the Grunge Factor

[reagan]

I think the light just came on for me. From time to time there's been several threads/posts around here addressing the rise in FSU prices over the last several months. The cause of the inflation is not something I've really been able to put my finger on... til now. I think what I've been missing or misinterpreting is "the Grunge Factor." Simply stated, "...the more grime, gunk, grit and grunge you can leave on a photographic instrument, the more valuable it is."

Man, have I been blowin' it. All this time I've been just cleaning, rubbing and polishing the dollars right off my FSUs. It will take me years - no DECADES to get that "natural man-fat glow" back on my shooters before they'll be worth anything.

A stellar example of the Grunge Factor applied to a Zorki 3 ~
http://www.kassiapeya.com/zorki3-01539/3.jpg

 

[Fedzilla_Bob]

I wonder if it comes from smokers. I have an Argus C44 that was covered with tar and smelled of Chesterfields. It cleaned up nicely.

Perhaps the old comrades were enjoying a cigarette or two while snapping photos in Havana.

Don't think I'll add the grunge back onto my FEDs and such. That scunge can be pretty scary stuff.

 

[Screwy]

Damn thats nearly as grungy as the 3M Ive just bought of him .

http://www.kassiapeya.com/zorki3m-5546331/3.jpg

thanks for the heads up , I,ll resist the urge to clean it

 

[reagan]

Damn thats nearly as grungy as the 3M Ive just bought of him .

Yeah, I should have noted a disclaimer. That seller has a 99%+ pos feedback rating, very often has interesting gear and I wouldn't hesitate to buy there.

It's just sort of humorous to me that many of the sellers in the Bay will occasionally (though not always) take a photo of something they are trying to sell and apparently give no thought as to whether the item's photo looks attractive/inviting/desirable enough that someone would want to buy it.

I'm just curious. Does anyone look at a dirty camera from overseas and think, "Oh yeah, that's the one. That's gotta be an oldie but goodie." ?

 

[Screwy]

Yeah, I should have noted a disclaimer. That seller has a 99%+ pos feedback rating, very often has interesting gear and I wouldn't hesitate to buy there.

It's just sort of humorous to me that many of the sellers in the Bay will occasionally (though not always) take a photo of something they are trying to sell and apparently give no thought as to whether the item's photo looks attractive/inviting/desirable enough that someone would want to buy it.

I'm just curious. Does anyone look at a dirty camera from overseas and think, "Oh yeah, that's the one. That's gotta be an oldie but goodie." ?

No need for a disclaimer CVBLZ4 , My reply was tongue in cheek

In all honesty , at $54 BIN its condition was reflected in the price , all the other 3M,s I had looked at had been 2-3 times more expensive .

And your right , I have had many a chuckle at some of the "L@@K R@RE collectors item" listings posted on Eb*y with some of them looking like they have been pulled from behind a cupboard where they fell 20 years a go and then given a quick rub with a damp cloth last used to clean the kitchen floor

I,m pretty sure lots of people just think "bang it on Eb*y someone will buy it"


Paul

 

[reagan]

My reply was tongue in cheek.

Yep, I knew that.
Hey, to me another chuckle is... most of these Grungers come with "the original case" !!! And the case will look farely clean! Geez Louise, for the love of Pete! Why didn't they keep the camera IN the case? And maybe they did! Maybe the camera went IN the case with the grime on it ... so the grime was preserved for lo these many years - THANKS TO THE CASE!! HA!!

 

[didotcicero]

That looks just like mine, lens too... tried to clean it but with no result... On the other hand, that reminds me of my photograpy teacher in school.

She said that a camera should look used (hers did), if you are to be taken serious... If it looks brandnew, you're not using it as much as you should... Well, that's what she said anyway

 

[reagan]

...that reminds me of my photograpy teacher in school.
She said that a camera should look used (hers did), if you are to be taken serious... If it looks brandnew, you're not using it as much as you should... Well, that's what she said anyway

Ha! Love it. And I agree 100% with your teacher. I use 'em. I try to take care, but hey, using is more important that polishing - to me. However... ... I try to keep them from looking like they're being USED for garden hoe! ha!!

 

[Bobbo]

That looks just like mine, lens too... tried to clean it but with no result... On the other hand, that reminds me of my photograpy teacher in school.

She said that a camera should look used (hers did), if you are to be taken serious... If it looks brandnew, you're not using it as much as you should... Well, that's what she said anyway

There is a fine line between used, mistreated, and abused.

