Is it Copal or copal? Then what is it?

I wasn;t there in the 20's or 30's either but I was there in the 50's shooting
sports with a Graphic and my memories tend to agree with Richard. I didn't use
film packs and neither did anyone else I knew.
Ted Harris
Resource Strategy
Henniker, New Hampshire

"Rebecca Ore" wrote in message
news
In article
,
(Richard Knoppow) wrote:

I've never seen the actual negatives of the
Hindenburg disaster but doubt very much they were shot
on pack film.

I thought I'd read somewhere that they were shot by people
who didn't
use the second sheet of film, just exposed one sheet per
holder under
conditions where every sheet counted and remembering which
sheet was
exposed might be a problem.

Thought it was posted here, but I could be wrong.

That could well be. A standard sheet film holder is double
sided and has two sheets. A film pack has 12 to 18 sheets of
film. While it IS possible to get exposed sheets out
separately it requires a darkroom and some surgery, too time
consuming for press work. One reason that sheet film in
conventional holders was used is that a holder could be set
back to the newspaper lab while the photographer was still
working.


--
---
Richard Knoppow
Los Angeles, CA, USA

"Tom" tom@localhost wrote in message
...
I do not want to get into a ****ing contest with Richard,
so I will not argue
with him except to say that most newspapers usually had
more than one camera
and/or lens available. I was not there back in the 20's
and 30's, but I have
talked with old timers myself. Often what they told me,
and what Richard says
was very very different.

On things like grip-n-grins, the mainstay of the old time
press, it was usual to
shoot one shot on one side of the holder, and a safety
shot on the other. The
safety shot often was never even processed unless there
was a problem, such as
someone blinking, with the first shot. However, to the
best of my knowledge a
working press photographer never went out with just one
film holder, and for
major events they often used pack film, WeeGee certainly
did if you can believe
what he said in his books.

Funny thing is folks who seem to never have used the
stuff, or who have only
used the 16 sheet packs made in the 70's with the then new
untra-thin film in
them, have strange ideas about filmpacks. For one thing
you could do just one
shot and remove it in the darkroom with out wasting the
rest of the pack.
However, even back in those days film was not so expensive
that a working
photographer was afraid to waste the rest of the film in
the pack even if he had
only shot only 2 or 3 of the 12 sheets of film. And the
film in the 12 sheet
packs was not all that thin, nor was roll film in the 50's
and earlier.

--

Rebecca Ore wrote:
Snipping...
I don't know who you talked to but I was taught the
business by a press photographer who happened to be one of
my highschool teacher. The practice of press photographers
was well established and historical records are plentiful as
are records of the cameras and other equipment used. In
fact, the very camera used to take the famous Hindenburgh
photo is in the hands of a collector.
I don't know what "strange" ideas you think people have
about film packs or what changes you think were made in the
1950's. Actually film packs were introduced early and did
not change much over the decades they were made. They came
is different sizes ranging from about 12 exposures to about
18. It was ALWAYS possible to open the thing and retrieve a
single or several films, I did that many times. It is a PITA
and the pack is not always usable afterward. Pack film was
not much used in press photography. In fact, most of the
popular press films were not available in pack form. Your
statements about the thickness of film packs and roll film
is just plain wrong. The sizes were exactly the same as
later ones, I think you have never seen them.
For those who have never seen a film pack perhaps some
description is in order. Film packs were oblong packages
which fit into a very simple adaptor. Adaptors were
available for both sheet film cameras and for plate cameras.
Film packs were especially popular for older folding plate
cameras. The pack had a series of numbered paper tabs coming
out of one side. To use it you placed it in the adaptor, put
the adaptor in or on the camera (of course) and tooke the
dark slide out of the adaptor. Then you pulled the first
tab. This tab was the "dark slide" of the film pack. The
first film was then available to expose. After exposing it
the next tab was pulled. This pulled the film around a
roller into the back of the film pack, it was then torn off.
After all the films were exposed the pack was opened in the
darkroom by pulling the sides off. The exposed film was in
the back. Pack film had to be very thin so it could be
flexible enough to go over the narrow roller inside the
pack. Normal sheet film developing hangers could not be used
because the pack film would fall out of them. One used
either special pack hangers or a closed tank similar to roll
film tanks. The main advantage of film packs was the ability
to change film very quickly but they also had problems with
jamming and scratching. In general sheet film holders were
more reliable.
The standard press rig from about the early 1930s on to
the demise of press cameras in the 1960s was Speed Graphic
with a somewhat wide angle lens on it. The most common
lenses were Zeiss or B&L Tessars of 135mm focal length, or
later, 127mm Kodak Ektars. The cameras were invariably
equipped with a flash gun which stayed on the camera even
when not in use since most cameras used an electrical
solenoid for tripping the shutter. This was a convenience
because the shutter was tripped by a button on the back of
the battery case which also formed a handle. These lenses
came in cocking shutters, either Compurs built by Deckel in
Germany or the B&L version. The "press" version of the
rim-set Compur differed from the standard version in that it
had a blade arrestor and press-focus button in place of the
self-timer in the "civilian version" and also had a large
paddle on the cocking lever. I have a couple of these guys
and they are still accurate and reliable despite being 70
years old.
Typically, the cameras were shot using the most powerful
flash bulbs available for the purpose with the lens set at
f/22 or f/32 for depth of field, and the shutter set at
about 1/200 for some action stopping. The camera was
typically focused at about 15 feet and locked. The
combination give sharp enough pictures over a large range of
distance and resulted in faster work.
I will repeat my orignal point NO self-setting shutters
were ever used on a press camera and none were avialable on
any lens sold for press photography purposes at any time
during which the familiar sheet film camera was in general
use for news photography. That covers about a 30 year
period.
A final note: Tom, you and "hemi" have decided I don't
know what I am talking about, or that all my knowledge comes
from "books". You are dead wrong on both counts. I know
where Hemi's problem comes from, I don't know were yours
comes from. I happen to respect accurate knowledge. That
doesn't make me right all the time but it means that I pay
attention to sources and check things. I also have a very
long experience in photography (more than fifty years) with
a lot of practical experience with a lot of its aspects. May
I suggest to you that its dangerous to guess about people,
espcially in a forum like Usnet, you have no idea of who you
are talking to most of the time.


