Rangefinder Stereo Cameras

Antietam battlefield. Shot with the Nil Melior.


Antietam Stereo1 by Vince Lupo, on Flickr

Colorized Version:


Antietam Stereo1 Colorized by Vince Lupo, on Flickr

I pretty much got all the light leaks plugged in this camera. The only thing I really need to adjust is that piece of fuzzy Velcro that I put down the middle between the frames (so that the light from each frame didn't bleed into each other). Problem is that the little fibers show up in the frames along the two edges, so I need to pull it out and replace it with some black-core matboard or something similar.
 
Looking Good! One error you’ve been making though.... when cropping images, the left hand image Must show “less” on the left side. Check some vintage stereo images and you’ll see what I mean. I like the artillery at Gburg! At the 125th anniversary re-enactment I worked with a gun crew shooting a 12 lb Napoleon. We had I think 40 guns on the Union side. It was Amazing!
 
Ambro51 said:
Looking Good! One error you’ve been making though.... when cropping images, the left hand image Must show “less” on the left side. Check some vintage stereo images and you’ll see what I mean. I like the artillery at Gburg! At the 125th anniversary re-enactment I worked with a gun crew shooting a 12 lb Napoleon. We had I think 40 guns on the Union side. It was Amazing!
Click to expand...

I'm looking at Brian May's 'A Village Lost and Found', in which the whole book is mostly reproduced 19th century stereo cards, and honestly I don't always see a universal adherence one way or another. For every pair that shows more on the left side of the left image, I see another pair that has less on the left side of the left image. However, now that I look at the slides from my Revere, I do see what you mean.

I can certainly try to crop it the way you suggest, to see if there is a difference when I look through my viewer.
 
As a follow-up to the left-right cropping, look at this shot from the Library of Congress:

https://www.loc.gov/item/2018647896/

And this one:

https://www.loc.gov/item/2008679091/

And another:

https://www.loc.gov/item/2008679098/

One more:

https://www.loc.gov/item/2013649251/

Now look at this one:

https://www.loc.gov/item/2006684474/

Going through these, I'm seeing more in which there is less on the left side, but there are definitely a good number of cases in which there is more on the left side. Not sure how that affects the stereo effect.
 
Some of the photos like the cannons at Antietam work good in b&w or color. Others like the Burnside Bridge gain something from the coloring, as it adds a bit of depth to an otherwise flat and drab winter image.


PF
 
A shot with the Heidoscop -- this time I made sure to get the cropping right (at least I think it is!).


Burnside Bridge Stereo #2 by Vince Lupo, on Flickr

Colorized Version:


Burnside Bridge Stereo #2 Colorized by Vince Lupo, on Flickr

If you're wondering why I have the 'gaps' different, I'm trying to replicate the space between the two negative frames. The Nil Melior space is much narrower than the Heidoscop, so I'm assuming that I should keep the space between fairly consistent between the neg and the print. The difference between the two cameras might also be due to the fact that the lens focal lengths are different.
 
Your cropping is correct now. Since it’s obvious you’re a CW buff, now when you look at original published images, you’ll note MANY are derived from stereo camera images. You’ll see this by the inclusion of a Lot of foreground details. You have the Realist Manual, that’s still the “last word” on stereo composition and framing. Also, the concept of the “stereo window” is fully explained. •••• as to color, yes, I like it. BW Stereo is “ok” and handles ‘bokeh’ better but in essence this photography is meant to accurately capture a view, instead of artistically expressing the photographers impressions. Early Dag stereos (usually soft core porn), were routinely hand colored.
 
Vince Lupo said:
...

On an unrelated note, what do you guys think of the 'colorization'? Does it add or subtract?
Click to expand...


I like your coloring.


I associate stereo images with either of two periods of photographic style. One is the original period of popular stereo photography, the mid to late 19 century with a little spill over into the pre-WW1 20th century. With these, any coloring needs to replicate the hand coloring of the period, as seen in hand colored photographs and tinted engravings (think Currier & Ives, ...).


The other period is the resurrection of stereo as slides in the decade or so that followed WW2. With these, the coloring style needs to replicate the look of early Kodachromes.