Used is general wear and tear from daily use, like numerals wearing of high-use buttons and dials, slight nicks, and scratches from tripods and lens mounts. My Elan 7e had a few marks on it, and when I went to sell it, the buyer told me it was clean for something that had been used for two years of weddings, two years of newspaper shooting, and a semester in a college photo class. That was used.

Misused are items that are not cleaned or left in places where they can get non use-induced damage or very nasty looking. Engraved cameras fall here. My pre-owned 10D came to me with marks on it because the previous owner didn't have padding and threw it next to a 70-200/2.8 in his bag for about three months (he got it right when it was discontinued)...I got it for $500, or $250 less than a spotless one at the time, and it only had 500 clicks on it. That was mistreated.

Abuse are cameras that are used as hammers or are stolen. My Mother's old Ricoh SLX 500 was bought at a pawn shop. It was engraved on the prism and the baseplate. It was then stolen from the owner, had it's engravings defaced and it's serial number removed. I just replaced the top and bottom plates with another camera, and it's a lot better now. That camera was abused.

A crummy looking Fed-3 falls into the second catagory. The same catagory as my neighbor's Nikkormat that was left in an open camera bag in the basement closet since the early 70's. He showed it to me, and after I got the quarter-inch layer of dust off it, I think there was something looking back at me.

The bad chrome on some early post-war Leica IIIc's and poor QC on some Russian cameras are problems at the time of manufacture and have nothing to do with use...I don't know where to put them.

Use adds charicter. Mistreatment adds fungus and trashed finishes with no purpose. Abuse kills.

Mark today "International Abused Camera Awareness Day"!

Bob Clark

 

[zhang]

I think the light just came on for me. From time to time there's been several threads/posts around here addressing the rise in FSU prices over the last several months. The cause of the inflation is not something I've really been able to put my finger on... til now. I think what I've been missing or misinterpreting is "the Grunge Factor." Simply stated, "...the more grime, gunk, grit and grunge you can leave on a photographic instrument, the more valuable it is."

Man, have I been blowin' it. All this time I've been just cleaning, rubbing and polishing the dollars right off my FSUs. It will take me years - no DECADES to get that "natural man-fat glow"........

Oooops! What a big pity! :bang: I have rubbed off all the values from my treasures.

My heart is crying.

 

[reagan]

Oooops! What a big pity! :bang: I have rubbed off all the values from my treasures. My heart is crying.

Yep, zhang, you've definately ruined those. Not much market for "Grunge-free Gear." Ah, well, just as a favor to you, I'm sure the guys here at RFF will "dispose" of those worthless things and get them out of your way. Just post them in the Classifieds as FREE, maybe someone will help you out.
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
P.S. Dazzling gear!!

 

[Seele]

She said that a camera should look used (hers did), if you are to be taken serious... If it looks brandnew, you're not using it as much as you should... Well, that's what she said anyway

After the passing of a rather well-known and successful commercial photographer, it was revealed that he paid premium prices for mint condition cameras of earlier types, and then he sent them to a technician to have them "distressed": the cameras were taken apart carefully and authentic wear patterns were applied to the appropriate external parts, then reassembled. It sure impressed the clients!

 

[Kim Coxon]

When I was going through flying trining, one of the guys on the course got accelerated promotion because of his degree. He turned up at work with his brand new bright rank tabs. One of the flying instructors said that he ought to try and get an old pair as everyone who saw his shiney new ones would know he was a "greenshielder" and he wouldn't have any credibility. This worried the poor guy and he asked the instructor what he could do. After a moment's pause, the instructor said he would help the poor guy out and offered to swap a pair of his old faded ones for the new. The swap was duly carried out and the next morning, the student arrived in his "old" tabs and the instructor arrived in a bright new shiny pair amongst peels of laughter from the rest of the course.

Kim

That looks just like mine, lens too... tried to clean it but with no result... On the other hand, that reminds me of my photograpy teacher in school.

She said that a camera should look used (hers did), if you are to be taken serious... If it looks brandnew, you're not using it as much as you should... Well, that's what she said anyway

 

[brians]

I like the rugged look of my FSU cameras (dull chrome and scuffs), but the stuff that sellers are selling these days make me wonder. What deters me from buying certain cameras is the pictures. Rust or green oxidation coming from the screws... Brown stuff all over the back leatherette... As a buyer this gives me less assurance that the previous owners used/stored them properly. Also, when I see that brownish, tarry looking junk on lens, I wonder if the rings will twist and turn as smoothly as the seller describes it... Then of course comes the reassurance, "EVERYTHING WORK PROPERLY MY FRIEND, A-OKAY." Well of course, there ARE those reputable businesspersons who will be honest, but by rule of thumb, I'll keep to the things that look salvagable and functional.

