Autochrome was the other color process I could not remember.
On 10/18/2020 1:02 PM, José Manoel Pavoski Neto wrote:
I agree with you both the Rolleikin adds a lot of flexibility to the Rolleiflex line. The adapter was actually my first experience with the Rollei, because 120 film supplies in Brazil have been unreliable for as long as I can remember (my last few boxes were bought on a trip to Argentina, importing film has since become pretty much unaffordable due to fluctuating exchange rates), and I came to use it a lot, in various forms. either in it's complete form, which I soon discovered was not working properly (I have found the mechanical part of it to be a bit unreliable on film advance), with no mask, for a 52x35mm picture with a terrible focus register, or with homemade and modified masks. I have since settled on removing all the cogs from the original mask and adding a wire spring that slightly catches on the sprocket holes, so that I can count the "thumps" for each frame while winding it. It has, however, caused some occasional tearing of holes on rewinding, something that I am still going to fix. Thinking about it, rewinding with that tiny handle at such an uncomfortable position is one definite con for the set-up. It really is a pain.
On a brighter note, I feel the 'kin shines on portraits, both for it's orientation and the great Rollei 80mm on a 135 frame. That's a really great combo. It uses the sweet spot of the lens every time, you get the brightest picture on the viewfinder and all the other advantages we all love of using a TLR. I have never mastered the art of using it in a landscape orientation, it's too uncomfortable, and even with the sports finder, a bit confusing.
I have an album here of a few, not really selected, pictures with the Rolleikin and a 2,8F, if anyone's interested:
https://www.flickr.com/photos/rolleifluxo/albums/72157716523361947 <https://www.flickr.com/photos/rolleifluxo/albums/72157716523361947>
All the best,
José
Em dom., 18 de out. de 2020 às 08:06, CarlosMFreaza <cmfreaza@xxxxxxxxx <mailto:cmfreaza@xxxxxxxxx>> escreveu:
Yes Richard, those were almost experimental color
processes, they never had significant commercial success,
at least in comparison with the new Kodachrome and Agfa
color for 35mm from the middle '30s. I saw some Autochrome
glass plates taken during WWI. 6,5x9cm glass plates and
film sheets were very popular in Europe in '20s and '30s,
the Rolleiflex had room for this size keeping the 6x6
format, it was the main reason for the Rollei Plate
adapter, the camera could increase its flexibility without
a major effort; the Rolleikin was different, it required a
significant evolution and more time to be perfectioned.
Carlos
El sáb., 17 oct. 2020 a las 17:33, `Richard Knoppow
(<dickburk@xxxxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:dickburk@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>>)
escribió:
I sometimes draw blanks on names so I have
forgotten the name
of the color film available in the early 1930s. Not
sure if Dufay
Color was available that early but certainly predated
Agfa Color
or Kodachrome. Kodak also made a couple of early color
films with
the names Kodacolor and Kodachrome but using different
processes
than the later, more famous, films of those names. I am
trying to
get stuff out of my memory I have not thought of for
too long so
I am missing the cues I need. One early system used
dyed starch
particles in the emulsion and another used stripes of
ink on the
emulsion. Kodak also tried a lenticular color film using
cylindrical lenses impressed on the film support and a
striped
color filter in front of the lens. Kodak's system was
intended
for home movies. Lenticular film was never very
successful. It
had many shortcomings plus was extremely difficult to
duplicate.
Paramount Pictures tried it for theatrical movies with
poor
success. Dufaycolor and the other process who's name I
can't
think of, were quite successful for slides but also were
impossible to duplicate.
I think all of these processes were discussed in
E.J.Wall's
book on color photography. Probably more detail is
available now
on the web, I have not done a search. Some of these
processes
needed to be on glass plates which is no doubt why Rollei
introduced glass plate adaptors. I should probably
look all this
stuff up before posting but, as the math books say, its
left as
an exercise for the student.
On 10/17/2020 12:45 PM, CarlosMFreaza wrote:
> Hello Richard:
> I agree with you 35mm color film
gave a
> significative impulse for the Rolleikin improvement and
> production, however the first Rolleikin prototype was
> introduced in 1932 and the first Rolleikin version
for the
> Rolleiflex camera was produced from 1933 up to 1934,
before
> Kodak and Agfa introduced the firsts color films with
> significant commercial success in 1935/36. "The
company
> stressed the following sales points (talking about the
> Rolleikin):Film can be cut after any frame and the
rest still
> be used. Use of all packing types such as
daylight-loading
> cartridges, daylight-loading refills and bulk film.
