Speeed Graphic and the Hindenburg

On Wed, 16 Feb 2005 00:29:40 GMT, Chris Brown
<cpbrown.TakeThisOut@ntlworld.no_uce_please.com> wrote:

 >In article <4213ca02.5073814.TakeThisOut@news.melbpc.org.au>,
 >Thom <tomlyons.TakeThisOut@melbpc.org.au> wrote:
  >>On Tue, 15 Feb 2005 10:28:21 GMT, Chris Brown
  >><cpbrown.TakeThisOut@ntlworld.no_uce_please.com> wrote:
  >>
   >>>In article <4212e784.4681870.TakeThisOut@news.melbpc.org.au>,
   >>>Thom <tomlyons.TakeThisOut@melbpc.org.au> wrote:
   >>>>On Mon, 14 Feb 2005 19:21:32 -0600, "jjs" <jjs.TakeThisOut@nospam.net> wrote:
   >>>>>
   >>>>>So you jumped out of perfectly good airplanes. Sorry we never met. I
   >>>>>studied at Oxford and did the RAF/USAF thing at the same time and could have
   >>>>>shown you how really good Oxford was. But life goes on, with rain or not,
   >>>>>life is good. Thanks for replying.
   >>>>
   >>>>which college at Oxford? And maybe you can asnwer a question. Why
   >>>>did they rename the Thames River where it goes thru Oxford???
   >>>
   >>>And while we're at it, why do they punt from the wrong end?
  >>
  >>I thought that was Cambridge on the river Cam???
 >
 >I can assure you that here in Cambridge, we stand on the back and the boat
 >goes forward. This chap is trying to demonstrate, but appears to be having
 >some difficulty, as his lady-friend is using a paddle:
 >
 >http://narcissus.dyndns.org/Chris/clare_bridge.jpg
 >
 >It's only those strange Thames Valley types who go everywhere in reverse

I will never forget those scenes of DR WHO punting on the Cam in the
"5 Doctors"

THOM<!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
 >> Stay informed about: Speeed Graphic and the Hindenburg 

On Wed, 16 Feb 2005 00:29:40 GMT, Chris Brown

 >It's only those strange Thames Valley types who go everywhere in reverse

Thames Valley, hmpfff. It's a murder a week there, it is. Seen it myself
on the Telly.

--
Nicholas O. Lindan, Cleveland, Ohio
Consulting Engineer: Electronics; Informatics; Photonics.
To reply, remove spaces: n o lindan at ix . netcom . com
psst.. want to buy an f-stop timer? nolindan.com/da/fstop/<!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
 >> Stay informed about: Speeed Graphic and the Hindenburg 

In article <PcPQd.2695$9J5.1147@newsread2.news.atl.earthlink.net>,
Nicholas O. Lindan <see DeleteThis @sig.com> wrote:
 >On Wed, 16 Feb 2005 00:29:40 GMT, Chris Brown
 >
  >>It's only those strange Thames Valley types who go everywhere in reverse
 >
 >Thames Valley, hmpfff. It's a murder a week there, it is. Seen it myself
 >on the Telly.

This man is dead, Lewis! And the pub's open! Hic!<!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
 >> Stay informed about: Speeed Graphic and the Hindenburg 

On Wed, 16 Feb 2005 21:48:31 GMT, "Nicholas O. Lindan" <see.TakeThisOut@sig.com>
wrote:

 >On Wed, 16 Feb 2005 00:29:40 GMT, Chris Brown
 >
  >>It's only those strange Thames Valley types who go everywhere in reverse
 >
 >Thames Valley, hmpfff. It's a murder a week there, it is. Seen it myself
 >on the Telly.

things go all to hell after Inspt Morse died?

