Cirkut list. (another one???)

[jamie young]

You would have to try it. I don't know. I think it would be hard to get enough exposure as the lenses are slow and fast fim might require a special order.
You'd want 400 iso film and then need to push it. The camera mechanisms tend to be cheap, and you would need one thats working very smoothly to take a bigger homemade fan. I have a whole bunch of the cameras and the smoothness of the swing is pretty variable. I have to admit that a lot of mine were "bargains, and in fairly bad shape. I've been having fun rebuilding them. Must be an ocd kind of thing. I still need to figure out out to tune up the clockwork better. I think it's going to be a challgenge to do night photography, but maybe other people on the forum have some ideas.
A person in the Chicago area has been shooting with homemade swing lense cameras for a long time, and might have some solutions to this. His name is Tom Yanul, and his web site can probably be found by a web search.
Jamie

 

[aaprlore]

Cirkut list. (another one???)

1.) I just got a Cirkut #8 two weeks ago. It was owned by a doctor in MI - probably as a collector's item. Looks like it was offered back in July and again on eBay last month. I was one of 26 bidding, and given the price a #6 went for just a few weeks prior, was surprised to get it.

2.) Nope - no services offered.

3.) I'm NOT a collector, and hope to be a user? The Cirkut needs work just to be able to take a picture - and I have to find film. It is also missing the original film holders (and four gears), so I can't make non pano images either.

4.) I have a website devoted to the history of Los Angeles (my home town) using the detective fiction author Raymond Chandler as a hook. I have one scanned vintage Cirkut image of downtown LA from 1924 posted online. I have a second vintage Cirkut image from 1916 of the Mack Sennett Studio in Edendale that I "collected" but don't have online yet. I have a couple of stitched pans taken with my Canon 30D online. One was taken from atop Mt. Lowe about three years ago. The once yearly Mt. Lowe car caravan is coming up on Saturday 12/6/08 and I'll be making a HD video with a camcorder mounted in the car of the ride up & down the trolly trackbed, and take more panos with the Canon of the LA basin. Hopefully next year I can do it with the Cirkut.

Dead Link Removed

5.) The Cirkut has an original T & R lens with a sticky Betax shutter. There are some marks on the front lens element and possibly some edge separation as well. The bellows exterior looks good but there are a couple of bad folds and light leaks. The eye piece on the side of the lens bracket has a cracked element and the ground glass is scratched. The lens board jams when trying to raise it. The tripod is OK, and the geared top seems to rotate OK. The motor winds and runs. Lots of fun work ahead! Haven't decided yet whether to fully restore or just to get it in working condition and leave it at that.

 

[DougGrosjean]

I'll bite.

1. I have just one Cirkut. It's a 1919 #10, formerly owned by Kenneth Snelson from the 1940s to when I bought it, in July 2008, from Snelson.



2. No, no services.



3. Cirkuts, only since my purchase in July 2008. But started shooting pans in 2006 with a 35mm Widelux, then 2007 bought a Kodak Panoram. As a result of those practice cameras, plus my background in mechanical design / drafting, many of the concepts of shooting with a Cirkut have come easy to me.

I'm a user. I didn't buy it to have it sit on a shelf. My second group photo with it was 1,000 people; and the experience was such that I can't wait to do something similar again. It's not just the camera - the planning, composing, directing; that go into such a shot.... all of that is huge fun for me. I wish I could figure out a way to work steadily with it, but since I've only had it for 4 months, and didn't expect to produce anything salable for 6-12 months, I don't have a biz plan in place, or a studio. For now, my Cirkut shooting is partly OJT. But I also am following up leads on shooting local groups, reunions, etc.



4. I personally don't have any Cirkut pics online. But my most recent Cirkut photo (second Cirkut group photo, 25th anniversary of a motorcycle apparel company, about my 10th Cirkut photo ever) is online. It was turned into a poster, and is available here (I love the ad copy on it):

http://www.aerostich.com/product.php?productid=20803

Here's a pic to give you a rough idea of the outcome of that group shot:

http://www.boringrally.com/files/vbr/panoramic/660_1hb_fadeBW.jpg



5. Misc. other.....

My #10 was in good mechanical shape when I bought it, so it hasn't needed anything. Lens has separation, so images are a litle soft, but it's fine for where I'm at on the learning curve, for now. A sharp lens, and gears to run it properly, are on my wish list. In due time, in due time...

I can reliably produce a decent b/w negative with my Cirkut. I've got a roll of photo paper, but haven't had time to make a contact printing frame for it. I figure just a flat bit of material, about 5' long, with ledge on it to line the paper, neg, and glass up on... should do it.

