No 2A Brownie 35mm modification

This easy-peasy modification can be used on almost any 116, 616, 127, 120, 620, etc. camera provided that the supply side of the camera will hold a canister of 35mm film. [I have a 127 camera with a supply chamber that is too narrow to hold the 35mm canister.]  It's also helpful to have the correct size spool for the take-up size.  For instance, I always use a 620 spool for take-up when shooting 35mm in my flipped lens Brownie Hawkeye Flash. If you happen to be working with a 116 camera (like the No 2A Brownie) and don't have the original spool, here is a great way to make a 120 spool fit a 116/616 camera.    

For this modification you'll need the camera you are choosing to use, a canister of 35mm film with the leader cut off (flat edge), tape (clear as well as electric), scissors, the empty take-up spool, and a pink sponge roller.  Packs of 10-12 sponge rollers can be bought at the dollar store for, you guessed it, a buck.   

 

Step one:  Cut the foam roller to size.  Size will depend on the width of the supply side of the camera, but you want to make sure that the roller pieces hold the canister snugly in place while still allowing the camera to close properly.  [See image above, far left.]  

Step two:  Tape the film leader to the empty take-up spool and place spool in proper position.  NOTE:  It's helpful to do this in the darkroom, so you don't waste (expose more film than you need to).  

Step three:  Place film take-up/supply insert into camera or (if you are working with Holga, Diana or BHF--the foam rollers work splendidly in all these cameras!) put the camera back back on. 

Importantly, you'll want to make sure that you have placed a couple layers of electric tape over the front and back of camera's red counter window so that you don't inadvertently expose the film. 

The trickiest part is figuring out how to properly advance the film so that you don't get frame overlap or waste too much film.  To this end, it's helpful to have a test roll of 35mm on hand.  Once I have the supply and take-up sides loaded, I use a sharpie to indicate the top of the film plane.  I then figure out how many turns it takes until the sharpie line moves to the bottom of the film plane.  With the No 2A Brownie, it takes approximately 5 half-turns of the film advance knob to ensure that the frames will not overlap.  [NOTE:  As you work through the roll of film, you'll need to advance the film slightly less with each exposure to avoid frame overlap.  I tend not to mind the extra space between frames, but if this bothers you, you can use the test roll of film to figure out how the exact turn count for each frame on the roll.]

The negatives from this 116 camera are about 5 inches long.  With a 36 exposure roll of film, I can make approximately 9-10 images.  [I load the camera in the darkroom as I want to expose as little of the film as I can.]   Here is a sampling of some of the other the images made with this camera.

 

zero image 135 modification

We recently ordered the cable release kit with plans to put it the 135 I had purchased some time ago, but didn't realize the instruction included with the kit and online did not apply to the 135. The (very time consuming) installation process continued and we noted that the fixed round body of the mount contacted the movable shutter when mounted and the post head (that is on the end of the release mechanism) did not seat very deeply into the movable shutter when you added washers behind the mount.

We used our Dremel tool to grind some of the round barrel to allow access for the shutter mechanism. Things seem to work well (with a minimum number of new holes), we used the one hole already there to attach the movable shutter. We did not notice the offset mount of the cable release on the deluxe 135 (and the instructions did not refer to it either). Ours looks nicer and works well,
without seeing the holes (from the old mounting location).

holgaversary

may 16th, 2009 marked my one-year holgaversary. i ordered my first holga (my first "as-adult" film camera) on may 16th, 2008.

i missed my one year flickr anniversary (april 26th, i think) and the one year anniversary marking my mom buying me, as an early b-day present, the canon powershot s5 (maybe early feb, 2008?), so i was glad to actually remember and mark the holgaversary by going out and taking a few shots with the holga.

i'm frankly amazed that the canon powershot led to the events and the enjoyment i've experienced over the past year. and i recall so vividly, when my mom offered to buy me the powershot, i felt it would be a fairly ridiculous expense. I aleady had a decent digital camera--not one that i ever really liked using--but it served well for research purposes. and the only photos i took at that point were images of student work. but my mom had bought herself another canon digital camera and i was testing it out to teach her how to use it. it was such a hoot to work with, i couldn't stop using it and trying new things. she kept saying, "okay--do you want that one and i'll get myself another?" i really didn't. her camera was fun to use but i already had one and it served me well for my research and scholarship. she offered to buy me my own camera a few more times that weekend. like i said, it was hard to stop taking pics with it once i started. i knew i wanted something with more manual controls, so we ended up going out and looking around and i settled on the powershot s5.

