) but did eventually find this video, in trying to find out what moth it could be, I realised I'd gotten the colour order slightly wrong, and the four winged larger moth should be pink and green, which then lead me to the identification of it being a 'Blackburn's Splendid Ghost Moth'
the description about Durst 66 is not quite right, since there is little info about that camera online, just because it is almost impossible to repair. Durst 66 has NO cylinder inside, it has a pair of 'cymbals'. one is inflexible aluminum, the other one is made of flexible material. When winding the shutter(also transfer the film), the flexible side is pushed clinging to inflexible side, left almost no air between the two. Release the shutter, the flexible side is forced away from the inflexible side, the chamber between the cymbals INHALE air from small hole, not expel. The shutter closes after flexible side return to it's original position.
Thank you so much for all this information! I'm fascinated with the beam splitter lens but they are so hard to find for modern cameras. Very tempting to try and engineer my own.
@@pccgbvideochannel8822 especially with VR headsets so readily available. I personally have a glasses-less 3D monitor from Acer that uses cameras to head track a single viewer and I'm dying to shoot some 3D content of the family as viewing it in years to come will only get easier.
Interesting. I'm sorry I missed this live, but I was on a photo walk in Leicester. I think Florian became Fabian once or twice. Your use of "Lightpainting" is slightly different from the practice of directing light at the camera as practised by Michelle Essenson and others, but it's all part of the same game.
Many thanks for your comments - one of the perils of a 'live' recording is that it includes the mispronunciations! But one huge benefit is being able to share the material online for those who couldn't attend!
With respect to the very rare helicoid lens, I guess it might not be a lens specifically meant for photographic purposes but rather found its use as a projector lens. The early photographic lenses didn't have - apart from the Petzval portrait lens - a focussing mechanism as such since this was not really needed because the sliding box camera itself was able to get the picture into focus. However, a projector - or rather its body - didn't have the ability to provide any means of focussing, but was for that purpose reliable on the focus-mechanism of the lens. ...Well its just a thought; nice find William any how i.e. your helicoid lens.
This is definitely not a projector lens. I have come across quite a few projector lenses in cataloguing the collection the Photographic Society of Ireland, which was founded as the Dublin Photographic Society in 1854. I have catalogued almost 200 items in that collection so far. Thomas Grubb was a founding member of that society. This mount was described by Grubb in his period advertisements as a 'Screw Adjusting Mount' which was offered as an option for camera lenses. The more common option was what Grubb called a 'Portable Mount' which did not have any focusing mechanism in the lens itself. The Screw Adjusting Mount is quite uncommon as very few people took that option. What I did not mention in this short talk was that the first commonly found reappearance of the helicoid was in the Goerz Anschutz camera which was available from the 1890s onwards.
Thanks, Tony. I was delighted to do an article on this for TLS, which you chair. However, there was a lot more to say and the 'before and after' situation needed an extended presentation which is here now.
Thanks, Dan. The word at Leica might have been that 'The British are Coming' 😀. Paul Revere never actually said that and I doubt if the Leitz people were really concerned as they had a another plan up their sleeve. However, some of what happened back then has lasted, even until today.
Thanks, Julian. I have only just become aware that this was posted. I now distributing it to friends around the world who were not able to attend the talk or visit the site of the darkroom.
The Prominent focus system for the wide and long lenses using the outer bayonet uses a bit of optical mastery. The focus throw is fixed so it is be too long for wide and too short for long lenses. The outer bayonet moves some elements while the shutter moves the rest of the lens. These changes move the nodal points so the lenses focus properly. It's similar to contemporary floating elements but for. different purpose. I have not checked but I suspect these lenses, the 35 and 100 have a lot of focus breathing because of this. Another feature of the Prominent is that it has two sets of shutter blades. I believe the purpose of these was to protect film from the radioactive emission from the Nokton lens. One other thing you may have noticed. The Prominent I body is a largely recycled Vito III body. Lots of very clever stuff on the Prominent but the Vitessa L's especially with f/2 Ultrons are my favorites and the Vito III is one of the nicest to carry and use.
Glad I was able to catch up on this Roland - and sorry I missed it live ! I think the loaning of " test " cameras to well respected, established photographers was a very logical step to take.
How come I never find rare/valuable stuff at thrift stores?! These are hard to find - and certainly a lot more valuable than a typical 'BBB' (Boring Brown Box)
It would seem that the pinhole spacing and hence the number of pinholes around the circumference are related to the relative radii of the film and tin. "Discontinuous panorama" - nice. Rather than lifting the cover, maybe coincident holes could be made and the shutter rotated. I would like to see a slit scan panorama using a similar set up and a single masked pinhole. The rate of rotation determines the exposure. That Hippo Photo Lab camera needs to be made into a real camera. I see at the end he seems to have 2 exposures on a contiguous roll. Does that mean the other half goes inside the inner box? Yes. 11 mins to 14 mins he says so but it's not clear.