So far I've been scanning my negs and stitching them in PS, in order to print them.

Snelson's last words to me were that I'd have a lot of fun with the Cirkut, that it would make me re-think everything that I think I know about photography. That's been the most accurate forecast I've heard. But I enjoy learning, so I'm enjoying the process.

 

[jamie young]

For printing one can just use a cheap solid core panel or door and glue black felt to it. A piece of 1/4" glass to flatten the neg against the paper, and you're good to go. A light bulb is all you need for exposure

 

[aaprlore]

Sorry about posting the wrong URL - I bought a lot of domains for Raymond Chandler, but not .com. Use http://raymondchandler.info (or .biz, .tv, .org, .us). Thanks.

 

[frobozz]

Might as well wake this thread up from its slumber...

1. After a long path of selling other stuff (hobbies are all zero-sum you know!) and hunting down sources for Cirkut #10s, I am about to be the proud owner of a seemingly complete 1926-1929 edition camera. I've been accumulating film here and there for the last few years, so it's about time I got the camera to use it with.

2. I can offer the service of scanning old Cirkut photos! I have a really big feed-through scanner and it does a passable job once I get them flat - all the old ones I buy seem to be rolled up. Some examples:

3. My time possessing a Cirkut camera starts in a few days... but I've played with a friend's Widelux, and have been doing photography as a serious hobby for about 40 years. I plan to use this thing!

4. I'll be collecting info and photos (mine, and old ones) at the above website.

5. I still don't have my darkroom built - too many other pressing home rebuilding needs - so I may not get much or any use out of this right away, but I still wanted to grab one while I could. I do B&W film development in a half-bath, maybe I can figure out a way to do Cirkut neg development there too. I can probably do some early tests with 35mm or 220 film, which would allow me to develop them and see what the camera's level of functionality is, at least.

Jamie Young - your personal info says Syracuse, NY, but I believe I've seen you refer to Madison, WI. Are you living in Madison or Syracuse at this point? If it's Madison, then that's at least close-ish to where I am, north of Chicago and I think that would be good to have another Cirkut owner nearby.

I'll add pics of the beast once I receive it.

Duncan

 

[Mark Crabtree]

Duncan, it is great you are finally getting a Cirkut. I'd love to see some renewed interest in them here, but understand it is a bit over the top even for most ultra large format guys. Cirkut Cameras were still in use when I started with them in the early 80's, but very uncommon even then.

I don't have any commercial services to offer, but am happy to help with information. I do also probably have film, gears, parts, and a camera available.

This doesn't seem like the right thread for it, but I developed negatives and made proof prints in hotel, motel, school, and dormatory bathrooms for years, so should probably start a new thread with details of how to do that. I suppose a half bath doesn't have a shower or tub (but then how can you take your half a bath), which would make it pretty challenging.

 

[jimgalli]

Duncan, welcome and nice to see the thread awakened from slumber.

Here's a shot I did with the venerable #10 last March at the high school.

Developing is where I draw the line. I sucked at the bathtub gin route and had an 8' long stainless tray built to get at least even development. You can see I still managed to booger the picture in camera. Hey it's 2014 and no one expects perfect Cirkut pictures anymore. The High School was thrilled and displays this picture proudly. Even the kids were enthused at the ancient technology. The guy on the far left did a 'pizza run' to get in the image twice and almost didn't make it in time. Everyone was smiling watching him do it.

BTW I set up the shot with a piece of rope tied to a spray paint can that painted a line in a perfect arc from the camera.

I scanned this on an Epson V700 and stitched it back together.

 

[frobozz]

Duncan, it is great you are finally getting a Cirkut. I'd love to see some renewed interest in them here, but understand it is a bit over the top even for most ultra large format guys. Cirkut Cameras were still in use when I started with them in the early 80's, but very uncommon even then.

I don't have any commercial services to offer, but am happy to help with information. I do also probably have film, gears, parts, and a camera available.

This doesn't seem like the right thread for it, but I developed negatives and made proof prints in hotel, motel, school, and dormatory bathrooms for years, so should probably start a new thread with details of how to do that. I suppose a half bath doesn't have a shower or tub (but then how can you take your half a bath), which would make it pretty challenging.

Well, at least until we rebuild this half bath, it has a wide/deep stainless steel surgical sink, so "bathtub gin" developing is not completely out of the question. But I'm going to start with narrower film which is less painful to sacrifice while sorting out the camera via testing, and that I can definitely do.

