Jump to content

Mark Dunn

Basic Member
  • Posts

    3,706
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Mark Dunn

  1. Sorry not to be the bearer of better news, but if those timing belts are anything like Steenbeck ones, I think you had better start looking for replacements. The dark colour means they are about to tear themselves to shreds. You will be able to mark them with a fingernail.

    If this has already happened this would account for the lack of transport.

  2. 29 minutes ago, Simon Wyss said:

    Pentacon  Dresden

    One of mine from a visit in 2012. Old and new. The Ernemannturm at the Pentacon factory by Högg and Müller, 1923, now housing the technology museum.

    An exemplar of the Neue Sachlichkeit (New Objectivity) architectural style.

    D0FBEF.jpg

  3. 3 hours ago, Simon Wyss said:

    I must clarify. The Pentacon AK 16 alias Pentaflex 16 is a Bell & Howell design through and through. It has a precursor at least one patent period older.

    FRC gears are used in such cameras as the Paillard-Bolex H (1935), Miller B De Luxe (9.5 mm, 1938), Revere 88 (1940), and many more. The material needs to be oily, else it’s worn down in short time and that is exactly the reason for the damage you encountered. Had it been oily the teeth would less likely have broken away.

    My Steenbeck has a number of cogs which appear to be made of this sort of material but they appear quite dry- I have greased them on occasion and it doesn't seem likely that they would get oiled often if at all, and the user manual doesn't mention it. Should I be thinking about oiling them? I should mention that the machine was made in 1975 and they show no signs of wear.

  4. I'm thinking of something we used to hang a quilt. It doesn't look like what we  usually call bamboo, but it may be the heart wood from it- looks like this

    https://www.amazon.co.uk/Green-Flower-Sticks-Cane-Support/dp/B00N4ZM7DQ/ref=sr_1_51?keywords=Canes&qid=1679396045&sr=8-51

    I think you'd want them as long as you could get, steam in a curve and join them with tape or ferrules. Just an idea, it's not something I've tried.

    Wire might work if you can buy it coiled. But I think wood would be easier to work with.

     

  5. If you form the fabric into a spiral, there's no limit to the size except the practicality of handling. Support could be canes steamed and joined into rings, like a sort of huge china ball, or even a spiral, like the material itself. A spiral may be self-supporting to some extent.

    • Like 1
  6. Yes, straight across.

    The Steenbeck isn't intended to work this way so there isn't always enough tension to achieve a tight wind. I just did it as an experiment. Hand rewinds will probably work better.

  7. I see what you mean, you've rewound EO.

    Then just rewind, still EO, and you change from B to A wind.

    Your method will work but I don't know how you're going to do your rewinding- the twist through 180 degrees (you still have to rewind) works on a flatbed like the Steenbeck.

     

  8. B/W( contrast) filters are in solid colours- red, green, blue, yellow and orange.

    Red, green and yellow contrast filters look nothing like colour conversion filters.

    A CC blue is  much paler than a contrast blue filter, and a CC orange filter is more of a brown colour. You should be able to tell by comparing the seller's images with images from a search on, say, the Tiffen or Lee websites.

     

  9. I'd say there would have been no reason for anyone to film a colour chart because MP Kodachrome was always intended, and used, for projection. The idea of scanning it, in an era when scanning was an expensive professional preserve, would hardly have arisen.

    The only possibility as Karim says might be stills.

    Commercial photography stills intended for reproduction would have included a colour chart, but one would expect that to be on sheet film, and that was discontinued in the 1950s.

    You can sometimes buy Kodachrome slides reasonably cheaply on ebay. If you choose the scene carefully it might help you.

  10. 12 minutes ago, Boris Kalaidjiev said:

    Kubrick used to take polaroids

    Indeed he did. The famous example is "2001" where he worked out a scheme with Geoffrey Unsworth to establish a relationship between the exposure of the (then peel-apart b/w) Polaroid and the 65mm. exposure. The famous example is the the high-key bedroom scene towards the end. They have the shutter speed and stop written on them.

    But there are examples from several of his films. Just search on "Kubrick Polaroid"..

    • Like 1
  11. 1 hour ago, Dennis Toeppen said:

    Here's what it looks like when mag is opened accidentally. Intensity of light exposure wasn't consistent across the whole platter, so it appears to pulsate. Pulse occurs with each revolution of the supply side platter.

     

    Save for the intensity, that looks awfully (word chosen carefully) similar, with the ragged streaks. Even the frequency (about 2.5sec at the start) is the same, getting shorter towards the end, about 1.5sec.

  12. 34 minutes ago, John Shell said:

    So I was reading an old article from Kodak on Mission Impossible: Ghost protocol and they mentioned:

    "The IMAX material was shot with the 15-perf IMAX camera, as well as the smaller, lighter 8-perf Iwerks camera for shots involving more camera movement or Steadicam. Hasselblad lenses were used. Elswit gravitated toward wider focal lengths—40mm, 50mm, 60mm and 80mm for IMAX—in order to fill the large-format frame with visual information. “If there is one weak element in IMAX, it’s these 30-year-old lenses,” Elswit notes. “They’re OK, just not great.”

    https://web.archive.org/web/20120129035501/http://motion.kodak.com/motion/Publications/In_Camera/Focus_on_Film/missionImpossible.htm

     

    I'm guessing he's referring to sharpness here but are old haselblad medium format lenses really not that good in sharpness ?? Or could be be referring to something else ??

    Well, in the world of photography Hasselblad were are good as it got, but the key word is were. That's a 2011 piece so he's probably discussing lenses designed in the 60s and made in the 70s. There was another generation of Zeiss Hasselblad lenses in the 80s with newer coatings- T*- but that's probably as far as they went.

    In medium format there never were third-party lenses- you got what the manufacturer provided, Zeiss were the best, but of course the enlargement required in stills photography was much less. So you probably never got to find out how sharp your lenses were- they were sharp enough. I remember once doing a selective enlargement the equivalent of about a 50" print that was still sharp. But today, you'd get better from any DLSR from 20MP up, and from a digital Hasselblad, well, no contest.

  13. On 2/21/2023 at 7:05 AM, Uli Meyer said:

    I know that they are rare and nigh impossible to find. There has been one on the market for the past three years at a very high price but my budget is about half of that. I already own a 2C 2perf and I'm not looking for alternatives.

    A long shot but you never know if you don't ask. Any leads anyone?

    Thank you!

    No chance of any movement (haha) by the seller? There's a reason it's been up for sale for 3 years............

    • Haha 1
×
×
  • Create New...