Daniel D. Teoli Jr.

I polled a printing forum I belong to about the Borrowdale camera. I got no replies. Looks like all the old timers that knew about the camera are dead. Everything is pretty much digital press now. When I think back to my graphic arts days in the early 70's, I was always the youngest on the job working with process cameras. Everyone else was a lot older than me. So now that I'm old, any remaining people that worked with them are really old. And graphic arts work was not the healthiest of jobs. I keep telling you guys and gals...document things. Get oral history and video. One day you don't wake up and the history is all gone. ...I'm still keeping my fingers crossed that an old timer in a rest home runs across my inquires.

Here is the deal for all the film fanatics. You should poll the commercial scanning companies. Find out if their business for scanning new film is stable or going up or down. The kids are not projecting these film...they are digitizing them. Forget the archival work, that is ancient history. Find out where the new production scanning business is going. (Although some businesses don't usually like to disclose their stats, especially if not positive.) Collection #1 vintage stag film labels off 16mm cans & reels DDTJRAC

How reliable has your scanner been? What sort of repairs if any have you had to make to them? If repairs were needed, were you able to complete them yourself or did you need to import a tech? Were there issues getting parts? Although my use of the Retroscan is limited, I have had no problems with it. (Early model)

They did make smaller process cameras. There were desktop model 'repro cameras' for the secretary to use. As well as small vertical cameras. This model could be used horizontally and vertically. Looks like a problem with the OP photo. Here it is again... The R.W. Borrowdale overhead process camera

In the specials of I wanna hold your hand, the principals talked about their AD...Newt Arnold. He sounded like he was quite a character. Clip of Newt Arnold 'I Wanna Hold Your Hand' 1978 : D.D.Teoli Jr. A.C. : Free Download, Borrow, and Streaming : Internet Archive There were to shoot this barbershop scene and the actor to play the barber did not show up. From what I recall, they said the actor was 5 hours late from a drinking binge. Newt pulled out a SAG card and said he would do it. They said Newt asked them for a butt pad and did the scene in one take. Spielberg has a fantastic 40min+ talk in the specials going way back to his beginnings and discussing mentorship. They said when Newt would direct, sometimes he would shoot a pistol with blanks in the air to get everyone's attention. Dunno if that would fly now with the recent movie shooting tragedy, but that was how it was back then. Newt died in 2000. They go on to discuss the importance of the DP. Back in the day before video taps, the DP was depended on to say whether they thought they got the shot or not. ...what about the rest of you? Anyone see any good commentary? A forum is only as good as the members that participate. You can't have a good forum if everyone are lurkers and only take. Give back a little once in a while!

Got timed out. Here are a few other tidbits on cleaning lenses... I didn't settle on Kimwipes and alcohol pads first thing. I found the combo after trying everything else and not being happy with the results. This is a sample of alcohol wipes. Never used this brand. Internet Photo: Fair Use When I ran out of the vintage Kodak lens tissue and Kodak lens cleaning fluid, I shopped around. I found much of the lens tissue and lens cleaners to be subpar. So, I bought everything that was on the market at B&H, Adorama, Sammy's, Walmart and the local eyeglass shop...and gave them all a try. That was how I settled on Kimwipes and alcohol wipes...by testing. And some of the tissue and lens cleaning solutions were terrible. I ended up trashing almost all of the cleaning solutions and some of the lower grade tissues. I tell you guys and gals all the time to TEST your setups, lighting, etc. So don't take my word for it, YOU test it out. It could be 25 years from now all my lenses have the coating eaten off of them. But for the last 12 years my system has worked fine. Sometimes when in the field I would not have anything to clean a lens, so I used the fog from my breath and my undershirt or Kleenex. After you have cleaned the lens, you can check out the quality of the clean with a bright flashlight. Shine it on your front element. It shows the problems. The flashlight is also good to use when buying a used lens. Shine it through the lens and it picks up any dirt or dust in the lens when wide open. eBay Photo: Fair Use But let's go back in time to hear from the old timers... This thread inspired me to do some archiving from eBay on lens tissues and cleaning solutions. Here is a small collection you can look at. Some of their instructions on how to clean a lens is there. At least one said don't use alcohol! eBay Photo: Fair Use Collection Of Vintage Kodak & Other Lens Tissue & Cleaning Fluid D. D. Teoli Jr. A. C. : D.D.Teoli Jr. A.C. : Free Download, Borrow, and Streaming : Internet Archive If you want to practice cleaning lenses, practice cleaning filters or buy a cheap, used Pentax manual 50mm lens on eBay. You can get them for $15 - $25 each. ...and here is how you can test your cleaning tissue for abrasives. Testing film cleaning wipes for abrasion qualities – Daniel D. Teoli Jr. Archival Collection – II (home.blog)