--
---
Richard Knoppow
Los Angeles, CA, USA

"Tom" tom@localhost wrote in message
...
I do not want to get into a ****ing contest with Richard,
so I will not argue
with him except to say that most newspapers usually had
more than one camera
and/or lens available. I was not there back in the 20's
and 30's, but I have
talked with old timers myself. Often what they told me,
and what Richard says
was very very different.

On things like grip-n-grins, the mainstay of the old time
press, it was usual to
shoot one shot on one side of the holder, and a safety
shot on the other. The
safety shot often was never even processed unless there
was a problem, such as
someone blinking, with the first shot. However, to the
best of my knowledge a
working press photographer never went out with just one
film holder, and for
major events they often used pack film, WeeGee certainly
did if you can believe
what he said in his books.

Funny thing is folks who seem to never have used the
stuff, or who have only
used the 16 sheet packs made in the 70's with the then new
untra-thin film in
them, have strange ideas about filmpacks. For one thing
you could do just one
shot and remove it in the darkroom with out wasting the
rest of the pack.
However, even back in those days film was not so expensive
that a working
photographer was afraid to waste the rest of the film in
the pack even if he had
only shot only 2 or 3 of the 12 sheets of film. And the
film in the 12 sheet
packs was not all that thin, nor was roll film in the 50's
and earlier.