THOM
 >
 >--
 >Nicholas O. Lindan, Cleveland, Ohio
 >Consulting Engineer: Electronics; Informatics; Photonics.
 >To reply, remove spaces: n o lindan at ix . netcom . com
 >psst.. want to buy an f-stop timer? nolindan.com/da/fstop/<!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
 >> Stay informed about: Speeed Graphic and the Hindenburg 

On Wed, 16 Feb 2005 11:04:18 -0600, "jjs" <john@xstafford.net>
wrote:

 >"Thom" <tomlyons DeleteThis @melbpc.org.au> wrote in message
 >news:4213ca40.5136188@news.melbpc.org.au...
 >
  >> I never made it into the city itself. I had a high clearence and
  >> would do these TDY's to places where super secret intel/recon stuff
  >> was involved and someone was sick or the work load was overwealming.
 >
 >Security - interesting. I recall one evening riding down the Queens highway
 >and seeing a lot of civilian autos on the side of the road nearest the head
 >of the flightline, but still quite far from it. Some even had tablecloths
 >across the bonnet and people were picknicing. I asked the driver what was up
 >and he said, "They are waiting for the U2 to come in." I asked him how the
 >heck they knew it was landing and he said "The base is full of men with
 >spitshined black shoes and dark suits when the U2 comes in." Another was in
 >Chambley France where they parked aircraft close enough to the road to see
 >and one day they were painting them all in camo. Shortly thereafter they all
 >took off, one after another all day and the base was shut down. Gee, I
 >wonder where they were going, eh? (1965)
 >
 >Back to photography - I got a huge roll of 9" film still in the can from the
 >former. Can't remember what I ever did with it.

Thats kinda what I did. I did classified briefings as in the slide
shows and also processed classified 9" film. Nothing exciting its
just that the stuff was very hush hush. I did TDY's to Texas for the
same reason. Someone went on leave and they needed someone cleared to
handle stuff like this. My main Base in Altus, OKLA required all the
photo people to have a top secret or better.

When I left it was thru Lakenheath and they wouldn't even let me drive
there to be a tourest, I had to take a hope on the milk run.

THOM
 >
 ><!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
 >> Stay informed about: Speeed Graphic and the Hindenburg 

As a matter of fact, I used a bag mag for some 15 years, maintained them
and repaired them. They were the standard film pack of the US Navy
for some 50 or 60 years - so they could not be that bad.

As for your assertion that a SFH was used for the Hindenburg pix, only
two people know exactly what was used - the photog and his lab man - and
unless you have documented provenence (a memoir, interview, credit line,
etc) you are pissing into the wind.

If you really want to know what was used, without guessing, you can
start your search by finding "Times World Photos" who owned the pictures
on May 7, 1937, and ask them.

