Incredibly basic folder question

jreid

Member
Local time
2:28 AM
Joined
Jan 15, 2007
Messages
22
I've recently bought two old folders and have been learning and enjoying them. The only problem I've encountered is that I have trouble seeing the film counter indications through the little red window. I have successfully fogged film by looking at the window in light that was far too bright. Does anyone have any hints on seeing the film numbers without fogging the film?

Thanks!
 
Which film are you using? The printed frame numbers could simply be too faint. I read that some Chinese-made films suffer from this. Haven't used those personally.

My experience includes Fuji, Ilford, Efke. I've never had this problem. Kodak should be fine, too.

Altogether, be glad your red window is still nice and dark. They can actually get lighter with age, giving you fogging with all films.
 
Is the red window still a dark red, or is it scratched up and turning orange? If you're fogging film with light from the red window, it sounds to me like the window's color has faded and the light seal material under the pressure plate (surrounds the red window's hole) has deteriorated. To fix it, you'd have to replace the red window (and probably the leatherette, since you'd have to take that off to get to it) and the light seal material.
 
Last edited:
Interesting. Most of my folders have windows that are so dark, I usually have to hold them in the sunlight, or use a penlight to see the number. Most do have a metal slide that fits over the window. Regardless, I have yet to fog any film. I too am curious what cameras and what film.
 
Agree with prior posts that this is unusual. Own maybe 10-15 folders, none rehabbed in any way, some with protective sliding covers for red window, some not -- have never had fogging problem using either Kodak or Fuji film.

Some have some light trapping material on inside around red window, don't know if that could be a problem in yours -- allowing light to bounce around.
 
Interesting. Most of my folders have windows that are so dark, I usually have to hold them in the sunlight, or use a penlight to see the number. Most do have a metal slide that fits over the window. Regardless, I have yet to fog any film. I too am curious what cameras and what film.

Yeah, the paper backing is supposed to be light-proof. To fog the film, the light would have to come around the paper. Only thing I can think of is that the light trap under the pressure plate isn't working and the color of the red window isn't red anymore. Film is more sensitive to light that isn't red.
 
Last edited:
I carry a little magnifying glas with me when I need to make out those red dark frame numbers. It helps me ... and the mag lens sits in the bag ...
 
I currently have a roll of Arista EDU 400 (Fomapan 400) in a Zeiss Ikon Nettar right now. The frame numbers are very hard to see, partly becase of scratches on the red window from the sliding metal cover over it, but also because the backing paper is black and the numbers are white. I find this harder to see than having black numbers on a white background. I have to have strong light to read the numbers, but have never had a problem with fogging from the window.
 
I don't know if this will get thro since I joined just a few minutes ago and I am low down on the foot of the learning curve. If it does then I am progressing .

If your roll film gear is ancient -- like me !! then it is likely that it was intended primarily for Ortho film, and Pancro was not in general use when the cameras were designed. hence the fogging with todays films. Also in them there days, the speed of the film was likely to be about 28 Scheiner or about 6 ASA in todays market, so if you are using Pancro Royal at 4000 Din then you will get Fogging thro the wind on window.

Reilly

What do you do ?. Well the first thing is to put some black tape over the wind on window, after using a old film still with backing paper to wind on to the next number and take note of the number of turns of the wind on knob . From thereon wind on by feel and not by viewing .




uote=jreid;1228592]I've recently bought two old folders and have been learning and enjoying them. The only problem I've encountered is that I have trouble seeing the film counter indications through the little red window. I have successfully fogged film by looking at the window in light that was far too bright. Does anyone have any hints on seeing the film numbers without fogging the film?

Thanks![/quote]
 
If your roll film gear is ancient -- like me !! then it is likely that it was intended primarily for Ortho film, and Pancro was not in general use when the cameras were designed. hence the fogging with todays films. Also in them there days, the speed of the film was likely to be about 28 Scheiner or about 6 ASA in todays market,

For one, 120 film and folders only gained popularity in the early thirties - by that time, panchromatic film (arguably with limited red sensitivity) was common, and ortho was already special purpose film.