In 1939,
> one more point was added: The Rolleikin is a valuable
accessory
> for color photography because the new color films -
Agfacolor -
> New and Kodachrome- are presently available only as
35mm film"
> (Rollei Report I, Claus Prochnow, page 12-263,
quoting F&H
> advertisements at the time). The initial main reason
to build
> the Rolleikin was the Leica and Contax cameras
success and F&H
> wanted to offer an option to use 35 mm film for their
> Rolleiflex customers. It was six years after the first
> Rolleikin introduction that F&H stressed the color
film use as
> a selling point for it; "The Rolleikin became one of
the most
> important accessories".
> Carlos
>
> El sáb., 17 oct. 2020 a las 15:06, `Richard Knoppow
> (<dickburk@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
<mailto:dickburk@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
<mailto:dickburk@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
<mailto:dickburk@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>>>)
> escribió:
>
> Don't forget that one reason for the 35mm
adaptors was to
> make color film available. 35mm color film became
available in
> the 1930s while roll format color was not
available until
> after
> 1945.
>
> On 10/16/2020 2:24 AM, CarlosMFreaza wrote:
> > Rollei TLR cameras have fixed focal length
lenses except for
> > some hundreds of Mutars, Rolleinars and some
dedicated
> Tele and
> > Wide cameras; the regular camera is used with
the fixed
> focal
> > length lens most of the times, however the
Rollei TLR 6x6
> > negative size and lens quality help a lot if a
different and
> > longer focal length is required for the scene,
the camera
> > manufacturers knew it and offered means to
reduce the format
> > and the lens angle of view causing a short tele
effec
> like the
> > masks for the T and Rolleicord and the
Rolleikin with the
> > additional mechanism for 35mm; these features
increase the
> > Rollei TLR system flexibility.
> >
> > I like the square format and I try to compose
for the square
> > format all the time using the Rollei TLR and
SL66 cameras,
> > however there are situations where it's
impossible to do
> it. I
> > had this situation last week-end photographing
with the 3,5F
> > Planar and Ilford Delta 100, I needed a short
tele and I
> used
> > the Rolleikin effect (I uploaded an image
bigger than the
> usual
> > size for my web images):
> > https://flic.kr/p/2jVmP7H
<https://flic.kr/p/2jVmP7H> <https://flic.kr/p/2jVmP7H
<https://flic.kr/p/2jVmP7H>>
> <https://flic.kr/p/2jVmP7H
<https://flic.kr/p/2jVmP7H> <https://flic.kr/p/2jVmP7H
<https://flic.kr/p/2jVmP7H>>>
> >
> > and this is a "regular" sht with the same
camera and same
> film:
> > https://flic.kr/p/2jT7K9x
<https://flic.kr/p/2jT7K9x> <https://flic.kr/p/2jT7K9x
<https://flic.kr/p/2jT7K9x>>
> <https://flic.kr/p/2jT7K9x
<https://flic.kr/p/2jT7K9x> <https://flic.kr/p/2jT7K9x
<https://flic.kr/p/2jT7K9x>>>
> >
> > Carlos
>
> --
> Richard Knoppow
> dickburk@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
<mailto:dickburk@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
<mailto:dickburk@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
<mailto:dickburk@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>>
> WB6KBL
>
> ---
> Rollei List
>
> - Post to rollei_list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
<mailto:rollei_list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> <mailto:rollei_list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
<mailto:rollei_list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>>
>
> - Subscribe at rollei_list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
<mailto:rollei_list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> <mailto:rollei_list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
<mailto:rollei_list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>> with
'subscribe'
> in the subject field OR by logging into
www.freelists.org <//www.freelists.org>
> <//www.freelists.org ;<//www.freelists.org>>
>
> - Unsubscribe at
rollei_list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
<mailto:rollei_list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> <mailto:rollei_list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
<mailto:rollei_list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>> with
> 'unsubscribe' in the subject field OR by logging into
> www.freelists.org <//www.freelists.org>
<//www.freelists.org ;<//www.freelists.org>>
>
> - Online, searchable archives are available at
> //www.freelists.org/archives/rollei_list
<//www.freelists.org/archives/rollei_list>
> <//www.freelists.org/archives/rollei_list
<//www.freelists.org/archives/rollei_list>>
>
-- Richard Knoppow
dickburk@xxxxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:dickburk@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
WB6KBL
---
Rollei List
- Post to rollei_list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
<mailto:rollei_list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Subscribe at rollei_list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
<mailto:rollei_list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> with
'subscribe'
in the subject field OR by logging into
www.freelists.org <//www.freelists.org>
- Unsubscribe at rollei_list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
<mailto:rollei_list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> with
'unsubscribe' in the subject field OR by logging into
www.freelists.org <//www.freelists.org>
- Online, searchable archives are available at
//www.freelists.org/archives/rollei_list
<//www.freelists.org/archives/rollei_list>