Regards,

Marv

Alecj wrote:
 > What's the point, Marv. Have YOU ever used a bag mag? If so, you'd know
 > you couldn't possibly make exposures as fast with it as with SFH. Get over
 > it.
 >
 > "Marv Soloff" <msoloff.TakeThisOut@worldnet.att.net> wrote in message
 > news:tiHQd.44703$Th1.18442@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
 >
  >>You were there looking over his shoulder, no doubt.
  >>
  >>Regards,
  >>
  >>Marv
  >>
  >>Alecj wrote:
  >>
   >>>Yes, Marv - NOBODY has presented any evidence that bag magazines were
 >
 > used.
 >
   >>>They HAVE been ruled out. Murray used SFH - period! Accept it.
   >>>
   >>>"Marv Soloff" <msoloff.TakeThisOut@worldnet.att.net> wrote in message
   >>>news:ZVkQd.41012$Th1.10821@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
   >>>
   >>>
   >>>>The 45 Grafmatic came onto the market in the early '50s at $19.95. I am
   >>>>glad to see that this indepth discussion of the Hindenburg shots have
   >>>>not ruled out the bag mags - which may have been used.
   >>>>
   >>>>Regards,
   >>>>
   >>>>Marv
   >>>>
   >>>>Richard Knoppow wrote:
   >>>>
   >>>>
   >>>>>"Jean-David Beyer" <jdbeyer.TakeThisOut@exit109.com> wrote in message
   >>>>>news:110tio9es9rd297@corp.supernews.com...
   >>>>>
   >>>>>
   >>>>>
   >>>>>>Alecj wrote (in part):
   >>>>>>
   >>>>>>
   >>>>>>
   >>>>>>
   >>>>>>>The Grafmatic had not yet been invented - they had "bag
   >>>>>>>magazines" but they
   >>>>>>>were slow to use.
   >>>>>>>
   >>>>>>
   >>>>>>When was it invented?
   >>>>>>
   >>>>>>--
   >>>>>>.~. Jean-David Beyer Registered Linux User
   >>>>>>85642.
   >>>>>>/V\ PGP-Key: 9A2FC99A Registered Machine
   >>>>>>241939.
<font color=brown>   >>>>>>/( )\ Shrewsbury, New Jersey <a style='text-decoration: underline;' href="http://counter.li.org</font" target="_blank">http://counter.li.org</font</a>>
   >>>>>>^^-^^ 22:20:01 up 24 days, 6:35, 3 users, load average:
   >>>>>>3.26, 3.24, 3.13
   >>>>>>
   >>>>>
   >>>>> It shows up in Graflex catalogues and advertising around
   >>>>>1950. Grafmatics are intended to be used with Graflok backs,
   >>>>>not the older Graphic back. While they will fit into the
   >>>>>older back they are too thick and stretch the springs. Also,
   >>>>>they depend on the slide locks on the Graflok back to keep
   >>>>>the entire holder from pulling out when films are changed.
   >>>>>The Graflok back was introduced on the Century Graphic in
   >>>>>1950 (maybe late 1949) and became standard equipment on all
   >>>>>Graphic cameras about 1951. They can also be retrofitted to
   >>>>>most Graphic and many Graflex cameras.
   >>>>> There was an earlier magazine available for Graflex
   >>>>>cameras, which had a different back from the Graphic. These
   >>>>>holders held 12 sheets of film and had a leather bag at the
   >>>>>side. To change the film the septum was pulled into the bag
   >>>>>and then inserted into a compartment at the back. Graflex
   >>>>>backs could be had on Graphic cameras on special order but
   >>>>>they were mostly used on cameras for scientific work where
   >>>>>some special accessory had to be attached. Holders for the
   >>>>>two backs are not interchangible. Graflex SLR cameras were
   >>>>>widely used for news photography in the 1920s but fell out
   >>>>>of use in the 1930s, supplanted by the Speed Graphic, which
   >>>>>was a much faster camera to use.
   >>>>>
   >>>>>
   >>>>
   >>>
 >
 ><!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
 >> Stay informed about: Speeed Graphic and the Hindenburg 

Since you strive to appear so knowledgable about this, why don't you
enlighten me and the others, Marvie?