A clean lens is basic to getting a good photo or cine' shot. You should always be looking at your lens to see what condition it is in, When I'm out in the field, hitting the pavement, I carry around some lens tissue such as Pearstone or Tiffen. I keep the Kimwipes at home or in my car or tent. If you are lucky enough to have a lacky intern, have them carry around a mini box of Kiwwipes in a Ziplock bag in the backpack. You can pack some loose Kimwipes in a Ziplock bag...but you risk picking up dirt. If you carry lens tissue in your pocket...keep it in a Ziplock bag. I can't say I'm the world's expert on lens cleaning...but I have lots of experience shooting in filthy places and working to keep a clean lens. Many times, the gear gets ruined before the lens coating does. Selection from Whoop-Whoop D.D. Teoli Jr. Take this Juggalo wedding. If this was the only time I would get drenched in Faygo, things may be OK. But it is constant day and night gear abuse. Selection from Whoop-Whoop D.D. Teoli Jr. If you could get behind the action and not be touched, you may be OK, but the Juggalos love to soak everyone in front of them. I tried shooting with telephoto from way back with a tripod. Put they thought I was a cop and almost got attacked a few times. Selection from Whoop-Whoop D.D. Teoli Jr. And it is not only liquids and dust. People put their hands on your lenses sometimes. This hen party wanted 5 Euros to take their photo. Their greasy hands ruined the lens until I could clean it. Luckily, I had some alcohol wipes and lens tissue in my pack...and a small blower. Selection from De Wallen D.D. Teoli Jr. As a bonus for getting pushed into the mosh pit, my lens got greased up and they broke my flash off at the hotshoe! Selection from Whoop-Whoop D.D. Teoli Jr. If you are shooting in dangerous or dirty locations, use some disposable gear if you can. The first year shooting the Juggalos, the lens and body got messed up. The drenching in sugary drinks froze the lens focus ring and froze the off / on switch and the shutter button. After 3 years of shooting the Juggalos I gave up on them. It was just too much ruined gear and could not afford to keep replacing it. But...the lens coating never suffered at all from what I could tell even though some of the lenses had been cleaned near a hundred times or more. Bottom line... Have backups and be ready to clean your lens. A clean lens is especially important at night.

You got to compare film and digital on equal footing, shooting the same subject. Cine' digital may be different than still digital. I've only comparison tested still film and still digital.

I think it was László Kovács or his partner that would say...I don't miss the shot, I'm from Hungary...if I miss the shot...I get shot!

I can attest to that. I've shot in very filthy locals where you had to clean the lens every hour or two. Only time I marred the coating was when on a sailboat and must have picked up some salt spray. Other than that it is amazing how durable the lens coating is. After decades of cleaning lenses, I settled on alcohol wipes and Kimwipes. Kodak made some good lens tissue back in the day. Now it is a crapshoot with tissues. I like Kimwipes best. I generally use skylight filters or uv filters. But some lenses like circular fisheyes can't use them. If you use the hi-tech coated B&W German filters...they are hard to clean. The coating makes it tough to clean. Their basic filters clean better. Other than that...alcohol pads and Kimwipes with a Rocket blower to dust it off before and after cleaning.

'I wanna hold your hand' 1978 has some great commentary by Spielberg and Zemeckis. See the specials as well.

https://www.diyphotography.net/how-i-built-a-diy-180-orbiting-rig-using-readily-available-parts/? May be of interest to some of the budget minded members.

Best cleaning is with a slow drying film cleaners. Edwal or other fast drying cleaners leave a lot of dirt behind. But slow drying cleaners are a pain to use. No perfect solution. I'd love to get one of the ultrasonic film cleaners. Although have no experience with them. There is a test for you guys. Clean a film with the film machine and then by hand with the slow drying cleaner. See how much dirt is left behind...if any.