In the long run, I have an ATL-3 and some cockmamie ideas about how to use that in developing (thanks to Mark for verifying that's not such a crazy idea!) but that's sitting idle until I at least get the plumbing done for the darkroom.

Duncan

 

[frobozz]

Duncan, welcome and nice to see the thread awakened from slumber.

Here's a shot I did with the venerable #10 last March at the high school.

Developing is where I draw the line. I sucked at the bathtub gin route and had an 8' long stainless tray built to get at least even development. You can see I still managed to booger the picture in camera. Hey it's 2014 and no one expects perfect Cirkut pictures anymore. The High School was thrilled and displays this picture proudly. Even the kids were enthused at the ancient technology. The guy on the far left did a 'pizza run' to get in the image twice and almost didn't make it in time. Everyone was smiling watching him do it.

BTW I set up the shot with a piece of rope tied to a spray paint can that painted a line in a perfect arc from the camera.

I scanned this on an Epson V700 and stitched it back together.

Nice picture! The defects kind of add that antique-wet-plate-developed-in-the-back-of-a-horse-drawn-carriage look to it. Heck, you'd probably have to pay $100 for a Photoshop filter to give you that effect...

If I may go briefly off-topic into hybrid-land... is that a print or negative scan with the V700? I also have a V700, but my giant scanner can only do opaque stuff. Currently. My inner MacGyver has pondered how to turn it into a giant transparency scanner. I'll probably get a darkroom set up long before I ever get around to that, though, and then I can just make contact prints which are easier to scan.

Duncan

 

[jimgalli]

Nice picture! The defects kind of add that antique-wet-plate-developed-in-the-back-of-a-horse-drawn-carriage look to it. Heck, you'd probably have to pay $100 for a Photoshop filter to give you that effect...

If I may go briefly off-topic into hybrid-land... is that a print or negative scan with the V700? I also have a V700, but my giant scanner can only do opaque stuff. Currently. My inner MacGyver has pondered how to turn it into a giant transparency scanner. I'll probably get a darkroom set up long before I ever get around to that, though, and then I can just make contact prints which are easier to scan.

Duncan

It's a neg scan and the print is digital on an Epson 4800

Sorry to scandalize the purists.

 

[jamie young]

Hi Duncan I'm no longer in Madison. I'm in Syracuse now, but still shooting my cirkuts. Happy to answer questions if you have them. Email and phone are on my web site jamieyoungphoto.com
I still expect and get a clean band free negative most of the time. I love shooting with them. absolutely my favorite camera to use. Glad you found one to use. At them moment I've also been fixing and shooting with al vista swing lens cameras. I just went out with a 5x16" al vista 5D and a 4x12" al vista 4B. First time shooting with both
jamie

 

[frobozz]

Hi Duncan I'm no longer in Madison. I'm in Syracuse now, but still shooting my cirkuts. Happy to answer questions if you have them. Email and phone are on my web site jamieyoungphoto.com
I still expect and get a clean band free negative most of the time. I love shooting with them. absolutely my favorite camera to use. Glad you found one to use. At them moment I've also been fixing and shooting with al vista swing lens cameras. I just went out with a 5x16" al vista 5D and a 4x12" al vista 4B. First time shooting with both
jamie

Well, I do sometimes drive over to visit my brother near Buffalo, so I get in that neck of the woods occasionally. Last time I was there we were shooting high speed 16mm of his giant air cannon destroying things. He's weird.

I'm sure I'll have more questions as I start testing this thing. UPS says it arrives tomorrow, I can't wait!

Duncan

 

[frobozz]

OK, I have it in hand and here are the initial detailed photos. (My brother and I both collect weird stuff, and call these detailed examinations of our prizes "Phorensic Photos" hee hee)

http://cirkutcamera.com/cirkut_10/mycamera.html

As you can see from the final picture it suffered a tiny bit of damage in transit. The seller packed it amazingly well, no fault of his, just one of those things that UPS does. It looks to me like maybe that wood had been cracked and reglued at the top end long long ago, but the impacts of shipping split it completely off. I can easily reglue it but I can't quite see how I could tighten the screws after doing so. Either I have to take apart the post for the tilt adjustment clamp (which looks to be swaged on through the slot) or I have to be able to swing the board around 180 degrees to get it out of the way of the screws, which isn't happening as long as the bellows is still attached. Anyone here have experience disassembling one of these and can tell me some trick I'm missing? I could just glue it with the screws pressed in as tight as I can get them, which would make it pretty darn tight, but not perfect.

