Fed-Arsenal

Thanks, Bill, for your strong and logical argumentation.

Sure, I could have say the same (in French!) before having made some researches. Now, I am not so sure, more especially as there are "rumours" (I should say "certitudes") coming from Arsenal saying that one (or rather two) small series of these cameras were made at the factory just after the war. That my camera belongs to the first series or not is not really the problem: the main problem is: did these series ever exist?

That these cameras were made by the factory or a forger, it would be useful to check the non-Fed parts (of which I had spoken) to see if they are the same. And to check too if there are engravings inside which could give us indications. But it seems I am alone to have such a camera here!

You are absolutely right about the lens. Certainly a 1945 or 46 camera would be better with a "normal" Fed lens, not an Industar 22, even a Moskva "tomb" made in 1948. But I cannot completely follow you about the "amateurism" of the engravings: we don't know in which exact conditions they were made, and the immediate postwar was a troubled period... And if they were made by forgers, I am a bit surprised too that these cameras are always so rare.

Perhaps some of us know more? Anyway, for me, this camera is much more than a (perfect) item in my collection; it's a question!

Amitiйs. Jacques.

Maybe a silly question: but in 1946-47 the Arsenal logo was still the classical "diamond" we know?
I remenber I saw a manual of a 1948 kiev 2 and there was no logo on the front page, only the name KIEV.
In my collection the oldest kiev logo is on a 1954 Jupiter 8.
Francesco

A perfect question, Francesco!
I have a manual of 1949 Kiev III, and there is no "diamond" logo as well...

Amitiйs. Jacques.

According to Russian Wikipedia Arsenal logo as we know it (stylized letter "A") was introduced in 1950.

Cheers,
Vlad.

If this logo appeared in 1950,and if the information is confirmed, there is no more question!
It doesn't change anything to my pleasure to own this symbolic camera...

Thanks, Vlad. Jacques.

Hi everybody.

Arsenal logo existed prior to 1950. You can see it on military optical devices, theodolites from 1947. If you are able to have a look on the Kiev camera instruction manual from 1947-1948 you will find this logo as well.

Concerning the Fed Arsenal camera it is genuine. Two versions are known: early with logo with hammer and sickle and later ones without hammer and sickle on the logo.

with best regards
altix

Hi Altix,

Please tell us how you know FED-Arsenal is genuine. Can you show any photos of documents? When was the second series made and do you have photos of one of the cameras from the second series? Is this just what some collectors or dealers in Ukraine, or workers at Arsenal are saying, or is there documentary evidence such as a passport, manual, or factory document? Any information would be helpful.

Best regards, Bill



Regards, Bill

Dear Bill,

I do not know if some documents were preserved (except probably blueprints or documentation). I never saw any passport for this camera and the possibility that there exists one is zero. As far as i know nor more than 400 pieces were ever made. What I've heard is the recollections of old former workers. I trust them since many things what I've heard from them later was proved by documentations or some artifact finds. It is quite easy to find the documentation of more recent cameras and optics since some designers are still alive and they have their own archive. Of course workers or camera assemblers have no such drawings or documentation and they can only recollect what they saw.

I know that this sounds silly and you may not trust me since I cannot provide any documentation. Remember that Arsenal is strictly secret object even today and its archive is closed for any research. Almost everything that I could find about the early post-war period of Arsenal comes from the Zeiss Jena archives.

I told Jacques about the existence of this camera for a long time ago and I think he still does not believe in its originality despite he managed to buy one.

Concerning the second type of the FED Arsenal I put some photos with the agreement of the owner. I know the history of how this particular camera has found the new owner and I have no doubts about its originality (I will not tell you explicitly where this camera were previously but you can easily guess why I am so sure)


http://www.ussrphoto.com/UserContent/1372015_2.jpg


http://www.ussrphoto.com/UserContent/1372015_3.jpg


http://www.ussrphoto.com/UserContent/1372015_5.jpg


http://www.ussrphoto.com/UserContent/1372015_7.jpg


http://www.ussrphoto.com/UserContent/1372015_8.jpg

And concerning the Arsenal logo, here is some proof that it existed say in 1947


http://www.ussrphoto.com/UserContent/1372015_1a.jpg

with best regards
altix

Another little thing. The FED Arsenal was produced in another place as Kiev-Contax cameras. Here is this building

http://www.ussrphoto.com/UserContent/1372015_comparison.jpg

This is an old Arsenal workshop that more or less preserved after the war. So the munition and FED Arsenal was produced there. After the German equipment arrived and was installed in this building:

http://www.ussrphoto.com/UserContent/1372015_Arsenal.jpg

the production of optical devices were moved to the new workshops. Bill, your photo of the Kiev cameras inspection was done in the latter building (second floor). The third and the fourth floors were build in mid fifties.

Altix, thank for you the information, very fascinating! Regarding my statement of Arsenal logo, my source was this:

https://goo.gl/X3cwLg

Just for the recordkeeping .

Cheers,
Vlad.

Dear Vlad,

you should take into account that Wikipedia cannot serve as a trustworthy source Fides sed affirmo - trust but verify.

altix

Dear Alix,

Thank you for the photos of another copy of FED-Arsenal. They are helpful to compare with the other examples known. It is certainly not a question of trusting you, as I have seen your other posts to be informative, knowledgeable, and without bias. So, as you yourself have just said, "Fides sed affirmo - trust but verify". In this case, until some documentation is revealed or discovered, there will remain a question in my mind as to authenticity of FED-Arsenal.

The cameras were supposedly made around 1946 - 1950 and so any person working at Arsenal Zavod at that time was doing so at least 65 years ago. If they can remember how many were made of each of two series, but have no other details that would help to authenticate the memories, then it is not much of a story. So far, I have not heard anything that convinces me that these cameras are real and there are many facts that do not line up with the usual details that show authenticity.As well, I do not rule out that they are authentic and only write about it at all to try come to some reasonable answer.

There are many reasons to fake such a camera, and many reasons to proclaim it authentic, both involving mostly money, but also the pride of discovery and being part of history. I don't know why you say that there is zero possibility of passports existing? All cameras and equipment made for the Soviet military had passports. Indeed the known FED-Arsenals have serial numbers, so of course they had passports.

The TSVVS camera was made in a series of about 1000 and presently there are about 75 examples known and listed in our USSRPhoto.com WIKI. Why, if there were 400 FED-Arsenal cameras made are there only a few to be found. I know only of numbers: 00004 (Yuriy Davidenko) / 00020 (Bill Parkinson) / 00067 (Jacques Morin) / 00070 (mentioned as owned by a third party in Kiev, in correspondence I had with Yuriy Davidenko) / 00216 camera you have just shown / 00222 sold on Ebay by German seller in March 2010. So only six that I have heard about. If there were 400 FED-Arsenal cameras it would seem like more would be known, judging by how many TSVVS have survived out of 1000.

Maybe you can find out more about the story than just some workers remember them. Any details or documentation could be helpful as it does not seem that any of the historian - authors of Russian cameras has heard anything other than that they were made after the war, twice. I thank you and your friend for the images of No. 000216 and I'm sure Jacques may tell us what model FED it is made from.

Why would the one I owned, No.00020 have been made from a Zorki? Any ideas? Also, I have some photos of No. 000222 from Ebay if anyone wants to see them.

Best regards, Bill

Regards, Bill

Dear friends!

Delighted by this thread!

As Altix says, it's several months we have discussed together about postwar Arsenal productions: these exciting 1945/50 years. And when I saw this camera for sale... But even now I am not completely convinced, like Bill and for the same reason: there is no "material" certitude.

On the other hand, a very small series made from Fed parts is not such a problem. They can have been made unknown from the rest of the factory and be the task of an internal workshop with two or three persons. All the work is to assemble spare parts, to reingrave plates, and to make some spare parts which can be missing. The last task can be the most delicate, it's why I have insisted on it.

As for a possible passport... After all, we found nothing about the TSVVS, Bill... If we had passports or papers about this camera, we would know for sure where the TSVVS were made.

Concerning the low number of these Fed-Arsenal, I found mine only under the specification of "Fed". Nothing else: these cameras are not well known. Another possible explanation about the difference between the number of 400 cameras and those really found : that the covers were engraved, but the very bad condition of parts coming from Berdsk couldn't have allowed to mount the foreseen number. It could explain too why we find a Fed Arsenal cover on a Zorki 1b, later...

But all that are only guessings. Nevertheless, I must say that after Altix's pictures of Arsenal, I imagine a small team working on the mounting of these cameras...

Now, concerning the original Fed series of the 00216, showed by Altix, it's impossible to say without having it in hand. Is there a hole in the press film? If no, it's a post s/n c. 150000. Are the two plates magnetic? If Altix could put these two questions to his friend? But at first look, I would say that this camera was probably made from wartime Fed parts, exactly like mine. But the vulcanite seems different.

Something else: the frame counter is exactly the same too, on the two cameras, with a position of one pin at "12" (and at "32" on the other side, of course), never seen on a Fed. To compare with Bill's Fed-Arsenal, which has a normal Zorki frame with pins at 5/10 and 25/30. These famous missing parts...

It should be interesting to speak of the lens plate too, and of the choice of the lens: a very early "1 turn" on the s/n 00216. But I stop there!

Amitiйs. Jacques.

Hello everybody,

Jacques has already mentioned some points I also wanted to stress. I do not expect the existence of manuals for FED Arsenal for several reasons:

1. It seems that the FED Arsenal was produced for a very short time and was distributed among the workers. I always wondered how much care used to take the Arsenal directors about the workers. They gave a lot of commemorative pins and medals (I guess also with money premium) to Arsenal workers who assembled munition during the war. I expect that FED Arsenal was issued almost immediately after the war to reward the outstanding Arsenal workers who made a lot of effort during the war. If the manuals ever existed then they were most probably printed by FED as a standard manuals for FED.

2. Most probably the Arsenal factory did not possess its own typography at the end of the war. The typography equipment arrived in Arsenal from Jena factory and only in 1947 they were able to print manuals for Kiev on relative high level. If you look on the passports for the cameras they were produced by printing in dark room until 1951. If you look on the documentation for trophy military optics or theodolites from late forties, the instructions are of really bad quality.

3. The movement of the production line from one building to another could also cause the damage to documentation (but I still believe that the documents and blueprints if existed are in Arsenal archive)

When collecting the Soviet cameras you should always learn the psychology of Soviet citizen and the essence of plan economics. Some things sounds to unaware people insane but it was natural to do this in the context of that epoch in USSR. I can speak about this a long time. But let me give you some examples.

Let us take German optical industry in seventies. German engineers and optical designers develop new cameras and lenses. They do it since the new outstanding optical design can bring big material profit from selling the lens to German or foreign customers. There are some money invested in the project, some money you spend for materials and production costs. But at the end after selling the lens you got more money that you invest. You have a profit. It is very trivial and logical way of reasoning why Germans invest in new design developments. The system is optimized for getting profit.

Now let us consider the lens or camera production in Soviet Union also in seventies. There is a plan economics. Say Arsenal has also very brilliant engineers and optical designers. But they have limitations by plan economics to produce such a number of cameras that are able to shoot. At the same time the cost of the camera cannot go beyond some threshold since than nobody from Soviet citizens would be able to buy it. Usually the optimal solution is to produce the camera the production costs of which is almost the same as the selling price. In any case Arsenal workers will get their salaries from the state.

But where to get extra money for the factory itself? There is again the solution in plan economics. The factory asks money for the development of new optics or cameras that are more up to date or similar to the best designs from the West. And the state gives a lot of money for the development of the camera within 5 years plan. During this period appears the new camera and optics, the factory prints manuals and advertisement booklets. Than they report that they managed to create this camera and spent all money for the project. Then other persons in ministry decide if this camera and optics could be mass produced. They conclude that it is impossible since the cost of materials and assembling is so high that nobody would buy it. The factory shows the prototypes on State exhibition or even on some international exhibitions. At the end the prototypes could go to some photojournalists or to party bonze. Everybody is happy. There is also some logic here but it has nothing to do with the profit from the development of new technologies.