--

Rebecca Ore wrote:
Snipping...
I don't know who you talked to but I was taught the
business by a press photographer who happened to be one of
my highschool teacher. The practice of press photographers
was well established and historical records are plentiful as
are records of the cameras and other equipment used. In
fact, the very camera used to take the famous Hindenburgh
photo is in the hands of a collector.
I don't know what "strange" ideas you think people have
about film packs or what changes you think were made in the
1950's. Actually film packs were introduced early and did
not change much over the decades they were made. They came
is different sizes ranging from about 12 exposures to about
18. It was ALWAYS possible to open the thing and retrieve a
single or several films, I did that many times. It is a PITA
and the pack is not always usable afterward. Pack film was
not much used in press photography. In fact, most of the
popular press films were not available in pack form. Your
statements about the thickness of film packs and roll film
is just plain wrong. The sizes were exactly the same as
later ones, I think you have never seen them.
For those who have never seen a film pack perhaps some
description is in order. Film packs were oblong packages
which fit into a very simple adaptor. Adaptors were
available for both sheet film cameras and for plate cameras.
Film packs were especially popular for older folding plate
cameras. The pack had a series of numbered paper tabs coming
out of one side. To use it you placed it in the adaptor, put
the adaptor in or on the camera (of course) and tooke the
dark slide out of the adaptor. Then you pulled the first
tab. This tab was the "dark slide" of the film pack. The
first film was then available to expose. After exposing it
the next tab was pulled. This pulled the film around a
roller into the back of the film pack, it was then torn off.
After all the films were exposed the pack was opened in the
darkroom by pulling the sides off. The exposed film was in
the back. Pack film had to be very thin so it could be
flexible enough to go over the narrow roller inside the
pack. Normal sheet film developing hangers could not be used
because the pack film would fall out of them. One used
either special pack hangers or a closed tank similar to roll
film tanks. The main advantage of film packs was the ability
to change film very quickly but they also had problems with
jamming and scratching. In general sheet film holders were
more reliable.
The standard press rig from about the early 1930s on to
the demise of press cameras in the 1960s was Speed Graphic
with a somewhat wide angle lens on it. The most common
lenses were Zeiss or B&L Tessars of 135mm focal length, or
later, 127mm Kodak Ektars. The cameras were invariably
equipped with a flash gun which stayed on the camera even
when not in use since most cameras used an electrical
solenoid for tripping the shutter. This was a convenience
because the shutter was tripped by a button on the back of
the battery case which also formed a handle. These lenses
came in cocking shutters, either Compurs built by Deckel in
Germany or the B&L version. The "press" version of the
rim-set Compur differed from the standard version in that it
had a blade arrestor and press-focus button in place of the
self-timer in the "civilian version" and also had a large
paddle on the cocking lever. I have a couple of these guys
and they are still accurate and reliable despite being 70
years old.
Typically, the cameras were shot using the most powerful
flash bulbs available for the purpose with the lens set at
f/22 or f/32 for depth of field, and the shutter set at
about 1/200 for some action stopping. The camera was
typically focused at about 15 feet and locked. The
combination give sharp enough pictures over a large range of
distance and resulted in faster work.
I will repeat my orignal point NO self-setting shutters
were ever used on a press camera and none were avialable on
any lens sold for press photography purposes at any time
during which the familiar sheet film camera was in general
use for news photography. That covers about a 30 year
period.
A final note: Tom, you and "hemi" have decided I don't
know what I am talking about, or that all my knowledge comes
from "books". You are dead wrong on both counts. I know
where Hemi's problem comes from, I don't know were yours
comes from. I happen to respect accurate knowledge. That
doesn't make me right all the time but it means that I pay
attention to sources and check things. I also have a very
long experience in photography (more than fifty years) with
a lot of practical experience with a lot of its aspects. May
I suggest to you that its dangerous to guess about people,
espcially in a forum like Usnet, you have no idea of who you
are talking to most of the time.


--
---
Richard Knoppow
Los Angeles, CA, USA

Well, sir, I do not wish to get into a flame war with you. As amazing as you may
find it, I thought you to be a widely knowledgeable and helpful person.

However, now it seems like you think you know everything there is to know. I
think you should reevaluate that. For what it is worth I too developed my first
roll of film over 50 years ago. I too have been into photography ever since in
some form or another. I have worked in the field professionally. Now, you say
you know everything, and I don't know anything?

I have commented on two occasions here where my experience and knowledge
differed from yours. And, kind of left it for others to make their own decisions
about who is, or is not, correct. With the full understanding that we may be
both correct from within our own experience.

For this, sir, you attack me personally? I think you have a major personality
problem. Please rest assured I will never contradict you again. I would be an
idiot if I bothered to.

--

Richard Knoppow wrote:
"Tom" tom@localhost wrote in message
...

I do not want to get into a ****ing contest with Richard,

so I will not argue

with him except to say that most newspapers usually had

more than one camera

and/or lens available. I was not there back in the 20's

and 30's, but I have

talked with old timers myself. Often what they told me,

and what Richard says

was very very different.

On things like grip-n-grins, the mainstay of the old time

press, it was usual to

shoot one shot on one side of the holder, and a safety

shot on the other. The

safety shot often was never even processed unless there

was a problem, such as

someone blinking, with the first shot. However, to the

best of my knowledge a

working press photographer never went out with just one

film holder, and for

major events they often used pack film, WeeGee certainly

did if you can believe

what he said in his books.