Duncan

 

[frobozz]

Oh yes, one oddity: the 24" lens scale is printed with "31" as the gear for 25 feet, but then it's been carefully stamped on top of that with "30"...and indeed, 30 is the gear supplied. Did someone at Folmer Graflex figure out that 30 was a better choice for all of these? Did they actually test each camera and figure out that 30 was a better choice for this particular lens? It certainly looks like a factory modification to the plate; your average photographer would probably scratch the new number on with a nail, or write on a piece of tape put over it.

Also, what are the two slots in the gear carrying case? The key was in one but certainly doesn't look like it fits there. And even if it did, did they originally supply two keys or something?

Duncan

 

[jimgalli]

The bellows attachment at the front may be very simple. 4 or 6 or 8 screws inside the bellows right at the front. Check that out. As far as the 30 overstamp . . . curious indeed. I would trust it but as to why, we may never know. I don't think my '10' is stamped that way. I'll guess that it was a situation where it was a borderline and the folks who build these things discovered that most end users were doing groups of 15 and moved in closer than the 25 feet?

Another imperfect picture. 24" long was all that was needed. They wanted to duplicate their 1924 picture, also a cirkut picture but done somewhere else. To get this picture I had to build a platform on top of a 'ladder rack' on a pickup truck and work about 8 feet in the air, in high wind on a 4 foot by 8 foot surface. You get what you get. Still I should investigate the light leak. It was too windy for a "morley baer wrap"

 

[frobozz]

I like the bizarro motion blur on the flags!

I really like Cirkut pictures in front of buildings, which should be a no-no (hard to get the building to stand in a semi-circle!) but which are endearing to me for some odd reason. I really scratch my head at old Cirkut photographs where they line a whole bunch of people up straight in front of a building, so the line of people is just as distorted as the architecture!

Duncan

 

[Mark Crabtree]

Oh yes, one oddity: the 24" lens scale is printed with "31" as the gear for 25 feet, but then it's been carefully stamped on top of that with "30"...and indeed, 30 is the gear supplied. Did someone at Folmer Graflex figure out that 30 was a better choice for all of these? Did they actually test each camera and figure out that 30 was a better choice for this particular lens? It certainly looks like a factory modification to the plate; your average photographer would probably scratch the new number on with a nail, or write on a piece of tape put over it.

Also, what are the two slots in the gear carrying case? The key was in one but certainly doesn't look like it fits there. And even if it did, did they originally supply two keys or something?

Duncan

Duncan, The camera looks very good; much better than I expected from my quick glance at the auction photo. I think all the wear on the leather covering made it look much worse than it is. The bellows looks good. Repair of the front shouldn't be hard. Take the top metal piece off the front standard, then take the whole sliding assembly up and out through the top. Then I think you'll be able to get at the screws.

30 would be the normal gear choice there, so I think the 31 was just an error. But the impression I have is that, yes, they did shoot a film test with them. Your lens looks unusually good also.

I may have missed a mention, but did you notice the extra rod in the back near the film supply area? I take it that is completely separate from the film adjustment at the bottom, but can you still get the the adjustment tab to move the bottom film holder up? I seem to recall a rod holding the adjuster on some early ones, but this just looks like an added brace or something. I first thought it was a roller for the film, but it looks in the picture to sit too far back for the film to ride on it. Any reason for it show up in looking at the back? Bracing a repair or anything? Or maybe the film really would roll on it.

 

[frobozz]

Duncan, The camera looks very good; much better than I expected from my quick glance at the auction photo. I think all the wear on the leather covering made it look much worse than it is. The bellows looks good. Repair of the front shouldn't be hard. Take the top metal piece off the front standard, then take the whole sliding assembly up and out through the top. Then I think you'll be able to get at the screws.

It's mostly just paint loss on the camera leather; the tripod/gear carrying case is in a little more dire condition. I'll take a closer look at the pieces involved in the front tonight and see what I can figure out. There are also all kinds of issues with the "hidden buttons" and patches have been put over some of them. Do they just fall out if the leather covering wears away? One has been replaced with a big screw that doesn't quite actuate things the way it should. And the release for the Cirkut attachment is missing something. Looks like maybe there's supposed to be a knob or something that you push to slide the latch back? The innards of the latch are there, but nothing protrudes beyond the slot in the metal plate on the outside. Like maybe a knob broke or fell off.

The front bellows is pretty darn supple, and may well be light tight. The rear bellows is definitely the original, and quite dry and creaky when I stretch it, but also seems to have no leaks, though it wouldn't really matter if it had pinholes, I guess. Is the rear bellows also supposed to be leather? It almost feels more like paper.

30 would be the normal gear choice there, so I think the 31 was just an error. But the impression I have is that, yes, they did shoot a film test with them. Your lens looks unusually good also.