Now, for any of you commercial scanning companies that want to do an interesting comparison test of scanning warped film with various scanners... I have an old 16mm Castle film called Belles of the South Seas. (One of the early 'native' nudie cuties.) It is terrible warped. I overscanned it to get the sprockets in. I did it just as an experiment to see how the Retroscan handled badly warped film. I still have to put it online. It is a poor quality scan. It needs a warped film gate which the Retroscan does not have. If you like, you can have the film to scan and show your warped scanning capability. (Just send me your finished scan and send the film back to me or to anyone here that wants to test their scanner with it.) Although this is not it, it is something like this. You can use my scan in your advertising that I will eventually put up at the I.A. to show the comparison.

Did they use a fan for cooling?

Northlight? If they use propriety bulbs and they go out of biz and you will be shopping on eBay for used bulb from Ukraine. I've only used LED in the scanner, so no experience with incandescent. On the scanner, I'm happy with it. I use incandescent in the projectors and hate them. Some guy on eBay mods Zeiss film viewers to run on quartz bulbs. It is a big improvemnt.

I'm catching up slow, so you may have already answered this... But what is it? And send in more photos related to it or put it up a the I.A.

Forgot to mention... If you want to make a go of it and sell scanner upgrades...sell them on eBay. Make a YT video demonstrating them. You will sell some as long as price is not crazy. The people that go for Retroscan are generally not rich. Or if you are on a tight budget, list something small to sell on eBay and you can advertise the other items and users will contact you. There seems to be a good amount of Retroscan users out there for the earlier models. They are hungry for any Retroscan related items, and they sell pretty good on eBay.

https://news.artnet.com/news-pro/kenny-schachter-crypto-pad-2061146? An interesting article on artists and NFT's.

In the USA incandescent bulbs are outlawed.

Fast is not that big a deal to me. Good and cheap are along with sound. Fast would be important to commercial scanning companies. Generally, everyone likes fast, but you know the deal...beggars can't be choosers.

I had inquired about adding a 4K cam with the manufacturer, but they showed no interest. But concur, 4K would be nice.

For 8mm it looks like an improvement on the Wolverine. I started with a Wolverine way back. I.Q. is very low and it broke after a short time. Something like 19 - 21 reels killed it. I'd be worried about Filmfabriek because they are a European company that is does not seem to be represented well in the USA as far as mainstream distributors. It would just depend on parts and repairs. But it looks like a beautiful little machine for 8mm. I've got a few hundred mostly 8mm and some Super 8mm to scan. But the bulk of my film Archive is 16mm. Yes, the Retroscan's weak point is warped film. It will scan it with the old gates but not the Lightpin gate. Even though it will scan warped film, it will not hold it flat. And there is the sound issue of being a silent scanner. Other than that, the Restroscan seems to be a good, reliable workhorse. This looks like a great thread. I hope to catch up on it some. I got no cine' scanner photos to contribute here. So, I will contribute this since it is 'scanner' related. This photo was done with a flatbed scanner and not a camera. It shows the depth of field available with a flatbed scanner on a 3D item. Selection from Girl in a Box D.D.Teoli Jr.

Wow, too bad it was not all archived in photos. Mendelson's sounds amazing. I looked on eBay. Does not look like Mendelson's had a catalog. Never thought about the processing as a component to film going bad. I thought cine' films was pretty regulated as far as processing. Press photos were notorious for poor processing. They just needed it for the next newspaper then they didn't care. Poorly processed press photo DDTJRAC

1963 DDTJRAC - Graphic Arts Archive This Borrowdale camera took 48x48 inch film and their biggest model cost $13,750.00. I don't know what the box behind the guy was for. Maybe for film boxes? It would have been in the darkroom with the rear half of the camera. The process / repro camera took up 2 rooms. Half was in light and half was in the darkroom. The skinny box going up in the air was probably for roll down glass halftone screens. There is a crank on the right for lowering and raising the screen. You could either use glass halftone screens or film screens that were adhered with the vacuum back. This camera is a crazy design, it looks to have 2 backs. We used smaller process cameras, nothing like this. Too bad or I could report on it. I will have to see if I can find some old printers from back in the day to question. But as time goes one, less and less old timers in any field left to question. From reading the literature, I believe the $13,750.00 also covered the onsite installation team. You used to get a lot of bang for your buck back in the day. Their smaller camera taking 20x24 inch film was only $7,400 with install.