"Marv Soloff" <msoloff.TakeThisOut@worldnet.att.net> wrote in message
news:YCSQd.46627$Th1.25712@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
 > As a matter of fact, I used a bag mag for some 15 years, maintained them
 > and repaired them. They were the standard film pack of the US Navy
 > for some 50 or 60 years - so they could not be that bad.
 >
 > As for your assertion that a SFH was used for the Hindenburg pix, only
 > two people know exactly what was used - the photog and his lab man - and
 > unless you have documented provenence (a memoir, interview, credit line,
 > etc) you are pissing into the wind.
 >
 > If you really want to know what was used, without guessing, you can
 > start your search by finding "Times World Photos" who owned the pictures
 > on May 7, 1937, and ask them.
 >
 > Regards,
 >
 > Marv
 >
 > Alecj wrote:
  > > What's the point, Marv. Have YOU ever used a bag mag? If so, you'd
know
  > > you couldn't possibly make exposures as fast with it as with SFH. Get
over
  > > it.
  > >
  > > "Marv Soloff" <msoloff.TakeThisOut@worldnet.att.net> wrote in message
  > > news:tiHQd.44703$Th1.18442@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
  > >
   > >>You were there looking over his shoulder, no doubt.
   > >>
   > >>Regards,
   > >>
   > >>Marv
   > >>
   > >>Alecj wrote:
   > >>
   > >>>Yes, Marv - NOBODY has presented any evidence that bag magazines were
  > >
  > > used.
  > >
   > >>>They HAVE been ruled out. Murray used SFH - period! Accept it.
   > >>>
   > >>>"Marv Soloff" <msoloff.TakeThisOut@worldnet.att.net> wrote in message
   > >>>news:ZVkQd.41012$Th1.10821@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
   > >>>
   > >>>
   > >>>>The 45 Grafmatic came onto the market in the early '50s at $19.95. I
am
   > >>>>glad to see that this indepth discussion of the Hindenburg shots have
   > >>>>not ruled out the bag mags - which may have been used.
   > >>>>
   > >>>>Regards,
   > >>>>
   > >>>>Marv
   > >>>>
   > >>>>Richard Knoppow wrote:
   > >>>>
   > >>>>
   > >>>>>"Jean-David Beyer" <jdbeyer.TakeThisOut@exit109.com> wrote in message
   > >>>>>news:110tio9es9rd297@corp.supernews.com...
   > >>>>>
   > >>>>>
   > >>>>>
   > >>>>>>Alecj wrote (in part):
   > >>>>>>
   > >>>>>>
   > >>>>>>
   > >>>>>>
   > >>>>>>>The Grafmatic had not yet been invented - they had "bag
   > >>>>>>>magazines" but they
   > >>>>>>>were slow to use.
   > >>>>>>>
   > >>>>>>
   > >>>>>>When was it invented?
   > >>>>>>
   > >>>>>>--
   > >>>>>>.~. Jean-David Beyer Registered Linux User
   > >>>>>>85642.
   > >>>>>>/V\ PGP-Key: 9A2FC99A Registered Machine
   > >>>>>>241939.
<font color=brown>   > >>>>>>/( )\ Shrewsbury, New Jersey <a style='text-decoration: underline;' href="http://counter.li.org</font" target="_blank">http://counter.li.org</font</a>>
   > >>>>>>^^-^^ 22:20:01 up 24 days, 6:35, 3 users, load average:
   > >>>>>>3.26, 3.24, 3.13
   > >>>>>>
   > >>>>>
   > >>>>> It shows up in Graflex catalogues and advertising around
   > >>>>>1950. Grafmatics are intended to be used with Graflok backs,
   > >>>>>not the older Graphic back. While they will fit into the
   > >>>>>older back they are too thick and stretch the springs. Also,
   > >>>>>they depend on the slide locks on the Graflok back to keep
   > >>>>>the entire holder from pulling out when films are changed.
   > >>>>>The Graflok back was introduced on the Century Graphic in
   > >>>>>1950 (maybe late 1949) and became standard equipment on all
   > >>>>>Graphic cameras about 1951. They can also be retrofitted to
   > >>>>>most Graphic and many Graflex cameras.
   > >>>>> There was an earlier magazine available for Graflex
   > >>>>>cameras, which had a different back from the Graphic. These
   > >>>>>holders held 12 sheets of film and had a leather bag at the
   > >>>>>side. To change the film the septum was pulled into the bag
   > >>>>>and then inserted into a compartment at the back. Graflex
   > >>>>>backs could be had on Graphic cameras on special order but
   > >>>>>they were mostly used on cameras for scientific work where
   > >>>>>some special accessory had to be attached. Holders for the
   > >>>>>two backs are not interchangible. Graflex SLR cameras were
   > >>>>>widely used for news photography in the 1920s but fell out
   > >>>>>of use in the 1930s, supplanted by the Speed Graphic, which
   > >>>>>was a much faster camera to use.
   > >>>>>
   > >>>>>
   > >>>>
   > >>>
  > >
  > >
 ><!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
 >> Stay informed about: Speeed Graphic and the Hindenburg 

"Thom" <tomlyons.RemoveThis@melbpc.org.au> wrote in message
news:42152a9a.5627066@news.melbpc.org.au...