If 31 was an error, it was an error made when setting up the silkscreen or whatever for printing the plates!

It was the clear pictures of the lens that he added to the auction that finally convinced me to pull the trigger - it's very nice! The serial numbers on the front and back cells match. Heck, the shutter even seems to work, though that doesn't really matter for Cirkut use.

I may have missed a mention, but did you notice the extra rod in the back near the film supply area? I take it that is completely separate from the film adjustment at the bottom, but can you still get the the adjustment tab to move the bottom film holder up? I seem to recall a rod holding the adjuster on some early ones, but this just looks like an added brace or something. I first thought it was a roller for the film, but it looks in the picture to sit too far back for the film to ride on it. Any reason for it show up in looking at the back? Bracing a repair or anything? Or maybe the film really would roll on it.

I've never held a Cirkut in my hands before, and none of the pictures I've seen show details like that, so I had no idea it wasn't supposed to be there. It definitely rolls. It's a tiny bit surface-rusty, which concerned me, but then I decided that the film went under it, which might mean it would do less damage to film rolling on it, but I'd still clean it up. But you're saying maybe just remove it?

The film adjustment works fine, but something is broken there too. The instructions talk about pushing a lever, but there is no lever. Maybe it broke off? If I reach under there and move the remaining parts in the obvious direction (the one that pivots it so the spring holding it in place gets stretched out) then the adjustment moves up and down just fine. So the rod doesn't seem to impede that.

Duncan

 

[Mark Crabtree]

Yes the weird bellows is a simpler material since it really only blocks out ambient light for focusing. The tripod cases are usually pretty bad from not being up to the load on them as they are opened. Yours actually looks to be the heavier type, which is considerably better in that regard. The hidden buttons can fall out and get lost if the leather is gone, as seems to have happened with one of yours. The ones on the back could also cause light leaks.

It is not clear from your description what, if anything, is missing on your film holder adjustment. The lever is like a tab that fits in a slot to hold it in position. That piece is sprung. Nothing much else there. At least that is what I'm used to, yours is mostly hidden by the rod in the photo. I certainly wouldn't run the film under that rod, but wouldn't remove it either until I figured out why it is there. Would film actually run on it like a roller? I don't see that being an issue either way.

Gears for the long lens cell generally skip a tooth going down to 25 feet. The extra one I have for sale skips two teeth on the original scale. I've not seen one that didn't, but there may have been, and they may have had scales printed for that. I would assume the 30 is correct, but don't find these scales very useful. I make scales for mine that show the exact (as best I can calculate) focus point for the gear. Rounding that to predetermined distances doesn't accomplish anything to me. Still they probably will work fine as is.

I don't see a picture of the camera back latch, but from the view there is it does look like the knob is missing. I don't see the tongue, but you said it is in there; maybe the spring that pushes the tongue out if missing. You actually don't really need that latch, so it would be low on my list of concerns. It might be better to consolidate some of this into a different thread, but I'm happy to replay here if that is what works best. Maybe a thread on sorting out your #10. The turntable would be my first area of interest/concern. Check the surface pitting, there's bound to be some, and the rollers for flat spots. You can just pull the pin to take the two pieces apart. I leave the pin out and transport mine in a way less likely to cause that damage.

 

[jamie young]

Jim Galli - the flags in your shot do look cool. Duncan- If you do come east let me know. We can go out shooting if you want or just get coffee. Your camera looks to be in very restorable condition. Glued joints are very strong so you should be good once you get the standard glued back together. I have a #16 that was shipped ups with almost no packing and needed a bunch of repairs before I could shoot with it. My #10 is a 1914 fan model and is fairly different from a #10 governor model so I'm not that familiar with your mechanism. Where have you found film?

 

[frobozz]

Jim Galli - the flags in your shot do look cool. Duncan- If you do come east let me know. We can go out shooting if you want or just get coffee. Your camera looks to be in very restorable condition. Glued joints are very strong so you should be good once you get the standard glued back together. I have a #16 that was shipped ups with almost no packing and needed a bunch of repairs before I could shoot with it. My #10 is a 1914 fan model and is fairly different from a #10 governor model so I'm not that familiar with your mechanism. Where have you found film?

I would definitely like to see a #16 in person sometime! I can't even imagine.

I've been gathering film for a bunch of years, in the hopes that I'd someday get the camera. My guess was that film was going to get harder to find (so I better get it while I can) while cameras were going to get easier (as the film ran out) and that seems to have paid off. I have some real Cirkut film and a bunch of aerial film.

Duncan