Accidental Reportage w/Brownie!

bmattock

bmattock

Veteran
Local time
2:37 PM
Joined
Jul 29, 2003
Messages
10,654
Location
Detroit Area
View My Gallery
I had a hacked-upon Brownie Bulls-Eye in my car today. I had worked it over with a Dremel moto-tool to try to make it take 120 roll-film instead of 620 (yes, I know all about the web pages where you can learn to roll your own 620, I was looking for a more permanent solution). It kind of worked - I could put the 120 in and a 620 takeup spool (like the Brownie Hawkeye can do without modification). I tossed it in the car and waited for a chance to try it out.

Well, it sat there all week with a roll of B&W in it. A fellow RFF'er and his wife came over to my house last weekend and they found it rolling around in the backseat when we all went to lunch. York! Bad for the film, I know.

On the way back to work from lunch today, I passed a fully-involved house fire. I mean that thing was blazing! Fire Department had it under control, but lots of smoke and impressive flames blowing out the top. And it was on the corner of a busy road, so I could pull over around the block and get a good vantage point without getting in anyone's way. Which I did.

All I had with me was my Brownie. 6x9, 8 shots, 120 B&W roll film. Hehehehe.

I managed 7 shots before I ran out of film. I guess I had already taken the first shot when I loaded the camera. I think they may be ok, but who knows?

When attempting to finish loading out the roll (you don't rewind roll-film), the tension got very stiff and the backing paper broke.

So, I'll have to take the film out of the camera in my darkroom (closet with a blanket over the door). After work. And here I am at work with PULITZER-PRIZE-WINNING news reportage in the can. OK, just kidding. Probably only some small regional prize. But I'm going nuts. I want to go home and pull the roll and process it. But I can't.

Argh. And I have a Knights of Columbus meeting tonight. Can't miss that.

What to do?

I doubt if a Brownie Bulls-Eye camera has been used for reportage since the Eisenhower Administration. He was a US President, for you young whipper-snappers.

Best Regards,

Bill Mattocks

PS - If I get anything out of this roll, I'll scan and post here, of course. Even though it technically ain't a 'rangefinder' camera - we can pretend, can't we?
 
I usually bend the rule by posting the non-rangefinder photo in a thread rather than the gallery 🙂.

Looking forward to seeing the shots, Bill!
 
I hope I actually end up with any images! The film is Arista.EDU el cheapo curly B&W film, and the camera is (I think) working OK, but I've never run a roll of film through it. I totally disasembled it and cleaned the lens, etc, before I gutted the insides to take 120 roll film, but who knows if the operation was a success? All I can do is try, I had no other camera on me at the time!

Best Regards,

Bill Mattocks
 
Well, here they are. Arista.EDU ISO 100 B&W. Camera was a Kodak Brownie Bulls-Eye circa 1958 or so. No focus, no aperture setting, no shutter speed ajustment possible. Just point-n-click the way our daddies did. Makes eight 6x9 negatives. Souped for 8.5 minutes in 20 degree C Kodak D76 1+1. Scanned with Epson Perfection PHOTO 2400 + Transparency Adapter with Vuescan 8.x and cleaned up a bit in The Gimp 2.2 on Linux. That's all.

Best Regards,

Bill Mattocks
 
Last edited:
No, but I will. Don't know if they'll care or not. Still, I thought it was cool. Nobody else I talked to thought so, though. Thought I was wasting my time. Prolly I am.

Best Regards,

Bill Mattocks
 
Those shots are fantastic! I like the ones with running water on the road showing off some reflections. They look really good 🙂 Hmm, maybe I should clean up one of my brownies and try it out.
 
Those photos are great! I especially like the second one, the exposure and lines of the three distinct streams. And that's such an awesome story behind taking the pics too!
 
Last edited:
bmattock said:
No, but I will. Don't know if they'll care or not. Still, I thought it was cool. Nobody else I talked to thought so, though. Thought I was wasting my time. Prolly I am.

