Brownies!

Here's a few more - the Caterpillar pic is from a Coronet box camera, while the others are from a Kodak No2 Model F. I've got an A4 blow-up of the Caterpillar at the top of my stairs, but really it needed a bit of contrast in the sky. I didn't appreciate this at the time - I'd only just started playing.

Adrian
 

Attachments

  • Canal.jpg
    Canal.jpg
    47.5 KB · Views: 0
  • Crawler.jpg
    Crawler.jpg
    38.1 KB · Views: 0
  • Major.jpg
    Major.jpg
    37.8 KB · Views: 0
And a few more... These are about the last I care to show off!

Three different cameras here - the tractor (hopefully a clearer version of the one above) the Kodak No2 Model F, the steps a Baby Brownie Special and the log an Ensign Ful-Vue.

Anyone else go any to share?

Adrian
(who does indeed have a thing about tractors)
 

Attachments

  • Steps.jpg
    Steps.jpg
    56.3 KB · Views: 0
  • Untitled-1.jpg
    Untitled-1.jpg
    70.2 KB · Views: 0
  • Log.jpg
    Log.jpg
    90.1 KB · Views: 0
Some from my flipped lens Brownie Hawkeye, I needed to get closer:

3083037091_eefb6008f2.jpg


3083036957_7b4455a5b5.jpg


3083874594_978582f0b2.jpg
 
charjohncarter said:
Fallis, I don't remember for sure, but I think I was joking.
Click to expand...

So was I. Imagine "you do have to know what you're doing" said in a derisive manner. This is implying that with an automatic camera you don't have to know what you're doing. With the older cameras, the manufacturer presumed that the person using it would have at least some small modicum of intelligence -- at least enough to know what ASA film to use in it in various lighting conditions. The new guys seem to assume the operator will be a retarded chimpanzee.
 
charjohncarter said:
How true, Fallis, and prior to digital, I wondered why they spent so many technology dollars on just making loading the film easy.
Click to expand...

Like with the Canonet QL cameras -- or are you talking about the SLRs? Well, I do remember one time with a Pentax K1000 that I finally figured out something must be wrong when I looked at my film counter and it was up to about 42.
 
OK, my Brownie Starlet says it uses 127 film. Can I use 120?

Also, will there be a paper backing to the film? Because it has the dark red plastic window in the back, so I will need the backing. And I suppose that's the only way I'll know when it's been advanced far enough.

I'm not sure how to invert the lens. Looks like I could remove the shutter mechanism with 1 screw. Once I do that, I suppose it's easy to remove the lens and flip it.

Anyhoo, cool thread.
 
crawdiddy said:
OK, my Brownie Starlet says it uses 127 film. Can I use 120?

Also, will there be a paper backing to the film? Because it has the dark red plastic window in the back, so I will need the backing. And I suppose that's the only way I'll know when it's been advanced far enough.

I'm not sure how to invert the lens. Looks like I could remove the shutter mechanism with 1 screw. Once I do that, I suppose it's easy to remove the lens and flip it.

Anyhoo, cool thread.
Click to expand...


127 is about 1.5cms narrower than 120. Obviously, the latter won't fit in a brownie starlet. Even if 120 has protective backing paper.

Most brownie lenses are fastened with a ring-shaped spring. But rather than go through the effort of reversing the lens, why not just surround the lens with a piece of clear, colourless crumpled cellophane with a hole punched in the middle?
 
In the spirit of using old cameras I decided to respool some 120 on to 620 reels...
Now I'm going to use the Argus Argoflex 75 TLR that's been sitting on the shelf since I got it many years ago...
I did this today and as we speak the camera is loaded and ready to go...all I need is a bit of sunshine...
I have the flash for it along with a box of flashbulbs...I'm going to wait until I get a few rolls under my belt before firing up that flash...
 
ZorkiKat said:
127 is about 1.5cms narrower than 120. Obviously, the latter won't fit in a brownie starlet. Even if 120 has protective backing paper.

Most brownie lenses are fastened with a ring-shaped spring. But rather than go through the effort of reversing the lens, why not just surround the lens with a piece of clear, colourless crumpled cellophane with a hole punched in the middle?
Click to expand...

Thanks, ZorkiKat.

What about 620 film?

Or more to the point, what kind of film do you guys use?
 
crawdiddy said:
Thanks, ZorkiKat.

What about 620 film?

Or more to the point, what kind of film do you guys use?
Click to expand...

Dan,

really unless you are really keen for some reason to use your particular 127 brownie camera, its not a great way to go, not economical for you at all. fiddly and time consuming to cut 120 film down to fit and expensive to buy 127 film, to use for say a brownie camera e.g for not much more, or around the same price it would cost you to buy a roll of 127 film, you could purchase a 120 film brownie camera.

120 and 620 film are the same size as each other but different to 127, which was in essance a miniture format film, bigger but more comparable to 35mm in some ways.
 
jody36 said:
Very Possible. Here is a pic from mine. My grandmother gave me this camera and it is the one that she used to take my baby pics. Also the one that helped get me started collecting.

3086282962_b0d4b8f01c_b.jpg
Click to expand...

indeed a very nice aluring shot with atomosphere, of your lovely wife? it does seem to have some camera shake though which is easy to occure with the slow shutter speeds. htat one in your gallery (a close portrait), close up, that shows the grain in the film, sharp focus is a beauty of your wife, but i am guessing not a brownie pic
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom