Interesting Old Photographs of Photographers Posing With Their Cameras

Interesting Old Photographs of Photographers Posing With Their Cameras

The quality and portability of cameras these days would be quite astonishing to photographers from back in the earlier days of photography — the days in which you needed both hands and a strong back to work as a photojournalist. Here, an interesting collection of old photographs of photographers posing with their vintage cameras.

A traveling photographer shooting in Columbus, Ohio with his sidewalk portrait camera, 1938.

In 1939, when star college quarterback Davy O’Brien visited Washington to receive a prestigious award, he paid a visit to Presidential Secretary Marvin H. McIntyre at the White House. To demonstrate his passing technique to McIntyre, O’Brien grabbed a camera from a news photographer nearby and pretended to use it as a football.

Children at the FSA (Farm Security Administration) Camelback Farms inspect the photographer's camera, Phoenix, Arizona, 1942.

Photographers at President Taft's inauguration, March 4, 1909

Theodor Horydczak lying on ground with camera in the early 1900s.

Unidentified photographer with camera from the early 1900s.

A photographer posing with his camera and tripod outside the White House in the early 1900s.

Photo shows Herman A. "Germany" Schaefer (1876-1919), one of the most entertaining characters in baseball history, trying out the other side of the camera during the Washington Senators visit to play the New York Highlanders in April, 1911. The camera is a 5x7 Press Graflex with a modification to accommodate the large lens. The camera was produced by the Folmer & Schwing Division of Eastman Kodak Co. between 1907 and 1923.

Group portrait of four members of the White House News Photographers' Association, standing, facing front, holding cameras, circa 1920s

A group of early-1900s photographers posing with their cameras on steps.

Frances Benjamin Johnston, three-quarter length portrait, holding and looking down at camera, facing slightly left, 1950.

President Coolidge in cowboy outfit, standing in field with photographers; mountain in background, 1927.

Photographer with a portable large format camera, 1914.

Unidentified photographer with camera from the early 1900s.

Unidentified photographer with camera from the early 1900s.

The photographer's assistants, 1873.

Group portrait of seventeen members of the White House News Photographers' Association, standing and squatting, facing front, with cameras, circa 1920s.

Tourist using candid camera, Taos, New Mexico, 1940.

This image appears that back in 1937 it was perfectly normal to snap news photos at the US Senate while holding a cigarette between your fingers.

Photograph shows boy with homemade "Kodack" camera pretending to photograph little girl with doll, 1907.

Four unidentified photographers from the early 1900s hanging out with their cameras in hand.

Three guys posing with two cameras in the early 1900s.

PHOTOGRAPHER PAULA CHAMLEE AND A FEW WORDS ON COLLECTING PHOTOGRAPHY

For our month long exhibit of “Photographs from the Traditional Darkroom”, paying tribute to black and white film photography, I am introducing you each day to one of our current exhibitors.  I may add information on a photographer important in history, or today I am including a few words about collecting photography from Walter Magazine.
PAULA CHAMLEE discovered photography during her return to college in the 1980′s while completing a BFA degree in painting and quickly found direct involvement with the world outside the studio to be irresistible.  In the twenty-six years since, she has traveled extensively, making photographs both in the United States and abroad.  Paula has published seven books over the years, ranging from personal vision, over Chicago, Texas to images photographed in Iceland.
Chamlee has been the recipient of several grants, including one from the Leeway Foundation for “Excellence in Photography.” Her photographs have been widely exhibited in museums and galleries, most recently at Gallery 291 in San Francisco and at the James A. Michener Art Museum, Doylestown, Pennsylvania. Her photographs are in numerous collections, both public and private in the United States and abroad. She is collected in thirty museums in the United States.
More recently Chamlee is working on a series of photographs of the Texas Panhandle from the air and a series of studio still lifes. In addition to her still photography, Chamlee made her first film, Flow, while in Iceland in 2006, and from footage made in 2010 is currently working on new films from Iceland.
Dyrholaey – Iceland  P. Chamlee