From Steven Sargent: Hi Dan, it is great to have your comments. I am reposting my reply because it didn't seem to appear correctly before. Yes indeed, the pinhole spacing and number can be changed with the relative radii of the film and tin. I based mine on the original design from Prof Wilie Sanderson. If the difference in radii is reduced so the focal lenght is less then you could have more pinholes. The Pinhole Photography book I mention would be invaluable for data on the coverage and viewing-angle for different focal lenghts. In terms of a rotating shutter, that sounds interesting. I wanted to keep my design simple for starters so that I could get to see some results quickly. The slit scan panorama that you describe sounds similar to the Lomo Spinner (I have one of these). Spinner 360° (lomography.com). That camera is good fun. The book by Brain Polden has a wealth of information about that and everything panoramic. The Bardwell Press - Photography at Length by Brian Polden (bardwell-press.co.uk) Yes, we are still waiting for Photo Hippo to make that camera! My camera does create two images on a 120 roll. If you view the video at 14.10 to 14.20 mins, I aim to explain my film threading. As per the photo on screen, the other half of the film is rolled up and sits in the recess on the inner right hand side. You can just see the coil of film in the photo. Many thanks for your comments, it is really good to see you are interested in this unusual contruction.
I can only assume William that the machining necessary for a succesful helicoid lens was so much more complex than for a rack and pinion focusing mount that firms didn't bother ? After WWI perhaps improvements in machining technology made the helicoid a practical option again. I think Grubb lenses came from an astronomical background ( ? ) where absolute quality was something required -not just desirable, and perhaps it was a little over the top for day to day photographic use ?
Thanks Christopher. It is good to see your comment on here. The rack and pinion device of Petzvals was liable to damage, even when they were new. That is still the case today where you often find that a Grubb Petzval has a damaged rack and pinion, but any lenses with his helicoid designs are still perfect. If you look at Thomas Grubb's letter of 14th July 1858 to the Photographic Journal, he alluded to this issue with the rack and pinion design. He also mentioned that the main purpose of the helicoid focus was for fine tuning of the second lens in a stereo pair after the first lens had been focussed using sliding box or bellows. However, I have never seen a helicoid lens in a Grubb stereo pair, they are usually in his 'portable mount' with no internal focus. As for the quality of construction, yes, they are probably over-engineered. In fact, in a large collection of lenses I have nothing that even remotely compares with the engineering quality of the lenses made by Thomas Grubb and his son Howard in Dublin in the mid to late 19th Century. This also applies to the superbly polished glass in the lenses which have the serial numbers engraved on the rims to discourage counterfeiting. In his 'day job' as Chief Engineer of the Bank of Ireland, Grubb had invented a method of printing banknotes which could not be counterfeited. I still have not found any helicoid lens designs from the period between Grubb's design and Berek's design for Leitz around 1920.
Great video. I just bought a prominent yesterday at a location shop. I paid $200 and it appears to be in mint condition 😊 mine came with the 50mm f3.5. Is that lens very good ? Should I be looking for another 50mm that is much better?
Hello MacGuy - glad you enjoyed the video. I've just checked the article in Photographica World #165 - the f3.5 was apparently classed as 'good', whereas the f2 and the f1.5 were superb... my advice is to shoot with what you have, then decide if you want to fork out a lot of cash for either of those 2 lenses! Better to shoot with what you have, than miss opportunities because you are waiting to track down a dream lens to work with!
Very interesting presentation, William. The Grubb lenses look to be precision instruments and are justifiably part of the photographic heritage of Ireland. I'll keep an eye out for anything connected with either Grubb or Ross and will revert to you if I come across any examples.
Thanks, George. I know where a few Grubb lenses are supposed to be in institutions in Ireland and I am in the process of following up on leads. So far there are less here than there are in my collection. Outside of Ireland, a friend and I have traced about 120 -30 Grubb lenses. They are of astonishing build quality and the optics are superb for their era. I have been to many leading experts about the helicoid question and, so far, we have not come up with any between Grubb's design and Berek's 1920 Anastigmat design.
Hi - glad you enjoyed the video! Part of the 'pleasure' of cameras is trying to track down the accessories - often a lot harder than finding the camera in the first place! One of our club members did a multi part feature about these Voiglander cameras, including all the lenses and accessories, in our club publication 'Photographica World' - these are available to view to members via the online digital archive - for more info please visit pccgb.net
I admit I actually wrote my comments below before I watched your full video. I used Photoshop at first, before I found 'StereoPhoto Maker' to line up my hand held 'cha cha' dance. Well I am glad to see, we are both are saying the same things. 'StereoPhoto Maker' was really important to me switching back and forth between the two Apps. I needed SPM to zoom in deep to verify my 3D details such as a characters face or hands. I don't use Glasses while I am working. My eyes can switch back and forth instantly from 2D to 3D because I am really used to it. I Subscribed.
Hello David - many thanks for your comments - personally I struggle to see 3D even with the glasses on, never mind the 'no-glasses'required' approach! I'll checkout your links for examples.
Believe or not, there is no need for 3D glasses or any adapters at all. Imagine talking to someone and suddenly a siren appears down the street over her shoulder or looking past your fingers. Same thing. We do it naturally. You can learn to do it with 3D photos without crossing your eyes. You just think you can't. The trick is though, you have to shift your head a bit to line up two images into a virtual center image and ignore the sides. Do you care about the glass in your bathroom mirror. No. Can you look out a window? Yes. Same thing. We do it naturally. Cheers! '3dfantasys'.
Try a search for '3D Lois Lane 97 Tribute to Curt Swan' Took me about 60 hours for me to paint it using Ver. Photoshop CS-3 2007. I have plenty of 3d on the Web. I hope you enjoy!
@@Heisenberg_Aka_itsme So much depends on the condition - most of these tiny cameras have chips in the plastic bodies - especially around the clip. They are generally about £100, although some of the colours can fetch a lot more if in mint condition.
I believe the National Optical Co. was set up during the Second World War to manufacture lenses for the war effort. I think it was Neill Wright who told me the company set up more than one small production facility and in effect was utilising skilled workers not taken on by the main optical companies. I would guess this included skilled people who worked for opticians suppliers. Stewartry later produced L39 mounts for some surplus N.O. CO lenses and I have seen a few over the years at camera fairs. I haven't checked but it is possible they were set up by TTH or were set up independently with TTH technical assistance and quality supervision. It was common practice during WW2 to sub-contract production to entirely separate companies or subcontractors were set up with financial input from the relevant Ministries and then supervised by the leading supplier. For example, the list of companies involved in producing Spitfires and sub-assemblies for Spitfires would probably fill a page, and even included a bus depot in Shrewsbury!
Thanks Tim, I'll make sure Tim G and various other PCCGB members who are into the Reid see you comments - it is a fascinating bit of British camera manufacturing...
An excellent piece of reseach by both John and Tim. The first time I heard of Reid cameras was a passing mention by my eccentric Geography teacher Bernie Platt. He said that in the 1960s he had attended an MOD pre-auction viewing at which there was a a large stack of Reids for sale. He described them as on of the best cameras ever made. I suspect he was right!
Thanks Tim, we're glad you enjoyed it. That's an interesting story about the MOD sale of these cameras. The nearest I ever got to buying one was when I saw one in a dealers 2nd hand selection window sometime in the early 1990's - it was about £200. Instead I bought a Mikroma subminiature and a very clean Olympus Pen W - the latter is almost as rare as the Reid... although not nearly as valuable these days. Still, I've put a lot of film through both of the cameras, which I doubt would be the case with the Reid...
@@pccgbvideochannel8822 I remember a nice clean example for sale in Sherwoods in Birminham for £200 in the mid-80's but I was saving for a medium format camera at the time so I couldn't stretch to that much. In retrospect it would have been a good investment as well as a very useful camera. I joined the PCCGB around the same time (1062). I suspect the Stafford Cripps story is correct as he was an extremely perceptive and intelligent politician and a successful former Minister for Aircraft Production, as you mentioned. There was considerable focus in the post war Labour government on developing products for export as the war had left the UK with huge debts and many export markets had been lost due to the total concentration on the war effort. I assume AGI were probably encouraged to produce the Agiflex for simuilar reasons.
A quite rare photographic process explored in depth in these 3 " articles. " The live sound helps at times and apologies for our ribald sense of humour in this episode ! No not really !!!!
thanks for the video my question is when using a DSLR where is the focus point when taking two shots.what i mean is when taking a photo for example of a house do i focus on the same brick which would make a triangle or do i just move the camera over 2'' and have two photos that focuses on different points
Hello John - glad you enjoyed the video - when doing stereo pairs you keep the focus point the same, but just move the camera 2" to one side, that replicates how your eyes see any scene in real life, when you view the pairs your brain maps the two images as a single stereo view. Let us know how you get on!