Best Regards,

Bill Mattocks
Click to expand...
No, prolly not a waste of time. If the local paper didn't have anyone there I can't imagine why they wouldn't want one of 'em any way.
A fire like this in my town(20,000 people, or so) would be big news and the paper would absolutely run pictures like this.
The flip side to having only the Brownie--if you'd had a "more serious" camera you(well I) might not have got the shots. since you didn't have any choices beyond where to stand that eliminated alot of options.
I got severly reprimanded a while ago in a much less congenial forum by saying what I'm about to say: It's the photographer NOT the gear that counts. Good work Mr. Mattock!
Rob
 
Thanks all, for the kind words! When I told folks at work about it, they just glazed over. "Ah, there goes crazy Bill and his antique camera roadshow again..." Y'know, I was pumped up about it, but they know how to suck the fun right out of anything. Well, whatever. I just like 'em, I guess. And I guess that bores people to tears. Anyway, you guys are great, thanks again for cheering me up!

Best Regards,

Bill Mattocks
 
Gene,

Stuff like this just happens to me. I don't know why. You'd think I could use that amazing luck to win the lottery, but nooooo. Instead, I'm the guy who has a 50 year old camera when passing by a house fire. Weird.

And actually, that's (Holga) what I was thinking of when I bought the Kodak Brownie Bulls-Eye. First, I bought a Hawkeye, but the dang lens is too good! Then I bought the Bulls-Eye, and that 'Twindar' lens is not quite as good (although it came later, go figure). But still too good. Now I have two new contestants - an Ansco ReadyFlash and a Halina 6/4. The Halina is a nifty piece of crap British camera (Empire made, it says), stamped metal and very cheesy. It did 6x6 or 4x4 negs - but get this - with a removable frame that made a 6x6 square into a 4x4 square - same number of shots - just smaller images and more blank space between them. Um, ok. I'm hoping this el cheapo will be as bad as a Holga. I just have to be different.

Best Regards,

Bill Mattocks

Best Regards,

Bill Mattocks
 
Great pix from a camera that was never designed for anything other than photographing family members at the annual clan reunion.

A few years ago my mother died (at 97) and among various items I inherited is a Kodak Brownie Bull's-Eye Camera, replete with the lightning fast Kodak Twindar Lens (no data available on focal length or maximum aperture. However, this lens can be rotated to various settings: Infinity, 15', 10' (in red), 8', 6, and 4.' There is a moveable lever near the lens that goes from "long" to "instant." Also, on the side of the camera there is a tripod bush, and right next to it what appears to be a plug-in for a flash cable, but I'm not sure.

The camera body is made out of black bakelite with a brushed aluminum front plate.

Now, about the 620 film. Is the take up spool the same width as a 120 take up spool? If this is the case, why can't you just shove in a roll of 120?

I need to know what you did with the Dremel tool.

Ted
 
tedwhite said:
Great pix from a camera that was never designed for anything other than photographing family members at the annual clan reunion.

A few years ago my mother died (at 97) and among various items I inherited is a Kodak Brownie Bull's-Eye Camera, replete with the lightning fast Kodak Twindar Lens (no data available on focal length or maximum aperture. However, this lens can be rotated to various settings: Infinity, 15', 10' (in red), 8', 6, and 4.' There is a moveable lever near the lens that goes from "long" to "instant." Also, on the side of the camera there is a tripod bush, and right next to it what appears to be a plug-in for a flash cable, but I'm not sure.

The camera body is made out of black bakelite with a brushed aluminum front plate.

Now, about the 620 film. Is the take up spool the same width as a 120 take up spool? If this is the case, why can't you just shove in a roll of 120?

I need to know what you did with the Dremel tool.

Ted
Click to expand...


Ted,

Yes, that's the same camera I have operated upon. As you're probably aware, but for the benefit of others who might not know - 620 film and 120 film share the same physical format of the film base - it is the same width and the same length. However, a 620 spool is a bit narrower than a 120 spool, and if you look very closely, a 120 spool is a tiny bit taller than a 620. You can Google for 120 & 620 roll-film and find several websites explaining how to rewind a 120 roll of film onto a 620 spool so you can use it in cameras that take 620, which is no longer available in native format (you can buy other people's reloads, but cheap they ain't).

So, I could have reloaded some 120 onto 620 spools, and that would have worked fine. But it's a bit of a pain. I wanted to modify the camera, not the film, so it would take 120 film all the time without modification.

I have noticed that the Kodak Brownie Hawkeye camera has enough 'slop' in the mechanism so that you can just shove in a roll of 120 and use a 620 spool as a take-up reel. A 120 spool won't fit in the top of the camera as the receiver, so you either have to try to get your precious 620 spool back from the processor - or shoot B&W like I do and process it yourself.

So I thought I'd try that on the Bulls-Eye too. But it didn't work too well. Yes, I could shove the 120 into the camera, and use a 620 spool for the take-up reel. But it was VERY hard to turn the knob, and I ruined the film when I broke the paper leader before even getting to the first frame!

So, I went out and bought a Dremel (I've been wanting one anyway, what mad scientist would be without one) and I thought I'd just get into that Bakelite case and auger out the bits that got in the way of the 120 spool and made it hard to turn.

Not to be. There is a metal plate inside the back of the camera. You can remove it easily enough with several screws that hold the whole lens assembly to the camera from the rear. It is a nice flat plate, and I suspect that you could relieve some metal near where the ends of the spool are and that would do it. I tried, and had some limited success. Once I got a roll of film to spool at all (took some fiddling), I got to the point where I could wind on from frame to frame with no problems. But once I hit the end of the roll and the paper backing without film, it tore again. Too much tension.

Now, I have read a report that a person just knocked off the 'ears' that hold the 120 roll, like taking the toilet paper roller out and letting the roll just bounce around inside the camera - the pit it lives in is enough to hold it in place and then it turns easily. I'm not sure I like that approach - first because I'm not really sure it would work, and second because if there is NO tension, the film won't be flat over the lens.

So that's where I am with this camera at the moment. What I need is a way to make the 'ears' that hold the 120 roll in place a tad longer, so they hold the roll up higher and it doesn't hit on the back of the camera. But I suspect that's a bit beyond me at the moment.

However, I have practice stock - eBoy has supplied me with a couple of $1.00 wonders to experiment upon.

Best Regards,

Bill Mattocks
 
Great narrative, Bill. I was able to read your explication and locate the various sections you were describing. The camera does contain a take-up spool, which is a step in the right direction. And, yes, I process my own black and white, both 35 and 120. But winding 120 onto a 620 spool? I don't want to get into that anymore than you do.

ONce modified to the point that it works well with 120, imagine the fun you could have with it.

An event is occurring, and all your knowledgeable camera friends are expecting you to whip out the usual stuff, M6, Canon 20D, Nikon (fill in the model #), etc. But NO! Guy whips out a Brownie Bull's Eye and nails the shot, the old decisive moment. A front pager. Money and fame comes your way.

I shouldn't have had that second drink.

Ted
 
Ted,

I'm with you! Yuengling beer and a busted tooth - I believe I'll be taking myself off to bed now. But I will be doing evil things to innocent Brownies in the near future. The camera, folks, the camera!

Best Regards,

Bill Mattocks
 
bill,
i am the photo editor and staff photographer for my local newspaper....and if you brought these in to me i would run them in a heart beat....if you told me that you used a hacked up brownie that heart beat would skip...they look great
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Pioneer
Argust Day 25
Replies
0
Views
254
Pioneer
Pioneer
Muggins
Kodak Tri-X Pan 120 - any idea of age?
Replies
13
Views
818
Muggins
Muggins
Muggins
Likely age of Kodak Verichrome 620 film?
Replies
2
Views
168
Freakscene
Freakscene
S
My Leica doesn't like my Paterson reels
Replies
17
Views
468
coogee
C
ChrisPlatt
ISO 400 BW negative film recommendation?
2 3
Replies
47
Views
3K
Erik van Straten
Erik van Straten
Back
Top Bottom