A FEW WORDS ABOUT COLLECTING PHOTOGRAPHY, TAKEN FROM WALTER MAGAZINE
W.M. Hunt is one of the world’s greatest photography collectors. He lives in New York and over his lifetime has purchased thousands of photographs, all with one simple theme: The diverted eye. He and his collection travel the world, and his dance card is filled with speaking engagements and lectures.
So when I’m asked how to go about buying a photograph or how to start a collection, I tend to give them Bill’s advice to me from 2006: “Photography is unlike any other contemporary art form,” he told me. “Everyone in the 21st century, at least in the Western world, has the experience of having looked at millions of photographs. We see them all the time, and we know what a good photograph is. We are all experts. The way to collect is to buy a photograph and take it home. Look, react, and commit. If you’re burdened with worries about the photograph’s provenance, the photograph’s ‘greatness,’ the photograph’s price, etcetera, you may be missing the point. Pursue the experience that’s pleasurable. When you see an image that thrills you, you must have that piece in your life. Buy it, take it home, hang it on the wall, and live with it.”
He said something else particularly memorable: “I’ve come to understand my collection as a manifestation of my unconscious. Buying photographs has led me to on an amazingly personal journey and, curiously enough, it has been a tool for gaining an even stronger sense of myself. It is a completely symbiotic relationship: As I have grown, so has the collection, and vice versa.”

Read more here: http://www.waltermagazine.com/collecting-photography/#storylink=cpy

Darkroom Setup
by Rick Paul
I started developing my own film in the 1970’s. A next door neighbor gave me his old enlarger from the 1940’s, and that gave me my first start at printing. I wish I had pictures to show you of that enlarger! It was a metal beast!

It wasn’t until recently that I had the space and the will to starting developing my own film again! While I don’t have a true darkroom, I have set up a space that is working pretty well for me.

above: Rick's Patterson Tanks

I started with just film developing with Patterson tanks. I have two, with the larger one allowing me to develop three rolls at once, or medium format film. I have tried many combinations of film and developers. I’ve settled on three main film developers, and I choose them based on the film I’m developing at the time. My favorites are:
• FA-1027 (Photographers Forumlary: http://stores.photoformulary.com/fa-1027-film-developer/)
• Tetenal Ultrafin Plus (Freestyle: http://www.freestylephoto.biz/131104-Tetenal-Ultrafin-Plus-Film-Developer-1-Liter)
• Rodinal (Compard R09 from Freestyle: http://www.freestylephoto.biz/9724-Compard-R09-One-Shot-Agfa-Rodinal-Formula-Film-Developer-120ml)
The FA-1027 is my favorite for traditional films (Tri-X, HP5). I generally use the Tetenal for T-grain films (Kodak TMAX, Fuji Neopan Acros, and Ilford Delta). I use the Rodinal when the whim strikes!
At first, I used a hybrid work flow, by scanning my negatives with a Nikon Coolscan V. While this worked at first, my ultimate goal was to start creating my own silver prints.
I started researching enlargers, looking at both new and used. Not satisfied with what I was seeing in the used market, I decided on going with a model I could grow with, and could handle just about anything I would want to do in 35mm or 120.

In 2012 I purchased a new Beseler 23CIII XL VC Variable Contrast Enlarger from Freestyle. I actually drove to the Freestyle warehouse to pick it up! They were very nice, were expecting me and had it already to go!
http://www.freestylephoto.biz/8019-Beseler-23CIII-XL-VC-Variable-Contrast-Enlarger
The 23ciii is available with three options for the print head. Color, Condenser, or Variable Contrast. I went with the variable contrast, which has built in filters for contrast grade 0 thru 5 and are calibrated for various brands of variable contrast papers.
The heart of my Beseler enlarger is a Nikon (of course!) EL-Nikkor f/2.8 enlarger lens. I found it on eBay for a great price. It appeared brand new and never used. It’s a great lens, and I couldn’t ask for anything sharper! I generally use it at f/8.
My darkroom is in my garage. At present, this only allows me to print at night. However, the garage is pretty dark in the daytime, and with a little work, I think I can make it light tight in the daytime.
I also researched work surfaces. While I considered dedicated dark room solutions, I went for a custom built table instead. This table was built for me by RDM Industrial Products in California.
http://www.rdm-ind.com
They were very helpful and understood exactly what I needed. They were actually very familiar with darkroom applications and have built darkroom workstations for institutions in the past. For my table, they built it to my dimensions (to handle the enlarger,  and three 16x20 trays), and they also built it to be a comfortable working height for my height. They offer a range of table surface materials, and we decided on the chemical resistant top for my application. This has made darkroom chemical clean up a breeze!
While this custom made table may not be for everyone, it was definitely the right decision for me. Not only was the table make my exact specifications, it’s also rock-solid. No movement or vibration at all!
While my darkroom work surface itself is “dry” (no running water), I have a larger laundry room sink close by to get to water for rinsing the prints.
For chemicals, my primary print develop of choice is BW-65 from Photographer’s Formulary:
http://stores.photoformulary.com/bw-65-liquid-paper-developer/
This developer is a Phenidone and glycin-based paper developer that produces rich blacks. BW-65 produces results similar to Amidol, but is much safer to use than Amidol.

Among other accessories I’ve picked up for the darkroom, include a darkroom timer. I found on eBay a decent, working Gra-lab timer. I like this style of timer, because it’s large, and easy to see. Very straight forward design.
I also recently picked up a Bestwell Grain Focusing scope. This allows you to precisely focus your image on the paper. If you haven’t tried one of these, you need to get one! You’ll wonder how you every got a sharp, focused print without it!
If you have any questions about my darkroom, or developing techniques, please feel free to contact me!
Rick’s e-mail:
shadowsphoto@mac.com
Visit Rick’s website: www.saguaroshadowsphoto.com
Hear Rick chat about recommended Darkroom books on Epiosde 101 of The Film Photography Podcast! http://filmphotographyproject.com/podcast

Light And Dark: The Racial Biases That Remain In Photography

by Tell Me More Staff

• 
  
• 
  

Syreeta McFadden has learned to capture various hues of brown skin.

Syreeta McFadden/Courtesy of the artist

When Syreeta McFadden was a child, she dreaded taking pictures after a family photo made her skin appear dulled and darkened.
"In some pictures, I am a mud brown, in others I'm a blue black. Some of the pictures were taken within moments of one another," she , digging into an "inherited bias" in photography against dark skin.
She tells Celeste Headlee that certain cameras and photographers who are unfamiliar with different shades of skin often distort the images and color of black and brown people.
McFadden is now a photographer herself. Though technology has improved and allowed her to capture the many hues of brown skin, she says photography still has a long way to go.

---

Interview Highlights

On why technology doesn't capture brown skin well and didn't especially in the past
A lot of [the design of film and motion technology] was conceived with the idea of the best representation of white people. And I don't mean to say that it was a deliberate and exclusionary practice, but [it was] much more of a willful obliviousness, if you will. So color film in its early stages pretty much developed around trying to measure the image against white skin. ...
Kodak Eastman had a model on staff named Shirley, [whom] they used as a human face to meter the printed color stock. So she's a pale, white-skinned woman [with] dark hair, that's set against a rather banal background to try and see how white skin fared in a high-contrast light situation. So the Shirley cards became a rubric to set up or establish what would be a much more perfected color image.
On push-back from black photographers
It wasn't so much that Kodak didn't encounter a groundswell of resistance from the African-American community. I think a lot of folks just thought that, perhaps, the color film, they're not very good photographers. That's probably why the color isn't reading our skin tones in varied lighting situations correctly. ...
[Photographer Jean Luc Godard] was commissioned to [do a short film] for the Mozambique government, and what was fascinating about Godard's position is that he felt that the film was inherently racist and said so. His experience with the film stock — and Kodak film stock was more than what we just put inside our cameras — it's also the film stock that was likely used in motion picture making. So for him to recognize that there's a lack of variety and nuance or complexity in dark brown or dark skin images is very telling.

McFadden says light adjustments can affect how skin color looks in photographs.

Syreeta McFadden

On the current discussion around photography and skin color
One of the things I definitely uncovered is that there's been a lack of a conversation — a frank conversation — about taking pictures of darker skinned peoples in mixed company. Pairing dark brown, dark black faces along with pale, light-skinned faces. While we're aware of it because we're all photographers now and to a certain extent we're becoming a little bit more versed in terms of how different lighting adjustments affect skin tones and how that looks against each other because of the variety of technology that we have available to us. I'd also say that darker skin people, we're going to be vigilant and sensitive to whether or not there is a lightening that happens when certain celebrities, say a Beyonce or a Lupita, appear on fashion covers. ...
I'm talking much more specifically about studio lighting and what the light design is.

“ We've seen so many images of black bodies denigrated, or rendered as criminals, or rendered in a way that doesn't necessarily reflect a kind of normalcy.

On why it's important to care about photography and skin color
I think it matters because we're talking about a saturation of images of darker skinned people that somehow we've accepted in our popular culture that kind of diminishes our humanity, and we're in an era where we're seeing a wider representation of black and brown life, particularly in American life.
We've seen so many images of black bodies denigrated, or rendered as criminals, or rendered in a way that doesn't necessarily reflect a kind of normalcy. We see in stock images, whether it's in commercial advertising or on television, we just see images of a normalcy of living and existing that seems to center around whiteness and shows the full variety and humanity of white folks, or of lighter skinned people.
And to have to always account for my humanity in situations where people would deal with me one-on-one, but the images they were exposed to said something very different about the kind of community and people I come from, it matters.

Interview with Maggy van Eijk

Shooting Film.net Interview:

Interview with Maggy van Eijk

Welcome back to London-based photographer Maggy van Eijk, who shoots mostly film and shared her loves for film photography with us here before. Today, we asked Maggy more about her work and her passion for film photography.

Hi Maggy, can you tell us more about you?
I’m a twenty three year old living in London. Originally from The Netherlands, I’ve lived all over the place but I’m hoping to stay in London for as long as my restlessness will let me.

I work as a writer for a student website and I have a vast collection of hobbies but I tend to focus on poetry and photography.

How did you get started and interested in film photography?
I started with digital and then my grandfather gave me his Minolta X-GE, which is still my favorite one to use.

I see it as a friend I’m always fighting with but when we somehow work together the results are awesome and make the struggle completely worth it. The camera is a bit broken and rusty and I currently have to wind it with a 5p coin but it totally fits my haphazard personality. Things that are broken are always more interesting, perfection is a snooze.

Tell us what was your first film camera?
The Minolta was my first and then my friend, a fellow film fanatic, told me about a shop in Holland that sells amazing second hand film cameras. The journey there was an adventure itself; we went on this epic bike ride in the summer heat. The shop sold me a Pentax P30 with a beautiful lens. I’ve also got a point and shoot Pentax I found in Denmark but I’ve stashed it away on the naughty shelf because it won’t focus properly. I also have a Diana F+ and a Canon EOS 1000F that my brother helped me bargain for at a flea market in Amsterdam.

You know those crazy cat ladies that surround themselves with cats? Well, that’s me but substitute cats for cameras.

Who are your favorite film photographers?
These are constantly changing. The great thing about Flickr is that you have unlimited access to the best artists all over the world. I’m completely amazed by young girls like Olivia Bee that are rocking the photography world right now. I think it’s really cool how young women are reclaiming feminine imagery rather than sitting back and weeping about fashion magazines that are making us feel bad. Who cares about the media when you can go out, run around in the woods and take pictures of you and your friends?

What gives you inspiration?
I change up my photography depending on how I feel. A couple weeks ago I was bed-ridden with heartbreak and I just wanted to be alone. My friend forced me outside and we went out to London’s Southbank and just took pictures of strangers and street artists and old men selling caramelized peanuts. It was great, I didn’t have to set anything up or worry whether or not my subject was having fun. It made me appreciate how lucky I am to live in London and I left my bed, which is always a good sign.

I think, people in general are inspiring to me; photo shoots are a great excuse to hang out with people I love and be silly and out doors. I’ve done paid photography work before and I hated it. It was too stressful and I was constantly worrying about getting the right shot for the client. I prefer to keep photography as creative outlet that I just do for me, no one else.

I suppose another point of inspiration is my bizarre obsession with Portland, Oregon. I’ve never been there and I’m always tucking away loose change in the hope to go there one day. It started because of Flickr, whenever I’d stumble on a photograph I really liked I would check out the Geo-tag, my favourite photos are somehow always taken there. It’s a really strange coincidence. I like to recreate that vast nature type feel where landscape completely swallows you, but living in London makes that a little difficult.

