Mailinglist Archives:
Infrared
Panorama
Photo-3D
Tech-3D
Sell-3D
MF3D

Notice
This mailinglist archive is frozen since May 2001, i.e. it will stay online but will not be updated.
<-- Date Index --> <-- Thread Index --> [Author Index]

[MF3D.FORUM:694] Re: Cameras


  • From: "don lopp" <dlopp@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Subject: [MF3D.FORUM:694] Re: Cameras
  • Date: Tue, 6 Jun 2000 20:43:43 -0700

It is fairly simple to get 6 pairs on either the Heidoscope or Rolleidoscope
Don.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Richard Twichell" <rmt@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: "Medium Format 3D Photography" <MF3D.Forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Tuesday, June 06, 2000 4:00 PM
Subject: [MF3D.FORUM:687] Re: Cameras


> Thanks for the welcome; I look forward to sharing experiences and
> information with this group.
>
> I use two Sputniks and a Heidescop; have been mounting in Spicer MF
> mounts, and viewing with a crude but awesome homemade viewer made by Ray
> Smullyan, secretary of the Delta SSA MF folio.  Have lately taken to
> mounting pairs in Gepe glass mounts and projecting with a pair of
> P-11s.  Looking for another pair for dissolving.
>
> I wrote and Paul responded:
>
> > > What I would really like is a
> > > 6x7 advance for 220 film fitted to the Heidescop - 10 pairs with a
> > > double wind for each shot...but am not clever enough to make one.
> >
> > Does the Heidoscop roll film back use a red window?
> > Surely there is no advance counter on that camera,
> > right?.
> >
> > Because 220 film does not have paper backing the
> > film would be fogged by the light coming through
> > the red window, and there would be no numbers to
> > read to see how far you had avanced the film.
>
> Correct, there is a red window and no counter on the rollback.  My
> thought is to construct an alternate back (they remove easily - too
> easily!) using perhaps graflex rollholder components, to enable use of
> 220 without counting revs of the windknob.  I'd rather use the 6x7 model
> than the 6x6, to maintain the extra width for window setting.  A good
> tradeoff in my view, settling for 10 pairs instead of 12.
>
> Dick Twichell
>