For the other, 28 Scheiner is not 6, but 50 (current) or 40 (old) ASA (there was a change to the definition in the fifties), the "normal" film speed at that time. Less common films ranged from 25-400 ASA back then - not really that much of a difference to our current state of affairs, the improvements in between went mostly into quality rather than sensitivity boosts - current 800 ASA film has finer grain than a 100 ASA film back then.

Sevo
 
Thanks for the input.
I've been using Kodak film, the window is the kind that slides open. On the first roll I tried it was so difficult for me (note -- me, might not be for others) to see the numbers that I had to shine direct sunlight onto the red window. I'm sure that was plenty to burn the film (the negatives have a big comet-like streak right at the point that corresponds to the window; otherwise they're fine).
The magnifying glass sounds like a good option, thanks for that.
 
Since joining but a few minutes ago the ensuing dialogue looks interesting.

In 1939 The fastest film generally available to the snap shooter, for which the majority of roll film cameras were made was Kodak Super XX, which was rated at the time at about 27 European Scheiner.( not the same as Americam Scheiner ). which was the equivalent of about 30 -40 Weston .It was a pancro film, and due to its "Fantastic" speed was not recommended for simple cameras . The usual film available for the snap shooter was Kodak Verichrome ( not the Verichrom Pan of latter years ) and Selo ( now Ilford ) Selochrome. Both of these as well as many Agfa films were Orthocromatic. The wind on window in those days was safe enough for the speeds and emulsions of the day. However, no safe light or filter is totally safe and is safe only for a limiting exposure. The only really safe environment is total darkness, and even some black paper backings leave much to be desired.

However the co -relation of film sensitivities is very much a matter of how the emulsion is processed, so the relationship between say H&D and the current ISO remains nebulous to say the least. More information can be found in " Exposure" published by the old Focal press. I only wish I could find my copy.











For one, 120 film and folders only gained popularity in the early thirties - by that time, panchromatic film (arguably with limited red sensitivity) was common, and ortho was already special purpose film.

For the other, 28 Scheiner is not 6, but 50 (current) or 40 (old) ASA (there was a change to the definition in the fifties), the "normal" film speed at that time. Less common films ranged from 25-400 ASA back then - not really that much of a difference to our current state of affairs, the improvements in between went mostly into quality rather than sensitivity boosts - current 800 ASA film has finer grain than a 100 ASA film back then.

Sevo
 
Not sure why you're having this problem. I shoot Kodak Tri-X and Ilford FP4, and even w/ my nearly 60 year old eyes can clearly see the numbers in all of my folders. It's a good practice to turn your back to the sun when opening the little slider over the window. Maybe your red window is dirty or scratched up a lot? Try practicing advancing the film at home w/ a practice roll just to make sure you're getting the hang of it.
 
In 1939 The fastest film generally available to the snap shooter, for which the majority of roll film cameras were made was Kodak Super XX,

Were the US that laid back? In Europe the pre war years already were the time of films like Agfa Isopan F (rated 28 Europ. Scheiner) and Ilford/Selo F.P. (26 Scheiner) - and there even were plenty of faster pan films (Isopan ISS, Selo H.P. etc.).

The usual film available for the snap shooter was Kodak Verichrome ( not the Verichrom Pan of latter years ) and Selo ( now Ilford ) Selochrome.

Sure? In Germany, there still were a few orthochromatic films advertised towards amateurs (and a big choice of pro plates and sheets), but the bulk of small films were already panchromatic. For example, the 1939 Voigtländer catalogue listed Bessapan (21/10° DIN, 31 E.Scheiner), Luxopan (17/10° DIN, 27 E.Scheiner), Bessapan-F (17/10° DIN) and Illustra (18/10° DIN, 28 E.Scheiner, orthochromatic). I.e. nothing slower than 27 European Scheiner, and only a last orthochromatic film left.