 > Thats kinda what I did. I did classified briefings as in the slide
 > shows and also processed classified 9" film. Nothing exciting its
 > just that the stuff was very hush hush.

Hush hush like the aerial photos taken of France's nuclear facility? Problem
there was the US got caught. Ticked off deGaulle.<!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
 >> Stay informed about: Speeed Graphic and the Hindenburg 

On Thu, 17 Feb 2005 08:27:42 -0600, "jjs" <john@xstafford.net>
wrote:

 >Hush hush like the aerial photos taken of France's nuclear facility? Problem
 >there was the US got caught. Ticked off deGaulle.

  Oh shoot !


Regards,

John S. Douglas, Photographer - <a style='text-decoration: underline;' href="http://www.puresilver.org" target="_blank">http://www.puresilver.org</a>
Please remove the "_" when replying via email<!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
 >> Stay informed about: Speeed Graphic and the Hindenburg 

I neither know nor care how the Hindenburg photos were taken.
I could probably take a good shot at finding out, but my time is much
more valuable than supporting some bogus "expert" opinion. I gave you a
legitimate place to start if you really want to know. As they say, the
balls are in your court.

Regards,

Marv

Alecj wrote:
 > Since you strive to appear so knowledgable about this, why don't you
 > enlighten me and the others, Marvie?
 >
 > "Marv Soloff" <msoloff.DeleteThis@worldnet.att.net> wrote in message
 > news:YCSQd.46627$Th1.25712@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
 >
  >>As a matter of fact, I used a bag mag for some 15 years, maintained them
  >> and repaired them. They were the standard film pack of the US Navy
  >>for some 50 or 60 years - so they could not be that bad.
  >>
  >>As for your assertion that a SFH was used for the Hindenburg pix, only
  >>two people know exactly what was used - the photog and his lab man - and
  >>unless you have documented provenence (a memoir, interview, credit line,
  >>etc) you are pissing into the wind.
  >>
  >>If you really want to know what was used, without guessing, you can
  >>start your search by finding "Times World Photos" who owned the pictures
  >>on May 7, 1937, and ask them.
  >>
  >>Regards,
  >>
  >>Marv
  >>
  >>Alecj wrote:
  >>
   >>>What's the point, Marv. Have YOU ever used a bag mag? If so, you'd
 >
 > know
 >
   >>>you couldn't possibly make exposures as fast with it as with SFH. Get
 >
 > over
 >
   >>>it.
   >>>
   >>>"Marv Soloff" <msoloff.DeleteThis@worldnet.att.net> wrote in message
   >>>news:tiHQd.44703$Th1.18442@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
   >>>
   >>>
   >>>>You were there looking over his shoulder, no doubt.
   >>>>
   >>>>Regards,
   >>>>
   >>>>Marv
   >>>>
   >>>>Alecj wrote:
   >>>>
   >>>>
   >>>>>Yes, Marv - NOBODY has presented any evidence that bag magazines were
   >>>
   >>>used.
   >>>
   >>>
   >>>>>They HAVE been ruled out. Murray used SFH - period! Accept it.
   >>>>>
   >>>>>"Marv Soloff" <msoloff.DeleteThis@worldnet.att.net> wrote in message
   >>>>>news:ZVkQd.41012$Th1.10821@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
   >>>>>
   >>>>>
   >>>>>
   >>>>>>The 45 Grafmatic came onto the market in the early '50s at $19.95. I
 >
 > am
 >
   >>>>>>glad to see that this indepth discussion of the Hindenburg shots have
   >>>>>>not ruled out the bag mags - which may have been used.
   >>>>>>
   >>>>>>Regards,
   >>>>>>
   >>>>>>Marv
   >>>>>>
   >>>>>>Richard Knoppow wrote:
   >>>>>>
   >>>>>>
   >>>>>>
   >>>>>>>"Jean-David Beyer" <jdbeyer.DeleteThis@exit109.com> wrote in message
   >>>>>>>news:110tio9es9rd297@corp.supernews.com...
   >>>>>>>
   >>>>>>>
   >>>>>>>
   >>>>>>>
   >>>>>>>>Alecj wrote (in part):
   >>>>>>>>
   >>>>>>>>
   >>>>>>>>
   >>>>>>>>
   >>>>>>>>
   >>>>>>>>>The Grafmatic had not yet been invented - they had "bag
   >>>>>>>>>magazines" but they
   >>>>>>>>>were slow to use.
   >>>>>>>>>
   >>>>>>>>
   >>>>>>>>When was it invented?
   >>>>>>>>
   >>>>>>>>--
   >>>>>>>>.~. Jean-David Beyer Registered Linux User
   >>>>>>>>85642.
   >>>>>>>>/V\ PGP-Key: 9A2FC99A Registered Machine
   >>>>>>>>241939.
<font color=brown>   >>>>>>>>/( )\ Shrewsbury, New Jersey <a style='text-decoration: underline;' href="http://counter.li.org</font" target="_blank">http://counter.li.org</font</a>>
   >>>>>>>>^^-^^ 22:20:01 up 24 days, 6:35, 3 users, load average:
   >>>>>>>>3.26, 3.24, 3.13
   >>>>>>>>
   >>>>>>>
   >>>>>>>It shows up in Graflex catalogues and advertising around
   >>>>>>>1950. Grafmatics are intended to be used with Graflok backs,
   >>>>>>>not the older Graphic back. While they will fit into the
   >>>>>>>older back they are too thick and stretch the springs. Also,
   >>>>>>>they depend on the slide locks on the Graflok back to keep
   >>>>>>>the entire holder from pulling out when films are changed.
   >>>>>>>The Graflok back was introduced on the Century Graphic in
   >>>>>>>1950 (maybe late 1949) and became standard equipment on all
   >>>>>>>Graphic cameras about 1951. They can also be retrofitted to
   >>>>>>>most Graphic and many Graflex cameras.
   >>>>>>> There was an earlier magazine available for Graflex
   >>>>>>>cameras, which had a different back from the Graphic. These
   >>>>>>>holders held 12 sheets of film and had a leather bag at the
   >>>>>>>side. To change the film the septum was pulled into the bag
   >>>>>>>and then inserted into a compartment at the back. Graflex
   >>>>>>>backs could be had on Graphic cameras on special order but
   >>>>>>>they were mostly used on cameras for scientific work where
   >>>>>>>some special accessory had to be attached. Holders for the
   >>>>>>>two backs are not interchangible. Graflex SLR cameras were
   >>>>>>>widely used for news photography in the 1920s but fell out
   >>>>>>>of use in the 1930s, supplanted by the Speed Graphic, which
   >>>>>>>was a much faster camera to use.
   >>>>>>>
   >>>>>>>
   >>>>>>
   >>>
 >
 ><!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
 >> Stay informed about: Speeed Graphic and the Hindenburg 

And I showed you what the available evidence shows. You're the one with
your "head in a bag". Adios.

"Marv Soloff" <msoloff DeleteThis @worldnet.att.net> wrote in message
news:ATbRd.232576$w62.199060@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
 > I neither know nor care how the Hindenburg photos were taken.
 > I could probably take a good shot at finding out, but my time is much
 > more valuable than supporting some bogus "expert" opinion. I gave you a
 > legitimate place to start if you really want to know. As they say, the
 > balls are in your court.
 >
 > Regards,
 >
 > Marv
 >
 > Alecj wrote:
  > > Since you strive to appear so knowledgable about this, why don't you
  > > enlighten me and the others, Marvie?
  > >
  > > "Marv Soloff" <msoloff DeleteThis @worldnet.att.net> wrote in message
  > > news:YCSQd.46627$Th1.25712@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
  > >
   > >>As a matter of fact, I used a bag mag for some 15 years, maintained them
   > >> and repaired them. They were the standard film pack of the US Navy
   > >>for some 50 or 60 years - so they could not be that bad.
   > >>
   > >>As for your assertion that a SFH was used for the Hindenburg pix, only
   > >>two people know exactly what was used - the photog and his lab man - and
   > >>unless you have documented provenence (a memoir, interview, credit line,
   > >>etc) you are pissing into the wind.
   > >>
   > >>If you really want to know what was used, without guessing, you can
   > >>start your search by finding "Times World Photos" who owned the pictures
   > >>on May 7, 1937, and ask them.
   > >>
   > >>Regards,
   > >>
   > >>Marv
   > >>
   > >>Alecj wrote:
   > >>
   > >>>What's the point, Marv. Have YOU ever used a bag mag? If so, you'd
  > >
  > > know
  > >
   > >>>you couldn't possibly make exposures as fast with it as with SFH. Get
  > >
  > > over
  > >
   > >>>it.
   > >>>
   > >>>"Marv Soloff" <msoloff DeleteThis @worldnet.att.net> wrote in message
   > >>>news:tiHQd.44703$Th1.18442@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
   > >>>
   > >>>
   > >>>>You were there looking over his shoulder, no doubt.
   > >>>>
   > >>>>Regards,
   > >>>>
   > >>>>Marv
   > >>>>
   > >>>>Alecj wrote:
   > >>>>
   > >>>>
   > >>>>>Yes, Marv - NOBODY has presented any evidence that bag magazines were
   > >>>
   > >>>used.
   > >>>
   > >>>
   > >>>>>They HAVE been ruled out. Murray used SFH - period! Accept it.
   > >>>>>
   > >>>>>"Marv Soloff" <msoloff DeleteThis @worldnet.att.net> wrote in message
   > >>>>>news:ZVkQd.41012$Th1.10821@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
   > >>>>>
   > >>>>>
   > >>>>>
   > >>>>>>The 45 Grafmatic came onto the market in the early '50s at $19.95.
I
  > >
  > > am
  > >
   > >>>>>>glad to see that this indepth discussion of the Hindenburg shots
have
   > >>>>>>not ruled out the bag mags - which may have been used.
   > >>>>>>
   > >>>>>>Regards,
   > >>>>>>
   > >>>>>>Marv
   > >>>>>>
   > >>>>>>Richard Knoppow wrote:
   > >>>>>>
   > >>>>>>
   > >>>>>>
   > >>>>>>>"Jean-David Beyer" <jdbeyer DeleteThis @exit109.com> wrote in message
   > >>>>>>>news:110tio9es9rd297@corp.supernews.com...
   > >>>>>>>
   > >>>>>>>
   > >>>>>>>
   > >>>>>>>
   > >>>>>>>>Alecj wrote (in part):
   > >>>>>>>>
   > >>>>>>>>
   > >>>>>>>>
   > >>>>>>>>
   > >>>>>>>>
   > >>>>>>>>>The Grafmatic had not yet been invented - they had "bag
   > >>>>>>>>>magazines" but they
   > >>>>>>>>>were slow to use.
   > >>>>>>>>>
   > >>>>>>>>
   > >>>>>>>>When was it invented?
   > >>>>>>>>
   > >>>>>>>>--
   > >>>>>>>>.~. Jean-David Beyer Registered Linux User
   > >>>>>>>>85642.
   > >>>>>>>>/V\ PGP-Key: 9A2FC99A Registered Machine
   > >>>>>>>>241939.
<font color=brown>   > >>>>>>>>/( )\ Shrewsbury, New Jersey <a style='text-decoration: underline;' href="http://counter.li.org</font" target="_blank">http://counter.li.org</font</a>>
   > >>>>>>>>^^-^^ 22:20:01 up 24 days, 6:35, 3 users, load average:
   > >>>>>>>>3.26, 3.24, 3.13
   > >>>>>>>>
   > >>>>>>>
   > >>>>>>>It shows up in Graflex catalogues and advertising around
   > >>>>>>>1950. Grafmatics are intended to be used with Graflok backs,
   > >>>>>>>not the older Graphic back. While they will fit into the
   > >>>>>>>older back they are too thick and stretch the springs. Also,
   > >>>>>>>they depend on the slide locks on the Graflok back to keep
   > >>>>>>>the entire holder from pulling out when films are changed.
   > >>>>>>>The Graflok back was introduced on the Century Graphic in
   > >>>>>>>1950 (maybe late 1949) and became standard equipment on all
   > >>>>>>>Graphic cameras about 1951. They can also be retrofitted to
   > >>>>>>>most Graphic and many Graflex cameras.
   > >>>>>>> There was an earlier magazine available for Graflex
   > >>>>>>>cameras, which had a different back from the Graphic. These
   > >>>>>>>holders held 12 sheets of film and had a leather bag at the
   > >>>>>>>side. To change the film the septum was pulled into the bag
   > >>>>>>>and then inserted into a compartment at the back. Graflex
   > >>>>>>>backs could be had on Graphic cameras on special order but
   > >>>>>>>they were mostly used on cameras for scientific work where
   > >>>>>>>some special accessory had to be attached. Holders for the
   > >>>>>>>two backs are not interchangible. Graflex SLR cameras were
   > >>>>>>>widely used for news photography in the 1920s but fell out
   > >>>>>>>of use in the 1930s, supplanted by the Speed Graphic, which
   > >>>>>>>was a much faster camera to use.
   > >>>>>>>
   > >>>>>>>
   > >>>>>>
   > >>>
  > >
  > >
 ><!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
 >> Stay informed about: Speeed Graphic and the Hindenburg 

I recall reading somewhere that he exposed only one sheet in each
holder,then slid the dark slide back in,dropped it on the ground and grabbed
another holder and did the same thing.
Oh...and I don't think the Grafmatic came out until sometime in the 1950's







"raoul" <gr8raoul RemoveThis @yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:100220052042553457%gr8raoul@yahoo.com...
 > Hi:
 >
 > I teach photography and U.S. History at a high school in Washington
 > State, USA. This week, I had a lesson on photojournalism and, in one
 > of the videos I used, there was talk of the photography of the
 > Hindenburg disaster.
 >
 > Even casual photographic history fans are familiar with this event,
 > where the photographer got off four shots in something like 40 seconds
 > using a Speed Graphic.
 >
 > Anyhow, I wanted to show the kids exactly what this entailed so I
 > brought my Crown Graphic and a couple of holders to give a
 > demonstration. Now, I basically take landscape shots so I don't have
 > much experience in handling a Crown Graphic quickly but, even with some
 > embarrassing fumbling and jamming the slide, I got the four shots off
 > in about 90 seconds. I let a couple of kids give it a try and one of
 > the kids did it in about 70 seconds.
 >
 > Now, I'm not saying that the photographer in question did not take
 > those photos that fast but I'm wondering if he did it with standard
 > holders. I'm thinking Grafmatic (if they existed in 1937) or film pack.
 > I could see getting off lots of shots quickly with film pack- pull the
 > paper, recock shoot and do it again. I could go through all 12 (16?)
 > shots in the pack fairly quickly.
 >
 > So.... Does anyone know if that photographer really used standard film
 > holders?
 >
 > raoul<!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
 >> Stay informed about: Speeed Graphic and the Hindenburg