once i started taking pics with the powershot--and i was quickly-addicted, sometimes taking 300 shots a day just to experiment, to play around--i put off joining flickr, thinking it would be way too daunting and overwhelming. shortly after i joined, i realized flickr's teaching potential. i'm not sure how or where i came across the first holga photograph i had seen, but i was transfixed. i started researching holgas, looking at other photographs and then i got one of my own. it was a couple months before i started developing my own b/w film, another month till i started developing color at home, so there was a lot of time spent waiting for film to come back from the place i sent it for developing. speaking of diy color developing, i guess i'd say hands-down that this is the thing i was most scared to do and the thing that i'm most glad i tried given how much money it's saved me over the past 8 months or so. again, if not for the advice and generosity of folks on flickr, well, i definitely probably wouldn't have known you could do diy color developing. as for other of the years' high points, low points, regrets, finds, misses, challenges, etc.:

so about diana+. wow. what a rough time this has been. when things work between us, they are amazing. the panda photo from the san diego conference trip is still one of my all-time favs. problem is, most of the time we don't work or play well together. ah, diana.


as for favorite films: hands down, for b/w it has got to be adox chs art (120 or 35mm) and efke kb 400 (35mm). the holga train station image above was taken with adox chs art 100.

what i'm not digging: surprisingly, higher speed films. ilford delta 3200, even the fuji 800 speed films. i thought i'd really like working with the higher speed films--color especially--but i've just not been feeling it.

some 60-70 cameras (yikes) later, i have to say that the camera i am most glad that i bought (and i say this only because i was going to pass on it) was the ultronic panoramic. i actually picked up two at resale shops when i went home for easter. that the camera was only a buck is pretty amazing. i was incredibly amazed though when i saw the images it was capable of taking. wow. i'm really, really glad i didn't pass on this one thinking that because it looked like junk the images would be junk--and not the interesting kind of junky i really love.

what i imagined i'd be doing more of at this point in time: most definitely, pinhole photography. i picked up a 35mm zeroimage and i really, really liked working with it. my plans were to spend this spring and summer getting into 4x5 pinhole photography. i figured that i'd go with another zeroimage as soon as i saved money for that and for the 4x5 tank, film, etc. that i agreed to start volunteering my time taking pics of rescued animals, animals needing homes and of so many, many pitbulls, kind of put the brakes on the pinhole plans.

what i've most enjoyed doing: most definitely, buying cameras and seeing if i'll be able to flip the lenses on them without breaking the cameras or shutters or lenses and without hurting myself. thanks again to folks on flickr and the incredible resources to be found there, my first flip was with the brownie hawkeye flash. --along with the ultronic, holga, and zenit em, this has definitely been one of my favorite cameras with which to take photographs of llamas in the springtime.

tetenal depleted

i took the pinhawk down to the tracks in halethorpe on a very, very windy day. yipes. i wanted to shoot another roll that day, in part, because i was getting ready to dump the tetenal batch i'd been working with since oct 25 and figured i could maybe get one more roll out of it. more importantly, however, i wanted to test out the new shutter i had made for the pinhawk. i wanted to make sure that there were no problems with light leakage before i use the camera for images or events that aren't easily re-doable.

the shutter worked well and any problems with the images were the result of the wind or camera shake. and then there's the fact that maybe i should have dumped the tetenal after i did the 22nd or 23rd roll. the colors here look decidedly x-pro--at least based on the results i've been getting with slide film.

i had commented elsewhere how much i loved diy color developing and the tetenal kit has been really, really excellent in terms of costs and output--and it's been surprisingly easy to use. i started developing my own color film at the end of august and i recall how nervous i was to do this. how i'd get or keep the chemicals to 100 degrees was puzzling and seemed to require more thought, effort and pre-planning then i was used to. i was assured (again, by really generous and supportive folks on flickr) that this was doable--some suggested it was easier than b/w. as for the cost--i figure i'm at about a buck a roll. depending on how far i stretch the tetenal, maybe a little less per roll. i think that with shipping costs included, the 5L kit cost me about 80-90 bucks. for the sake of simpler math, round that up to 100 and that's 20 bucks a liter and i'm getting on average, 22 rolls per liter.

as for getting and keeping chemicals at 100 degrees, the two dollar styrofoam cooler i got at the dollar store has been a lifesaver. i put the jugs of chemicals in there, fill it with 120 degree water and let the chemicals heat while i'm reeling up the film. i come down, scoop out some of the water, add more hot water, put the thermometer in the developer and place the tank in the cooler to get that warmed up. a few minutes later, i'm ready to go. 3 1/2 minutes for the dev, 4 for the bleach-fix (at least when the batch is still new-ish), 3 minute rinse, 1 minute stabilizer and the negs are ready to hang and dry. surprisingly quick and easy. almost makes b/w processing (especially caffenol devs) seem high-maintenance by contrast.

and i think i'm definitely going through a pro-color phase at this point in time. there's something about the added information (in terms of color info) that really appeals to me right now. i'm hoping this will still be the case, this spring when i've more colorful matter to choose from. last spring i was still/only shooting digital and am especially eager to know spring (esp. my gerbers and gazanias) on/through film.

pinhole. pinhawk. (pinheck?)

maybe my post about shooting digital vs. film angered the digital gods who, in turn, ensured that i will never take a pinhole image that isn't "soft" or blurry. . .

with the help, support and advice of two (most generous) people on flickr (i.e., look here and here) i set about modifying one of my brownie hawkeye flash cameras. i had debated buying another zero image but can't currently justify the cost. bottom line, i wanted to try a medium format pinhole.

at the risk of sounding like a one trick (or one move) pony, this was the kind of sharpness and detail i was going for but i ended up getting much softer, blurrier results (see below. . . and then sigh with me).

soft, blurry and funky is usually fine with me--as are scratched, watermarked and/or dusty negatives. as a matter of fact, as far as the funky goes, i often find myself trying to ensure that every camera i work with produces holga-esque images. which begs the question: why not just shoot always and everything with the holga? answer: cause that would be too easy--it's more fun to produce images that might have been taken with a holga but were not.

if anything, it could be my experience with digital cameras (and their results) that informs my goals when it comes to working with pinhole cameras. i was bummed that my matchbook images were much, much softer than others i had seen online (i.e., those that made me want to try pinhole photography in the first place), same goes for the images i took with the zero image and now the pinhawk. and i swear, i'm not spinning around with the camera, not shaking it, etc. while taking these shots. i'm working with a tripod and/or setting the camera on a stable surface but i do think that i might introduce some disruption at the start and end of each exposure (i.e., in the process of uncovering and covering the pinhole). in this way, i figured that the shorter exposures would be blurrier than the 1/2 hour or longer exposures. though not the most patient of folks, i'm not against practicing in order to achieve better--or just different--results. it's just been frustrating to try so many different things--size of pinhole, type of camera, distance from pinhole to film, etc.--and to end up feeling like i'm not making any kind of progress toward my goal.

if not a charm, at least a little bit better. . .

it wasn't five minutes after writing this in my last post:

"while waiting for the new camera to arrive, i've been tempted to try yet again with this one--well, after creating a new, still smaller-sized pinhole. the main deterrent to this (besides having a book to write and 30-some student projects to grade and not having anything with which to make a smaller size pinhole) is the time involved with carefully uptaping and then carefully retaping the mechanism"

that i went to the shelf where i had placed my matchbook pinhole and began taking it apart, deciding that i would, in fact, attempt to create a new (and i hoped still-smaller) pinhole and then began the process of taping things back up again. i should know better than to think that i won't end up doing what i insist that i would not or should not end up doing.
aside from the presence of what i call "the hangy" thing (see top-right side of image left), i was most pleasantly surprised with test roll three. i almost found myself regretting (albeit briefly) my decision to pay someone else to make a pinhole for me.

as for the "hangy" thing: as the negatives were drying, i thought that the mark might indicate a light leak but noticed that the marks on the negatives were all white. it wasn't till i took the box apart that i realized that a poorly-cut portion of the cardboard must have been pulled down when i loaded the last roll of film. i had to do more cropping than i would have liked to do with these images but, overall, i was pleased with the increased sharpness of images (much less fuzzy and cartoon-like) and i had far fewer exposure problems than i had with the first two rolls. --as a point of comparison, i have paired below an image from the first test roll with a "re-do" shot taken yesterday.