Do you have any tips for someone who’s just picking up a film camera?
Just go out and learn as you go. I went on holiday to Venice and Barcelona shortly after my grandfather gave me his Minolta. It was a really exciting trip and I was eager to capture every second of it. However, the first problem started because I couldn’t load the film and a kind man sitting next to be on the plane helped me out. Once I started shooting I thought I’d gotten some great shots until I had them developed and none of them had worked out. Next time I used the camera I got maybe two photos out of it, next time a couple more and then eventually I got the hang of it became this amazing rush. It was worth the long and expensive learning process.

I could have cut some corners by reading the manual. I probably should have done that.

Maggy, thank you so much for the interview.

From: Timothy Buerger Photography

More as things develop…

You’ve probably figured out that I’m a proponent of film. Film is cool stuff. Especially black and white film.
Film or digital, honestly, is a choice that everyone has to make for themselves. But I think that every photographer starting out in the digital era would get a huge benefit out of going through a film phase. Because film is a royal pain in the butt.
Really. It is. But that’s exactly why it’s a fantastic teacher.
Digital cameras throw around a lot of words when they’re trying to convince you to buy them. Some of them refer to characteristics of the camera’s image sensor and it’s representation of the image: dynamic range, megapixels, noise at high ISO, and the most ambiguous one, colors. The problem with digital cameras is that you generally only get one, at least at the beginning. If you’re a studious first camera purchaser, you do your research, and you decide on a camera, without any real experience as to what those terms mean to you.
Film cameras are a pain in the butt. You only get a small number of pictures before you have to change the image sensor roll of film. And you can’t change the ISO from photo to photo.
When you start out shooting film, you go to the store and buy one of everything. You learn what you like and what you don’t, and in that process, you learn what those crazy digital camera marketing terms mean. You learn what a film with less dynamic range looks like compared to the films with more dynamic range. If you branch out from 35mm to a borrowed medium format camera, you have a very physical representation of the value of megapixels. And that hardest to explain one, “colors” – that happens when you shoot a few different films, and realize that all films do not represent color the same way.
I think that there are some very good arguments to be made for films. No colors look as beautiful as a slide in your hands. The dynamic range you can squeeze of of black and white films is amazing. But learning to see those things in film is what’s going to make you able to see them in your digital photos. If you’ve only ever had one hamburger from one fast food chain, you’d have a hard time describing it. But if you’ve had a lifetime of eating at all of the fast food chains, you can describe the differences in them very well(unless, of course, your diet-induced diabetes and obesity has done you in).
One thing about films is that the conditions you develop under, and the chemicals you use to develop them can make a world of difference. Here in Tokyo, I can’t develop film in the winter. The film dries to slowly, and it leaves bubbles on the film. In some of these shots you can see some bubbles – not bad, but perhaps I should have waited for it to be a little warmer. I use HC-110 to develop my film, because it pulls more dynamic range out of the shots, even if that comes at the cost of a bit of graininess. If I wanted to completely reduce grain, I’d be shooting digital.
I think that an appreciation for the developing process, and the printing process, will make you appreciate exactly how important that post-processing step is. “Straight-out-of-camera” is cool to say and all, but when you’re working with film, you realize how nothing is SooC. Nothing ever was. Nothing comes easy, especially not a great photograph. You always have to put your work in and make it something special. And if you really get into darkroom printing your film photos, you’ll discover
Dust is a major pain in the butt. I have to use my bathroom to hang film to dry because it’s relatively dust-free. I have an air filter that I run for hours before scanning film. With cleaning the surface of the scanner, I still end up with dust, more sometimes than others. With landscapes, I want to edit the dust out, but with other photos, it can feel like part of the aesthetic. Perhaps it’s silly, but I tend to like it.
With film, there’s so much that can go wrong. A lot of those things are cured by moving to digital(but other problems are introduced. It’s not a 100% miracle cure.) But these problems can be treated as features. They teach you to do things properly. You can’t chimp shots by looking at your LCD, so you learn to properly trust your metering skills. You can’t change your ISO, so you learn to plan ahead, and then adjust when life is less-than-ideal. You learn a lot, and then you can take that back to digital and be a more competent, more confident shooter.
I don’t shoot film commercially. Usually. But the things I learned from film bring me to where I am when I shoot digital photos. I really recommend that everyone lets themselves go through a film phase. It will teach you amazing things. The problem is, film is sexy. You might just end up loving it. That’s what happened to me.