 

[reagan]

Great story Kim. I love it.

Yeah, agreed Brians, scuffs, brassing and a ding here and there doesn't bother me at all. When I/you use stuff, hey, it wears.

I was always under the assumption that when trying to sell something, you photo the best side of it and describe it honestly. So when I see cameras/lenses that look like they just got lifted out of the bottom of my brother's tool box he keeps in the John Deere, I ask myself, "Geez, and this is the best side?"

I started this thread to see if maybe I was wrong. I thought maybe there are people out there who think Grunge is somehow hip/retro/desirable/attractive/marketable and therefore purposely left on cameras to improve their chances to sell. Doesn't seem to be a market for it at RFF anyway.

 

[reagan]

Seele, that might be a business we could start up.

"Send us your Contax or Leica and we'll give it that 'Retro-distressed' look and return it to you promptly... in 20 years."
​

 

[Screwy]

I started this thread to see if maybe I was wrong. I thought maybe there are people out there who think Grunge is somehow hip/retro/desirable/attractive/marketable and therefore purposely left on cameras to improve their chances to sell. Doesn't seem to be a market for it at RFF anyway.

Well Ive noticed that most of the better FSU sellers tend to price there camera,s according to condition so being a Yorkshireman (we make the Scot,s look positively extravagant ) I usually end up buying grungy camera,s , That said, most cosmetic damage ie: Brassing,dings or torn/scuffed vulcanite can be rectified and I allways assume that I,m going to have to do some work on the shutter/slow speeds no matter what the seller says .

So you could possibly say, yes I do find grunge desirable if the camera is mechanically sound,priced accordingly and not a total scrap job ,Though I do occasionally buy those for spares .

Paul

 

[reagan]

Screwy ~ yep, I'm there. I've paid for Grunge too... but, probably like you, I looked past the Grunge and thought the camera looked pretty "straight" (hey,save the puns guys... ) and it was. The Grunge wasn't the attraction.

"Brassing,dings or torn/scuffed vulcanite..."

Doesn't bother me either, unless extreme. I'm just talking about pure filth - dirt & grime that can be removed with a cotton cloth and a toothbrush while having a cup of coffee.

Is there a market share out there that think, "Oh hey! This one has a lot of Grunge on it... that's a plus." .. ? I'm thinking some people might... or at least, thinking/wondering if some sellers apparently think people might. Otherwise, surely they'd take the 30-40 minutes to at least hose the outside of the camera off before taking a pic of it and plastering it on the WorldWideWeb.

And to be honest, I can't recall seeing one Grunge infested unit that was at a reduced-fixer-upper price. Grunge or spotless; same price. Maybe they're out there, I just don't recall one. The "Stellar Example" link in the first post above is $95 BIN; about the norm. If the dirty ones were cheaper than the clean ones, then hey, I'd probably look a little closer.

 

[Screwy]

Hmmm just searched Eb*y for Zorki 3 BIN and your right Well thats my theory shot down I can only assume that either the sellers are getting lazy these days or people will just buy anything no matter how bad it looks and with no regard to price .

 

[reagan]

'Well thats my theory shot down I can only assume that either the sellers are getting lazy these days or people will just buy anything no matter how bad it looks and with no regard to price."

Looks like it. And it sort of supports my thinking all along that most of the sellers aren't camera shop owners or even enthusiasts, but rather just "brokers" who know nothing about cameras. Considering some of the inaccurate descriptions, it's not a real stretch to assume this. Anyway, their concern is simply, "buy low, bring it home, sell high, ship it." Granted, there are some who don't fit this description, but the rapid growth in popularity and number of e-sellers seems to suggest that the expertise of many of these guys is simply... "what it will bring" - period.

It makes moot the question, "Whose a good e-seller?" From the same seller have come reports of "good camera" and "bad camera." Why? Because the guy is honest and a good business man, but he doesn't know cameras and hasn't even tested it. He bought it for X and can sell it for Y. Put it in a box and mail it out. It get's tested at my house. Ha! Oh yeah, and cleaned!!