Compendium Hood System and Mounting for Deardorff V8 8x10

Trying to set up or build a system to mount a compendium hood onto the front of a Deardorff V8 8x10 field view camera, without damaging the camera.

I have two different compendium hoods available to use:
1. A Linhof compendium from my Technika V which I am very familiar with and know how it is mounted and used on the Linhof.
2. A Toyo View compendium hood that I picked up cheaply on the weekend at a camera show. I do not know if it mounts directly onto the front standard and lifts up out of the way to set the lens, or whether it is mounted onto some strut system for use with longer lenses.

My current lenses range is lengths from a 159mm EWA and a 210mm G-Claron, through to a 600mm Apo-Ronar CL with various focal lengths in between.

What solutions have you used or could suggest?

Thanks,

Len

Can't do it. It's not a modular camera,
and a compendium isn't
necessary.

A single shade, even adjustable, doesn't cut it for
a 159 and a 600. A shade that COULD work would be as big as the camera.
Use a darkslide to shade the Wolly.

There is a post somewhere here
that talks about adapting barn doors from a little fresnel light.
That's a great idea, and your best bet.

The Toyo shade mounts to the top of the front standard. Or, at least that is how the mono rail version works. I think Toyo makes two adjustable shades, one for the monorail system and one for the field camera system. Looking at a V8, I doubt the Toyo can be simply adapted. Take a look at the Lee lenshood, it is (I think) a compendium hood that attaches to different lenses by the lens threads, somewhat like a Cokin ring system.

df cardwell said:

Can't do it. It's not a modular camera, and a compendium isn't necessary.

A single shade, even adjustable, doesn't cut it for a 159 and a 600. A shade that COULD work would be as big as the camera. Use a darkslide to shade the Wolly........

Click to expand...

I don’t want to be argumentative, but I don’t understand that statement.

A properly designed lens shade that shades the lens on all sides will always out perform a dark slide that only shades on one side. I base this statement on actual tests I have made on an 8x10 and 7x17.

After reading the design mechanics of lens shade design from a thread on APUG, I constructed a custom lens shade, very similar to the Arca (and Linhof and Toyo) compendium, for my Canham 7x17. I attached it to the Canham front standard using the embedded nut that Canham designs in their front standard. Another mounting option is with a filter ring or the Cokin system, like Tomf2468 mentions.

I constructed a custom lens shade

The Deardorff won't function like a Deardorff if you hang a compendium anywhere on the camera,
you'll effectively turn it into a 2D.

I hope you'll be able to solve the problem. A few photographers more inventive than myself have considered the matter over the past many decades.

A wide brimmed hat works just fine If you have series filter adapters you could put hoods on your old lenses and use off the shelf hoods for your newer lenses. Another alternative would be a bit of that heavy black foil pros use in studios to control lighting to shape a cone shade for your lens, but...a wide brimmed hat is a whole lot quicker and simpler to use IMHO. My current sombrero is an Oregon Hat Company "Gus" but I think a palm fiber hat would be more flexible and probably take more abuse.

I have found it was worth the expence to go with the Lee system for my V-8.

resummerfield said:

I don’t want to be argumentative, but I don’t understand that statement.

A properly designed lens shade that shades the lens on all sides will always out perform a dark slide that only shades on one side. I base this statement on actual tests I have made on an 8x10 and 7x17.

After reading the design mechanics of lens shade design from a thread on APUG, I constructed a custom lens shade, very similar to the Arca (and Linhof and Toyo) compendium, for my Canham 7x17. I attached it to the Canham front standard using the embedded nut that Canham designs in their front standard. Another mounting option is with a filter ring or the Cokin system, like Tomf2468 mentions.

Click to expand...

The Canham Compendium is designed for that embedded nut you mention... http://www.canhamcameras.com/accessoryf.html . it works fine on my Canham 12x20/7x17 with most lenses, but is too small for some of the larger diameter lenses (such as either of the XXL fine Art, or at least two of four of De Golden Busch Lenses- 482 & 610, or the Rodenstock 300W). Like the Arca compendium, it can adjusted to fit the lens (longer for long focal length lenses, etc), as well as somewhat for swings and tilts.

As always, you are advised to view the coverage of the lens either through the back corners or !! by looking through the lens and checking for corners at the groundglass(my favorite means - much easier in low light, but you have to be tall ;-). In either case, if the compendium is in part of your optical path, it will be obvious. If so, readjust to prevent vignetting.

The purpose of the compendium is to keep stray light sources from hitting the lens....

And a Compendium (or whatever you'd like to use) is particularly needed AFTER the sun has set but before nightfall. (or at dawn before sunrise!) when the ENTIRE SKY becomes your lightsource....like a giant light box. Having stray light enter the lens from areas outside the image can make make a difference in resulting contrast. ....for those of you that like to do "John Sexton Quiet Light Photography".

Its also similarly critical for dark interior images when there are expansive windows in the structure (like a roundhouse for engines).

df cardwell said:

I constructed a custom lens shade

The Deardorff won't function like a Deardorff if you hang a compendium anywhere on the camera,
you'll effectively turn it into a 2D.

I hope you'll be able to solve the problem. A few photographers more inventive than myself have considered the matter over the past many decades.

Click to expand...

Must be a problem inherent to Deardorfs...

I have no such issues with Compendiums on either Canham 12x20/7x17 or on Arca 5x7/8x10 with lenses from 155 to 1200. I use extensive swings, tilts, shifts on my cameras (when you use ULF you have almost no depth of field...)

I can't picture your problem with a compendium and Deardorf that causes it to be 3D. Can you please elaborate so we understand fully?
Thanks (no argument here, just trying to understand your situation)

Don12x20 said:

Must be a problem inherent to Deardorfs...

I have no such issues with Compendiums on either Canham 12x20/7x17 or on Arca 5x7/8x10 with lenses from 155 to 1200. I use extensive swings, tilts, shifts on my cameras (when you use ULF you have almost no depth of field...)

I can't picture your problem with a compendium and Deardorf that causes it to be 3D. Can you please elaborate so we understand fully?
Thanks (no argument here, just trying to understand your situation)

Click to expand...

Much as I hate to speak for other people, I am a Deardorff user and realize that front rise/fall in a 'dorff is mostly accomplished by a unique sliding mechanism whereby the front half of the front standard, containing the lensboard, slides up and down on the rear half of the front standard. Some additional rise/fall can be accomplished at the sides of the front standard, as well. Putting any hardware onto the lensboard holder would interfere with the sliding function and limit front rise/fall to the more limited side screws. The D2 accomplishes all its rise and fall with slots in the sides of the front standard braces.
DF, did I describe this correctly?

Deckled Edge said:

Much as I hate to speak for other people, I am a Deardorff user and realize that front rise/fall in a 'dorff is mostly accomplished by a unique sliding mechanism whereby the front half of the front standard, containing the lensboard, slides up and down on the rear half of the front standard. Some additional rise/fall can be accomplished at the sides of the front standard, as well. Putting any hardware onto the lensboard holder would interfere with the sliding function and limit front rise/fall to the more limited side screws. The D2 accomplishes all its rise and fall with slots in the sides of the front standard braces.
DF, did I describe this correctly?

Click to expand...

Thanks for clearing this up. Makes perfect sense now why Deardorffs would have some difficulty with Compendium shades
Best regards
Don

Thanks for your thoughts.

I was deliberately vague on describing all potential requirements so I might get as many ideas as possible. I have looked at the situation and some of the alternate solutions.

Like DF, I too sometimes use a dark slide as there is usually one handy when making an exposure with the Deardorff. And until I come up with an alternate solution, will likely be one I continue to use.

Being Canadian, I probably should use my Tilley hat, except that might increase the amount of stray light bouncing around. Unless I stand well behind the camera or put the dark cloth on top of my head rather than over the shoulders during exposure.

The dilemma with both those above solutions of course is to ensure that your efforts don’t result in ineffective shading of the lens and the resultant impact to the image or that the object shading the lens becoming part of the image. A fixed flag or compendium hood where one could observe that prior to the exposure would help to eliminate that risk.

With regards to the Lee / Ambico / Lindhal hoods, the situation I am trying to avoid by mounting a compendium hood to the camera is the issue of requiring a number of adapter rings for the various lenses I have and sometimes borrow (e.g. currently my brother has lent me his 250 Imagon). Also the process lenses are not always standard size, a particular issue with the 600mm Apo-Ronar CL (not a 86mm thread, but around 85mm) and would require an adaptor to be made or some other solution (e.g. tape a 86mm filter onto the front of it?).

I consider the Deardorff and the Linhof Technika similar in basic concept, just separated by their construction, materials, design details, country of origin, etc. I guess similar to the Canham, the Technika was designed to take accessories mounted onto the front standard. The Deardorff unfortunately did not have that in their original design and the nature and details of its construction seems to make it difficult to fit something without a significant modification to the camera. As Deckeled Edge mention, the front rise that is separate from the rise and tilt makes it more complex. And with long barrel lenses, I sometimes use that rise to re-compose the picture after tilting.

I still have an idea or two to try, just a matter if my fabrication skills match my design skills.

Any additional ideas would be appreciated.

Again thanks for all your help,

Len