# Vintage Kodak Camera - Info wanted



## psun03 (Jun 4, 2014)

I found some cameras in my garage. I was hoping to see if someone could ID it.

It is some OLD Kodak..


----------



## compur (Jun 4, 2014)

The model is written on the little plaque on the front of the camera below the lens.


----------



## vintagesnaps (Jun 4, 2014)

Looks like a vintage 'folder' as they're often called. It looks like it might say Autographic (I have a couple of those) but I don't see anyplace that would hold a stylus. The Autographics usually had a little window that you would slide open and could write the date or whatever using the stylus, and it would be exposed onto the film (then you'd close the door covering the window). All I see is the red window that would show the frame number. 

It's fairly old because it says EKC for Eastman Kodak Company. I don't know offhand when they stopped using that logo or that style lettering for Kodak. Yours looks like it's lost some of the leatherette on the ends; I know there are collectors who re-cover their old cameras where that's peeled off. These usually don't have much value, depends on condition, but might interest someone as a parts/for repair camera.


----------



## webestang64 (Jun 4, 2014)

Looks like it's the 5th one down on this list......
http://www.kodak.com/global/en/consumer/products/techInfo/aa13/aa13.pdf


----------



## dxqcanada (Jun 4, 2014)

compur said:


> The model is written on the little plaque on the front of the camera below the lens.



Hmm, that does help in ID'ing this camera.:mrgreen:


----------



## minicoop1985 (Jun 4, 2014)

No. 1A Autographic Kodak Jr. I want to say 1914, but I'm not 100% on the date. If it shoots 120 and doesn't have light leaks, that shutter's probably still fine. Put some film in it and give it a whirl!


----------



## webestang64 (Jun 5, 2014)

minicoop1985 said:


> No. 1A Autographic Kodak Jr. I want to say 1914, but I'm not 100% on the date. If it shoots 120 and doesn't have light leaks, that shutter's probably still fine. Put some film in it and give it a whirl!



The 1A is 116 film.........1914-1927       http://www.kodak.com/global/en/consumer/products/techInfo/aa13/aa13.pdf


----------



## minicoop1985 (Jun 5, 2014)

Damn, thought it might work. Oh well, I imagine 120 could be used though.


----------



## vintagesnaps (Jun 5, 2014)

I was going to guess 1920-ish, I was sort of close! lol I think the 116 spools are longer than 120 size. I've seen that people adapt by cutting out circles from things like old mouse pads to fit each end of the spools to hold them in place yet allow them to turn and advance film. Or I've seen that people use older & larger cameras to do direct positives on paper. 

I have a 116 Kodak camera that's 100 years old (one of the many variations of Brownie and 'pocket' which apparently fit pockets big enough to hold a couple of bricks). I saw one like mine being sold in a kit for making tintypes but I haven't gotten that adventurous or taken time to experiment with anything like that yet.


----------



## webestang64 (Jun 9, 2014)

116 film.........Film For Classics 116 - Kodak Pan-X 100 Film


----------



## Derrel (Jun 9, 2014)

Here's an example of what an old, folding Kodak of that type could produce, on film of the early 1930's, scanned on an Epson 3200 Photo flatbed scanner.






[    DadwBoxLunch.jpg photo - Derrel photos at pbase.com    ]

This is my dad, eating a box lunch. There is a bamboo fly rod poking out of the window of the old convertible. I am going to guess that this is the opening weekend of trout season in Oregon, mid-April, 1934. This was shot with an old vintage Kodak folder that my grandparents had until the early 1950's, when my grandfather switched to 35mm slides, using a Kodak Pony 135-B, which was made from 1953 to 1955.


----------



## webestang64 (Jun 9, 2014)

Derrel said:


> Here's an example of what an old, folding Kodak of that type could produce, on film of the early 1930's, scanned on an Epson 3200 Photo flatbed scanner.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



LOVE that photo.....and car!!!!!


----------



## Derrel (Jun 9, 2014)

Yeah, it's a pretty cool car. I learned to fish with that old fly rod, back in the late 1960's. I caught my first trout on it in fact. It was an old Montague Redwing. As far as this type of folding Kodak; I scanned a lot of these negatives and made 13x19 inch prints for my dad's funeral. The prints look better than this small, down-sized scan. The scans outta' the Epson 3200 Photo make really nice 19-inch long prints! Plenty sharp for the display I set up. People were actually in awe of what the old Kodak folder could show in a photo. I admit, I was surprised too, since all I had ever seen were contact prints from it.


----------



## vintagesnaps (Jun 9, 2014)

Didn't know that Blue Moon was selling Film for Classics! (who I'd bought from when they still sold direct) much less 116 - and developing it!! You just made my day Scotty. No, my week! Looks like I'll be using it sparingly (hmm maybe a good use for some of the tax refund I haven't already spent on film!) but I'll finally get to actually use my 'pocket' camera. The last I'd looked which was some time ago B&H didn't have much of their film anymore, Central Camera in Chicago did but I didn't think had many odd sizes. Now to go look for some 828 too for my Bantam (which actually would fit in a pocket).  

Great photo Derrell, he looks like a mini-you. Love the car too. I remember someone in the family having somebody or others' bamboo fishing rods from back in the day.


----------



## webestang64 (Jun 9, 2014)

Derrel said:


> Yeah, it's a pretty cool car. I learned to fish with that old fly rod, back in the late 1960's. I caught my first trout on it in fact. It was an old Montague Redwing. As far as this type of folding Kodak; I scanned a lot of these negatives and made 13x19 inch prints for my dad's funeral. The prints look better than this small, down-sized scan. The scans outta' the Epson 3200 Photo make really nice 19-inch long prints! Plenty sharp for the display I set up. People were actually in awe of what the old Kodak folder could show in a photo. I admit, I was surprised too, since all I had ever seen were contact prints from it.



I'll tell ya......when I estimate for retouch I use a loupe on many smaller prints and the detail is amazing on some of the old prints, mainly because they are contact prints. 




vintagesnaps said:


> Didn't know that Blue Moon was selling Film for Classics! (who I'd bought from when they still sold direct) much less 116 - and developing it!! You just made my day Scotty. No, my week! Looks like I'll be using it sparingly (hmm maybe a good use for some of the tax refund I haven't already spent on film!) but I'll finally get to actually use my 'pocket' camera. The last I'd looked which was some time ago B&H didn't have much of their film anymore, Central Camera in Chicago did but I didn't think had many odd sizes. Now to go look for some 828 too for my Bantam (which actually would fit in a pocket).



Glad I could help, I was looking for 620 (before I decided to roll my own) and found Blue Moon. I might get a few rolls of 127. I have about 12- 127 cameras in my collection.


----------



## PWhite214 (Jul 22, 2014)

I am not sure I understand this explanation, but....

Using 120 film in your 116 film camera. - Photo.net Classic Manual Cameras Forum

Phil


----------

