Re: plate holder woes (again)

From: Robert Newcomb ^lt;[email protected]>
Date: 07/06/04-02:00:51 PM Z
Message-id: <>

Glass plates are about 1/16th (.060) thick, film is about .005 thick.
So if you put a glass plate in a standard spring back, the emulsion
will be too far forward (closer to the lens) as compared to the
groundglass focus screen. You can have an 8x10 glass plate holder
made, but you would also need to have a new grounglass panel made as
well so the focus planes match up.
 From what I've seen, wet plate holders were a good bit thicker then dry
plate holders or film holders. That may be what the Star company
person is saying, a wet plate holder would be too thick and a double
sided would be way too thick even to physically fit in a standard
spring back.
It can be done though, you just need a holder and a back.
Robert Newcomb
On Jul 6, 2004, at 3:17 PM, Gregory Popovitch wrote:

> Hi Jon,
> I don't understand the answer from the Star company either!
> Your request seemed perfectly reasonable to me. While a double
> sided plate holder may be thicker than film holders, certainly
> a single-sided one, even with the space required for the spring to
> keep the plate where it belongs, should be feasible. It is possible
> that there are set to make only thicker holders to fit their own
> cameras.
> I'm surprised by the short answer, though, because I have dealt with
> them in the past and I was very satisfied both with the
> friendliness and the delivered products.
> As for me, I have standardised on the full-plate size because
> I got a camera with plate holders, and that was the max size my
> other equipment would accept.
> gregory
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Jon Danforth []
>> Sent: Tuesday, July 06, 2004 2:46 PM
>> To:
>> Subject: plate holder woes (again)
>> After my latest dead end (see below), I'm now, again, at a loss
>> on where to
>> get plate holders for my modern 8x10 camera. I sent the e-mail
>> below to the
>> Star Camera Company and I just don't understand the reply. Could
>> someone
>> help me to understand why this guy seems to be implying that I'm an
>> idiot?
>> I don't plan on doing wet-plate collodion and I don't plan on making
>> glass-plate negatives... maybe the definition of tin type that I'm
>> working
>> from is different than his?
>> Could someone please tell me if what I'm after is even possible?
>> Do any of
>> you work with plate holders that fit into a regular spring-clip back
>> on a
>> modern view camera? Can I buy one or borrow one to replicate? I'm
>> going
>> out of my mind trying to find plate holders.
>> ---original message---
>> I was browsing the Star Camera website and I'm duly impressed. I
>> would like
>> to use my Calumet 8x10 view camera to make Daguerreotypes and tin
>> types but
>> I do not have any plate holders. What I would like to know is if you
>> can
>> make the following for me and how much such a thing might cost:
>> 2 8x10 full size plate holders (single side OK, double side all
>> the better)
>> for use on 8x10 back
>> 2 8x10 holders with centered 4x10 plate holder (single side OK,
>> double side
>> all the better) for use on 8x10 back
>> 2 4x5 full size plate holders (single side OK, double side all the
>> better)
>> for use on 4x5 back
>> I would like for these plate holders to work in the same manner as
>> film
>> holders in that they can be used in a standard spring-clip back on
>> view
>> cameras. I may very well ditch the Calumet and buy a field Toyo
>> 8x10 in the
>> next five years so I would want to know that I could use these on
>> another
>> camera with a standard spring-clip back. I am willing to ship the
>> Calumet
>> to you and may consider a visit to NJ.
>> ------
>> ---reply---
>> Sorry these things cannot be made. Too thin, you really
>> need some insight into collodion to figure out what you
>> need.
>> ------
>> -Jon
Received on Tue Jul 6 14:01:04 2004

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : 08/13/04-09:01:10 AM Z CST