Going by the time pan film and box type cameras hit the market hereabouts I had always assumed that the spreading of cameras into average households was at least partially driven by the availability of fast pan film, which allowed for hand-held candids of family members that did not look like skin diseased zombies.

However the co -relation of film sensitivities is very much a matter of how the emulsion is processed, so the relationship between say H&D and the current ISO remains nebulous to say the least. More information can be found in " Exposure" published by the old Focal press. I only wish I could find my copy.

The relations between old and new ratings are a bit complicated, but the difference rarely exceeds one full stop.
 
Thanks for the input.
I've been using Kodak film, the window is the kind that slides open. On the first roll I tried it was so difficult for me (note -- me, might not be for others) to see the numbers that I had to shine direct sunlight onto the red window. I'm sure that was plenty to burn the film (the negatives have a big comet-like streak right at the point that corresponds to the window; otherwise they're fine).
The magnifying glass sounds like a good option, thanks for that.

Can you post an example of one of your negatives or a print from it?
 
Apart from the counter window fogging, there is a difference in readability in various films frame numbers. I read about it here last week, some films really are easier to read thru the red window than others.

Now, where was that thread...?
 
^ Don't remember seeing that thread but for Shanghai brand film you can read about it here: http://www.frugalphotographer.com/cat120.htm

Joseph, any chance you still have the backing paper from those rolls? Maybe it was a poorly printed batch?

I'd investigate along this line first. Try a roll from a different manufacturer. Maybe don't even expose, just keep winding (and then wind it back onto the supply spool in the dark).

This is assuming that you weren't using 220 film by mistake, and that the camera window lines up with modern markings. I don't want to sound patronizing, but it's something to rule out.

Lastly, if you do end up counting the turns on the advance knob, keep in mind that the frame spacing will increase as the take-up spool gets fatter. You'll probably lose one frame.
 
...
This is assuming that you weren't using 220 film by mistake, ...

The numbers wouldn't be difficult to read with 220 film. It would be impossible as there is no paper backing on 220, only a paper leader and tail.

Other points for the OP to consider:

1. Are you wearing sunglasses? Doing so would be foolish as it dims your view of the numbers without dimming the light striking them through the red window.

2. Do you actually need some slight eyesight correction for close distances (e.g. reading glasses). A very slight undercorrection can make reading low contrast numbers vastly more difficult. Searching out brighter light causes your eye's iris to stop down creating more DOF and aiding the ability to get adequate resolution. If brighter light helps you to read then you very probably need reading glasses to some degree. Often the over-the-counter drug store variety can work well enough for reading all of the small numbers on cameras.
 
The numbers wouldn't be difficult to read with 220 film. It would be impossible as there is no paper backing on 220, only a paper leader and tail.

I am aware of that, and as I said, this is only to rule out a possible very basic issue. It would explain the streaked negatives the OP is describing.
 
thats very often the problem, there just isnt any light trap at all in many red window camera! many folders included, more particularly the early ones or even some of the cheaper consumer folders from the 50s, even some of the more expensive models you might expect to have a light trap dont have one...i concern my self more with making a good light seal/trap than worrying about the density of the red window colour.

if the camera leaks (poor seals/light traps behind the presure plate but good reflecting) and has the exposure to light it will still fog with deep red coloured window--unless using ortho film

Yes, film (especially color film) is sensitive to all colors of light, but is less sensitive to red, which is why we don't have green, yellow or blue windows. In some of the cameras with no light baffles surrounding the red wondow, they relied on the color filter covering the window and on flat black non-reflective paint that they used to "flock" the interior of the camera to keep light from bouncing around in there and fogging the film. of course some cameras were not well thought out, and had shiny paint inside them. Some have flat paint inside them that wears down shiny. On others, the paint has worn away entirely, exposing bright metal. Still others had light traps, but they have crumbled away with time.
 
Back
Top Bottom