What's a Tit For?

thuggins · Jul 12, 2020

Some of the lens standards for the Baby Graflex have a tit stamped onto them, next to the lens mounting hole. Not all lens standards have this feature and it doesn't seem to serve any purpose. It actually limits the utility of the standard by interfering with the mounting of some lenses.

summicron1 · Jul 12, 2020

i think it was originally intended as a way to make sure lenses were mounted in the proper direction so the shutter release is in the right place out front. But, yeah, for other lenses it just gets in the way.

Not sure what to do about it. Whack it with a hammer?

thuggins · Jul 12, 2020

Forcing a certain orientation when mounting the lens would be a good theory... except the tit protrudes to the back, not the front. It only restricts the mounting diameter, not the lens orientation.

And, yes, I am contemplating the hammer whacking.

Dan Fromm · Jul 12, 2020

It is harmless, don't hit the board with a hammer. It is intended to accept a locating screw. Many shutters were delivered with a locating screw sticking out of the back. The screw goes into the recess or into a slot cut in the board, prevents the shutter from rotating on the board.

OP, tell us more about how that dimple interferes with mounting some lenses. It is on the back of the board, the shutter goes in front of the board.

voceumana · Jul 12, 2020

Have it machined off, so the resulting surface is smooth. Hitting with a hammer isn't likely to give you a smooth mounting surface. Or drill it out and fill with black epoxy.

BAC1967 · Jul 12, 2020

From what I understand a tit is for tat.

Dan Fromm · Jul 12, 2020

voceumana said:
Have it machined off, so the resulting surface is smooth. Hitting with a hammer isn't likely to give you a smooth mounting surface. Or drill it out and fill with black epoxy.

What you suggest is unnecessary. You may have been composing your post when mine (# 4 above) went up.

I can't for the life of me understand why the OP thinks that the dimple gets in the way. If the shutter is mounted properly on the board, that is. I have to wonder whether the OP has mounted the board on a Pacemaker Graphic. I have Pacemaker Graphics, have Pacemaker Graphic lens boards with and without the dimple. They all mount properly on my cameras and I've never had a problem with them.

thuggins · Jul 12, 2020

It interferes with the lens mounting because it is right along the edge of the mounting hole. If the flange on the lens retaining nut is too large, the tit prevents it from tightening properly. It also prevents the hole from being enlarged to accommodate even small variations in shutter mounting diameters.

Personally, I see absolutely no possible benefit to the tit. The ultimate aim is to get into the hole. The tit is nothing but a useless distraction.

Dan Fromm · Jul 12, 2020

It will clear a retaining ring. Flanges are not used to hold lenses on boards, except when they are. I've done that a few times, have reversed what might be called long flanges so that the narrow ends butt up against the board.

If you can't do that, get a proper retaining ring.

138S · Jul 12, 2020

Yes... probably the single thing it can interfere is the retaining ring, if the external dimension is too large...

shutterfinger · Jul 12, 2020

Flanges were designed to be mounted onto the front of lens boards with screws on wooden boards or with screws and nuts on metal boards. Once mounted the shutter screws into the flange.

ic-racer · Jul 12, 2020

it doesn't seem to serve any purpose

If you turn the lensboard around you will see one man's tit is another's pit to hold the index pin.

Dan Fromm · Jul 12, 2020

Hmm. You could cut a notch in the flange to clear the dimple, at the cost of losing control of the shutter's position on the board.

fiddle · Jul 12, 2020

It might just be me, but I thought long about what this post might be about before I opened it.

Dan Fromm · Jul 12, 2020

For the difference between flange and retaining ring, see: https://skgrimes.com/products/mounting-flanges

Rick A · Jul 13, 2020

BAC1967 said:
From what I understand a tit is for tat.

That was my first thought.

BrianShaw · Jul 13, 2020

This thread has me tittering. Honestly...

xya · Jul 13, 2020

BrianShaw said:
This thread has me tittering. Honestly...

that's better than tattering...

Luckless · Jul 13, 2020

ic-racer said:
If you turn the lensboard around you will see one man's tit is another's pit to hold the index pin.

I have a 127mm Kodak Ektar in a Graphic Supermatic X with a stub on the back, but no factory plate to fit it. [I've been relying on a custom built one instead.] Is this the style that matches the plate, or would that plate fit another style lens?

Dan Fromm · Jul 13, 2020

Luckless, the OP's board is original issue for a 2x3 Pacemaker Graphic. I b'lieve, can't prove, that the dimple is lens specific, most likely for a 101/4.5 Optar/Raptar or 101/4.5 Ektar. This because the dimple is so close to the hole.

One of my 2x3 Crowns has a 105/3.7 Ektar in a larger Supermatic than the one that fits the 101/4.5 Ektar. Its board has a dimple near the edge. The 101/4.5's board has a small hole for the locating pin about where the OP's board's dimple is.

Both of these lenses are retained by reversed flanges. The flanges had a top hat cross-section, and the top of the hat butts against the board. The three holes that would be used for attaching the flange to a wooden board are in the hat's brim.

Your 127/4.7 Ektar has the same shutter as my 105/3.7, can't be attached to the OP's board, which isn't bored large enough to accept it. And, the dimple is in the wrong place for that shutter.

Alan Gales · Jul 14, 2020

As Monty Python used to say, "The Nipple!".

What's a Tit For?

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency