| T O P I C R E V I E W |
| Bull Halsey |
Posted - Jun 13 2009 : 11:24:35 PM
Here is a good one for you. A FED, Galvanized Steel, #2969.
The top plate's inscription appears as a Model 1b, no notch around the viewfinder, it's stepped out and rectangilar. All other features appear as a Model 1a. The attached 50mm has VERY small numbers 34 then a small space followed by the numbers 959.
What do you think it is?
Steve |
| 3 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First) |
| Bull Halsey |
Posted - Jun 15 2009 : 2:16:08 PM
Quite interesting. How else is someone to know until surfacing the issue. The finish is quite appealing nevertheless.
After studying the information presented on the net, including pieces which are owned by our own members, I agree with the proposal that this camera had been worked on as a model 1b. It obviously took a bit of labor to further enhance its appearance.
Obviously a mystery as to why there is such a disparaging issue concerning the serial numbers with the Model 1b.
I will try to get a few pictures posted as soon as possible.
Thanks for your input.
Steve |
| mermoz37 |
Posted - Jun 15 2009 : 10:48:48 AM
Bill is completely right:
The technical translation of JL Princelle can lead an error:
Really, in the 1930s in 1950 it was current, for mechanicians who could not Nickeler the mechanical surfaces in finish, "to scratch" surface to polish them by small touches. They used to make it a "Scraper" (in French) which was a manual tool to rectify with a maximum of precision surfaces for "good finish" looking.
I even personnaly ,used this tool during my technical learning to the college in the years 55 - 60: it was a boring and slow work.
For example, people of the factory Bugatti made the same matter on the aluminum dashboards of automobiles, but by making turn the tool. It gave this aspect if private individual of finish.
For our Fed, these small scratched surfaces erased the irregularities of the galvanoplastique cover of the manufacturing by approaching the luxury criteria of some item in silversmith's trade of this time, by mitigating the lack of raw materials.
Actually when we look well at an object galvanized with some zinc as ancient pans or basins) we can believe and be allowed abuse by the aspect.
To my opinion, it adds a little more to the interest that we carry in these cameras because it shows well that they are objects made by true mechanics workers.
To be contested  ???
Alain
(PS : to day , I am very tired but happy , because the phénomenal Bièvres friend's meeting )Thanks to all... |
| nightphoto |
Posted - Jun 14 2009 : 3:50:00 PM
Hi Steve,
Can we see photos of it? Sounds like a 1b that with a re-engraved number and with the body finish then made to look like the "galvanized" finish.
In actuality the galvanized finish on early FED cameras is not really galvanized, but is a finish created by brushing a circular pattern texture onto the surface using a small round wire brush on small electric drill. These days we would use something like a dremel tool. Princelle has created a lot of confusion by calling this finish "galvanized" rather than brushed (maybe it was a translation problem).
So possibly a FED-1b was polished down, the number re-engraved, and then the whole camera given a circular brush treatment.
Another possibility is that it is part of the group of cameras that are 1b FEDS, but have low serial numbers. It has been speculated that they are replacements for FED 1a cameras that were taken back to FED when broken and that new 1b models were engraved with the old camera's serial number. So in this case, if the camera that was returned had a brushed finish, maybe the replacement was also given a brushed finish and the old number even though it was a 1b.
The lens sounds early, but is not usually too much of an indication as the lenes were switched so often.
Regards, Bill
|
|
|