having gotten a good chunk of the grading done, i began another pinhole project yesterday morning about which i will say (perhaps unwisely?): i am not even close to being ready to shoot a test roll with this camera yet. i had purchased some months ago an agfa ansco shur-shot box camera that seemed to be in pretty amazing shape when i received it. problem was that the shutter broke before i could put film in it. (perhaps a good thing as i am glad not to have wasted the roll of film.) i took the camera apart to see what, if anything, might be done to get the shutter working again, realized that there was nothing i could do at that point in time, so i put it in a box marked "if/when you learn more about how shutters work, open this."

i was really bummed about the camera as it has the ability to take half-frame shots--something i had been hoping to try.

though i've not learned much about shutter-fixin' in the past few months, i have found a new appreciation for black boxes and wondered what might be involved with making this camera into a pinhole camera. i did a search on flickr which lead me to a couple of things ansco/pinhole related (though it's not the exact camera i have, i found this and this) and then spent most of the morning taking my camera apart, thinking through what i'd need to do, where the pinhole should be (i.e., in front of the shutter or behind), etc.

i'd never had the occasion to attempt using 35mm with the shur-shot since the shutter went kaput shortly after arriving. otherwise put, if i knew i could, in fact, run 35mm through this camera, it might make testing it more appealing and certainly more cost-efficient. as it is, i'm thinking this one will have to wait till i've done more thinking and researching.

third time's a charm?

cause i definitely didn't have beginner's luck with my pinhole adventure and after this second-go round, i'm thinking that this is the way i'll be going in the near future.

i was feeling decidedly hopeful about the second test roll since i had (at least from my perspective) made the second pinhole at least 1/2 the size of the first. since the images on the first test roll were all over-exposed, i kept with the same exposure/time guide, thinking the images on the second roll would be closer to normal. no dice. problem was that i took a good number of shots outside, around campus, and had little idea of what i was doing since the first test shots were all indoors. so much for controlling one's variables. and i meant to do more by way of bracketing shots with the second roll but, well, ended up not doing that either.

while i love, love, love the perspective one can get with the matchbook pinhole (reason enough to keep revamping and retesting my diy matchbook), i can't help but feel disappointed with what i consider to be the rather cartoon-like quality of the first and second test rolls. i thank goodness i shot color with these since it provides hints to what the image is supposed to be of--more or less.

while waiting for the new camera to arrive, i've been tempted to try yet again with this one--well, after creating a new, still smaller-sized pinhole. the main deterrent to this (besides having a book to write and 30-some student projects to grade and not having anything with which to make a smaller size pinhole) is the time involved with carefully uptaping and then carefully retaping the mechanism. and starting it all again from scratch, cutting up another matchbook, etc. is simply out of the question. but who knows--if it turns out that tomorrow or the next day is one of those crazy sky days (i.e., bright blue with clouds), i might be tempted to get out the electrical tape and load another test roll.

bratz cam

shortly after i began experimenting with different kinds of film cameras, i found this bratz cam. the good news is that it was more or less a freebie. . .












well, it was free provided that you purchased the bratz doll and this ended up posing a small problem since i couldn't justify spending 20 bucks for the camera and throwing the doll out. i could have, of course, tried giving the doll to one of the neighborhood kids but i wasn't sure how parents would feel about this. with my luck, i'd give it to someone whose parents had forbidden them to play with bratz dolls. as luck would have it, my mom found, purchased, and sent to me last month a deeply-discounted doll and cameras set. (in the end, i ended up keeping the doll even though i noted that one of the neighborhood kids does, in fact, ride a bratz bike and guessed at least her parents might not object to her receiving a free bratz doll.)

so, let the experimentation begin! . . . on second thought, if i'm being truthful, my response was more timid, less committed, less hopeful. more like, "let the experimentation begin?" at the time i received the bratz cam i had just experienced a run of really bad camera luck. it felt like everything i touched or tried to do came out the opposite of okay. first, there was the dead-spider-in-the-praktica-viewfinder situation that i was never able to solve. miraculously, i did find a post from another person--i think it may have been on flickr--who described having the same problem with his praktica. at first, i thought it might be the person who sold the camera to me but his was a different model. unfortunately, no one responded to his post and to this day, i wonder how the spider got in there. i tried taking the top off the camera, no luck. i got the screws out but the top wasn't budging. (again, left wondering how the spider got in there.) of course, it didn't need to be a total loss. i could always try to frame shots around (or inspite of) the spider, but it kinda made me queasy to look through the viewfinder.