Funny thing is folks who seem to never have used the

stuff, or who have only

used the 16 sheet packs made in the 70's with the then new

untra-thin film in

them, have strange ideas about filmpacks. For one thing

you could do just one

shot and remove it in the darkroom with out wasting the

rest of the pack.

However, even back in those days film was not so expensive

that a working

photographer was afraid to waste the rest of the film in

the pack even if he had

only shot only 2 or 3 of the 12 sheets of film. And the

film in the 12 sheet

packs was not all that thin, nor was roll film in the 50's

and earlier.

--

Rebecca Ore wrote:

Snipping...
I don't know who you talked to but I was taught the
business by a press photographer who happened to be one of
my highschool teacher. The practice of press photographers
was well established and historical records are plentiful as
are records of the cameras and other equipment used. In
fact, the very camera used to take the famous Hindenburgh
photo is in the hands of a collector.
I don't know what "strange" ideas you think people have
about film packs or what changes you think were made in the
1950's. Actually film packs were introduced early and did
not change much over the decades they were made. They came
is different sizes ranging from about 12 exposures to about
18. It was ALWAYS possible to open the thing and retrieve a
single or several films, I did that many times. It is a PITA
and the pack is not always usable afterward. Pack film was
not much used in press photography. In fact, most of the
popular press films were not available in pack form. Your
statements about the thickness of film packs and roll film
is just plain wrong. The sizes were exactly the same as
later ones, I think you have never seen them.
For those who have never seen a film pack perhaps some
description is in order. Film packs were oblong packages
which fit into a very simple adaptor. Adaptors were
available for both sheet film cameras and for plate cameras.
Film packs were especially popular for older folding plate
cameras. The pack had a series of numbered paper tabs coming
out of one side. To use it you placed it in the adaptor, put
the adaptor in or on the camera (of course) and tooke the
dark slide out of the adaptor. Then you pulled the first
tab. This tab was the "dark slide" of the film pack. The
first film was then available to expose. After exposing it
the next tab was pulled. This pulled the film around a
roller into the back of the film pack, it was then torn off.
After all the films were exposed the pack was opened in the
darkroom by pulling the sides off. The exposed film was in
the back. Pack film had to be very thin so it could be
flexible enough to go over the narrow roller inside the
pack. Normal sheet film developing hangers could not be used
because the pack film would fall out of them. One used
either special pack hangers or a closed tank similar to roll
film tanks. The main advantage of film packs was the ability
to change film very quickly but they also had problems with
jamming and scratching. In general sheet film holders were
more reliable.
The standard press rig from about the early 1930s on to
the demise of press cameras in the 1960s was Speed Graphic
with a somewhat wide angle lens on it. The most common
lenses were Zeiss or B&L Tessars of 135mm focal length, or
later, 127mm Kodak Ektars. The cameras were invariably
equipped with a flash gun which stayed on the camera even
when not in use since most cameras used an electrical
solenoid for tripping the shutter. This was a convenience
because the shutter was tripped by a button on the back of
the battery case which also formed a handle. These lenses
came in cocking shutters, either Compurs built by Deckel in
Germany or the B&L version. The "press" version of the
rim-set Compur differed from the standard version in that it
had a blade arrestor and press-focus button in place of the
self-timer in the "civilian version" and also had a large
paddle on the cocking lever. I have a couple of these guys
and they are still accurate and reliable despite being 70
years old.
Typically, the cameras were shot using the most powerful
flash bulbs available for the purpose with the lens set at
f/22 or f/32 for depth of field, and the shutter set at
about 1/200 for some action stopping. The camera was
typically focused at about 15 feet and locked. The
combination give sharp enough pictures over a large range of
distance and resulted in faster work.
I will repeat my orignal point NO self-setting shutters
were ever used on a press camera and none were avialable on
any lens sold for press photography purposes at any time
during which the familiar sheet film camera was in general
use for news photography. That covers about a 30 year
period.
A final note: Tom, you and "hemi" have decided I don't
know what I am talking about, or that all my knowledge comes
from "books". You are dead wrong on both counts. I know
where Hemi's problem comes from, I don't know were yours
comes from. I happen to respect accurate knowledge. That
doesn't make me right all the time but it means that I pay
attention to sources and check things. I also have a very
long experience in photography (more than fifty years) with
a lot of practical experience with a lot of its aspects. May
I suggest to you that its dangerous to guess about people,
espcially in a forum like Usnet, you have no idea of who you
are talking to most of the time.