In both groups, the subject matter and compositional style also needs to match the period. You Gettysburg images look very much like the better of the old Underwood & Underwood views and a 19th Century style of "hand" coloring fits them well.
 
.....for your next GAS attack, let me suggest a very early Stereo Realist. Search out one with a SN under A10000. These early Realists from 1947 and 1948 use ILEX lenses. Most “experts” feel these Ilex lenses are sharper than any other Stereo lenses. Though rare, these early Realists do pop up from time to time on ‘bay. A lot of sellers and buyers do not recognize the special appeal of the early Realist. To tell the difference from pictures, the Ilex lenses have aperature numbers on Both lenses, while the later David White Anastigmat have aperature numbers only on the left lens. Not saying though that the later lenses cannot do nearly as well. The 1042 Realist used 2.8 lenses. These do not vignette at small aperatures as the 3.5 lenses do. Hardly noticeable when viewed, but apparent when projected. The 2.8 also works better with the incredible Steinheil München Redufocus attachment, which gives you a 25mm wide angle!
 
Dwig said:
I like your coloring.


I associate stereo images with either of two periods of photographic style. One is the original period of popular stereo photography, the mid to late 19 century with a little spill over into the pre-WW1 20th century. With these, any coloring needs to replicate the hand coloring of the period, as seen in hand colored photographs and tinted engravings (think Currier & Ives, ...).


The other period is the resurrection of stereo as slides in the decade or so that followed WW2. With these, the coloring style needs to replicate the look of early Kodachromes.


In both groups, the subject matter and compositional style also needs to match the period. You Gettysburg images look very much like the better of the old Underwood & Underwood views and a 19th Century style of "hand" coloring fits them well.
Click to expand...

Many thanks for your thoughts -- that's pretty much been my intent, and I'm glad that it seems that my intent is coming across.

My hope is that I'll be able to make limited edition stereo card sets and including a viewer and hope to sell them (one way or another!). We'll see, as I'll have to figure out the best way in which to offer them for sale.
 
Ambro51 said:
.....for your next GAS attack, let me suggest a very early Stereo Realist. Search out one with a SN under A10000. These early Realists from 1947 and 1948 use ILEX lenses. Most “experts” feel these Ilex lenses are sharper than any other Stereo lenses. Though rare, these early Realists do pop up from time to time on ‘bay. A lot of sellers and buyers do not recognize the special appeal of the early Realist. To tell the difference from pictures, the Ilex lenses have aperature numbers on Both lenses, while the later David White Anastigmat have aperature numbers only on the left lens. Not saying though that the later lenses cannot do nearly as well. The 1042 Realist used 2.8 lenses. These do not vignette at small aperatures as the 3.5 lenses do. Hardly noticeable when viewed, but apparent when projected.
Click to expand...

Ah I already have the next GAS attack taken care of for the next little while -- just gotta wait for the international shipping to start up again 🙂
 
One day about 20 years ago I went to that bridge with my wet plate gear. After awhile...of course Mr. Ranger came by and gave me a ration of s*** about pouring out my plate rinse water on the ground. So.....I drank some. He left.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

J
35mm Still-Picture Photography: It began with scale focusing cameras! Back To Basics. Part 1, From the first to half-frame 35s of then and now.
Replies
10
Views
1K
Jason Schneider
J
J
  • Article Article
Scale-focusing full frame 35s: A cherished bygone breed. Part 1Simple, ubiquitous, and charming, they flourished for over a century!
2
Replies
24
Views
1K
ChrisPlatt
ChrisPlatt
J
Did Nikon really blow Leitz and Zeiss out of the water in 1950? Not quite, but....
Replies
9
Views
1K
aoresteen
aoresteen
J
  • Article Article
Who invented the Leica M3 and IIIg? Two great men at Leitz Wetzlar! Both projects were team efforts led by innovative engineering geniuses.
Replies
13
Views
737
Ljós
L
J
  • Article Article
What’s the best U.S.-made interchangeable lens rangefinder 35? It depends on your criteria.
2
Replies
26
Views
5K
rick oleson
rick oleson
Back
Top Bottom