and then there was the polaroid 225 misfortune. the camera only cost me 2 bucks "as is" and i was hoping that cleaning up the piggy little camera and installing a new battery would do the trick. no luck. i read up on how its electromagnetic shutter system worked, tried different tests to see if the shutter was firing as it should. no dice. 225 was placed in the "no bueno" box, where it is currently hanging with mr. praktica-with-spider. (fortunately the polaroid 220 I had purchased for 3 bucks arrived a few days after the bratz cam did and it works wonderfully--didn't even need a bath.)

also joining the 225 and the praktica in the "no bueno" box were the parts and pieces of two of the dollar store trashcams i had recently purchased and proceeded to break (or to not be able to get back together--at least not in working order) while attempting to flip their lenses. needless to say, when the bratz cam arrived, i was feeling like i had something decidely opposite of the midas touch when it came to cameras. and it didn't help that i had wanted the bratz cam for so long and that it was a gift from my mom. if i were to mess this one up to. . .well, i'm thinking that would have pushed me over the edge.

on the first modification. the great new was that the bratz cam is fairly idiot-proof when it comes to getting it apart and gaining access to the lens. unlike the other two trashcams in the "no bueno" box, i could flip the lens on the bratz cam and get the camera together again without messing up the shutter mechanism. the four pictures below were taken after i had inserted one of the lenses from one of the broken trashcams. i flipped, (lightly glued) and placed the other lens in the bratz cam. the lens was very similar in both size and shape to the lens that came with the bratz but this one had a little bit more plastic around the outside of the lens, making it easier to glue and hold in place. i was bummed when i scanned in the negatives--hanging there to dry, the negatives looked pretty promising. otherwise put, it appeared as though something would actually be in focus. no bueno.

































































on the second modification. i am, if nothing else, persistently hopeful. plus, i knew that i had at least two more lenses left to experiment with. and if all else failed, i could just use the camera as it was intended to be used--with the original non-flipped lens. for the next modification, i decided to insert and again lightly glue in place the lens from a suprema sunshine trashcam. compared with the original bratz lens and the lens used in the first modification, this lens was much larger and much flatter. i'm pretty sure i flipped it before putting it in place, but the lens was flat enough that it was kind of hard to tell.

once again, no point of focus but after viewing the negatives, i hadn't expected as much. but in this case, the images really grew on me. but maybe it had more to do with my actually working up the courage enough to drive myself somewhere (in this case, ellicott city) so that i could take pictures of things that were not in my house, backyard or on campus. . .

mod woes

After my last post, I decided to do a flickr check to see if other shared my love of (or sense about) the kind of pics that result from the Vistaquest VQ 350. I didn’t find that but I found this cool mod for another Vistaquest. I’m thinking, mine has 5 screws too, so this might work. No go. My lens wasn’t moving clockwise, anticlock-wise or other. Strike one.

I thought then that I might flip the lens on my Kodak Brownie Bull’s-Eye. Took that puppy apart and no go. Kodak wasn’t playing at this point. Not only does this one guard against double exposures (as well as using 120 spools in either the take-up or supply side--argh!), but it also prevents lens flipping without gluing stuff where it shouldn't be glued. No problem, the camera is at least cleaner now. But I did manage to set it up with a roll of 35mm. We’ll see how this test roll goes.

New threads for the Ikoflex

Sweet. . . not that I should be giving wardrobe/fashion advice to anyone or anything these days but I was in the process of researching helio lenses when I ran across a discussion about re-covering a Kiev 4. That discussion led me to this page where I learned that for the not-highly-unreasonable price of 26 bucks (plus shipping) I could get my Ikoflex a new suit. I could, of course, live with it in its current condition (most of it is fine, save for covering on the one knob and a portion of the top and side where the original covering is starting to pull away), but I think it would be much happier if it could wear seal grain red imitation leather. I, on the other hand, would be happiest if it could wear (as all things should) leopard grain imitation leather but they don’t seem to offer that option. The question at this point is whether I’m handy, patient, or simply coordinated enough to remove the old covering and all the gunk beneath it. My fear is that I'll get a third of the way done and want to quit.

cleanings and a Foldex-20 mod

The two new Brownie Hawkeye Flashes and the Trailblazer 120 (see below) arrived yesterday. Actually, they arrived just as I was starting to take apart the Foldex-20. I was disappointed with the test roll I shot with the Foldex—then again, when I purchased this one, it was mainly with the thought of using it as a respooling mechanism. That, however, didn’t work out that well. I decided to see what difference it would make to unscrew the front piece and clean the lens. While I was at it, I decided to do a variation on the brownie and holga mods I had read about (or viewed and listened to) online and try to run a roll of 35mm through the camera. I wasn’t sure how far to advance the film, so with this test roll, I did three turns of the film advance knob. I ended up getting 7 shots on a 24 exposure roll of 35mm. Hmm. If these photos even turn out, if this mod is even worth attempting again, I can see if I can get by with fewer turns on the advance knob so I can get more shots per roll. My other option would be to convert the Foldex-20 into a pinhole camera. Sounds like this mod is pretty easy.

As for the Brownies: Compared with the condition my first Brownie was in when it arrived, these new Brownies look like they were made yesterday. (The Trailblazer 120 is another story.) The Brownies didn’t need nearly as much cleaning as the first one did but I wanted to see if I could clean up the plastic viewing mechanisms and the viewing mirror so that I could get better ttv (through the viewfinder) shots. Getting the right screw on the top of the plate to come out proved to be a real feat. With patience and much persistence, I eventually managed to get the front piece off one of the new Brownies as well as my old one, but the other new Brownie—well, I decided to leave that one for another day. Odd since the screws don’t appear to be rusty. But the top right-side one, wowsa. Hard—almost impossible—to get out.

Aside from being much cleaner (and so newer looking) than my first Brownie, these Brownies don’t have brackets on the plastic viewfinder piece on the top of the camera. No biggy, just a small difference I noted. I decided not to flip the lenses on either of these (I've still got the lens flipped in the first one I bought) until I run test rolls in them. I’m eager to see if these will accept 35mm film and to see if I can use a trimmed 120 spool in both the supply and take-up sides of the camera as I’ve (most miraculously) been able to do with the first brownie. Anything to avoid losing my 620 spools, respooling by hand and/or attempting again to use the Foldex to respool!

As for the Trailblazer 120. Sigh. I have to say, when I decided to purchase these items, I saw the Trailblazer as a bonus extra--kinda like getting a toy in a cereal box. I’ve only been able to find a few references to this camera online or on flickr and from what little I’ve read, it’s not a stellar performer. But that’s fine. The whole lot was only 8-9 bucks and that covered the two brownies, one flash attachment, a couple of flash bulbs, the box that one of the cameras and the flash attachment and bulbs originally came in and the trailblazer. The seller had it marked as a Kodak Trailblazer but that’s not correct. Kodak didn’t, in fact, make the Trailblazer 120.

So I tried cleaning the exterior but got nowhere fast. The front and back pieces are metal and they were a bit easier to clean, the front especially. I cleaned up the lens and ran a test roll through. Like the Foldex-20, the Trailblazer only takes 8 shots on a roll of 120. What’s worse, like the Foldex, it’s hard to tell (by sound alone) if the shutter worked correctly. And since I’ve taken myself off bulb-time settings, well, I had to trust that it worked with the regular setting. I don’t have the greatest hope for these shots. Actually, I don’t really have any hope that they turned out. Besides the shutter issues, it’s hard to keep the camera steady while pushing in the button for the shutter—this is also the case with the Foldex but the Foldex has a tripod mount which helps a bit. So I’m guessing that if the Trailblazer’s shutter worked, the pics will all be blurry. Ah well. Again, I saw this camera as a bonus extra—probably not one I will use that often or maybe even again. Bummer to only get 8 shots per roll. That said, I would be open to seeing if I can run a roll of 35mm through the Trailblazer since making mistakes with a roll of 35mm is cheaper (in terms of film and developing costs) than making mistakes with a roll of 120. I want to wait, however, before attempting this to see how much extra space was left between shots on the Foldex.