Another example that was very trivial for Soviet people and is hard to understand on the West that if you need to repair the broken camera you do itself (and could scratch it or destroy completely) or you go to the repairman who do the same thing as you with some probability of successful reparation since he has spare parts or know a little what to do. This guy is not much interested to preserve the originality of the camera or its beauty. He can replace any part he wants, he can scratch it or drill a hole (as on Iskra cameras) despite he can repair even without doing this. He always chooses the simplest and cheapest solution since he is not interested to do it well. At the end he will get for his work amount of money regulated by the state. Of course if you have the guarantee then you go to factory service where they perform reparation on a more or less good level. If you see the FED Arsenal camera with Zorki parts this only means that you are unlucky since the camera was some day repaired by somebody who had no idea that this camera would sometimes be interesting for the collectors.

Bill has mentioned here TSVVS and I find it interesting. I was very skeptical about the originality of TSVVS cameras for a long time (I speak about the genuine TSVVS excluding later fakes). My reasoning for that was exactly opposite to Bills argumentation. I asked myself why there exist so many TSVVS and with every year appears new and new known cameras? It looks very strange from the statistical point of view. I compared the frequency of TSVVS appearance with the frequency for another camera Drug (Droog or Zorki 7). Despite the fact that TSVVS is much more rare camera than Drug their frequencies in the last years are almost the same. That was for me the strong evidence for considering TSVVS as a fake camera. But a friend of mine gave me very simple explanation for this fact. Now I have no problems to consider TSVVS as genuine.

The reasoning is the following. TSVVS was distributed among the officers. These people had little to do with the photography. But for them the camera was a kind of memory of their platoon or probably the status thing. In USSR you could be considered as successful person if you had a car, a camera, a summer cottage, etc.

But the generation of these officers passed away recently and their relatives try to sell all rubbish left. Since almost all the time these cameras were never used they are good cosmetically and look great.

On the other hand Drug camera is not a reliable camera and many of them one can find in completely awful shape. I think many cameras ended their existence in trash bins.

For FED Arsenal the frequency of appearance is quite normal. However I afraid that after our discussions the market would be overflooded with fake FED Arsenal. Alas...

And more questions arise!
I did write this answer while at work, and now I see Altix has written mostly same ideas.

Military: Like Altix points out, TSVVS was a trophy and luxury item for high ranking officers, and not for field use. So they were not to be used in daily work, and I can think that many were kept as an investment for the bad day. Remember also all those anniversary cameras we have seen: many are hardly ever used ones.

Was this Arsenal-FED then that ordinary tool like camera, used eg for documenting war traces, and rebuilding? I have seen a lot of these pictures, so there was a need to photograph what was left after war. Even propaganda: we did rebuild everything this fast and well, destroyed by others. Or actually by the Soviet troops in many cases…

For those cameras there was a need. And I can imagine that if there was passports, they went to army records, not followed with cameras.

Some say that there was Leicas and such to use after war. I say the opposite. So much was lost, hidden and stolen in the chaos just after war. Even here in Finland it is as late as now, that these war time items have been popping up from the homes of war time soldiers. Those generations saved everything, and anything they could. It was not stealing when there was no physical owner, and it could save your own life someday. Even my grand dad had an illegal WWII-pistol in his drawer, and his children did not know of it until he died. Just like Altix wrote, again…

Also if the camera was a tool, the survival percentage must have been very low. Broken or lost and just thrown away when aged enough. Most likely these were not the worlds best made cameras: when you see the finish of Arsenal-made parts it is poor. More poor “fast made replacement” parts inside?

Some hundred units: were these meant for Red army in the just occupied Ukraine, Poland, Hungary, Baltic countries, Czechoslovak and so on? Where there was no Red army from past, but a need for all inventory.

Bills odd camera with too new insides? Maybe it was a factory-repaired one? I can imagine that it has been easier to repair an old one, than purchasing a new camera in Soviet bureaucracy. A couple of years error could still be possible.

Best regards,
Juhani

quote:

---

Originally posted by altix

Dear Vlad,

you should take into account that Wikipedia cannot serve as a trustworthy source Fides sed affirmo - trust but verify.

altix

---

I completely agree, I just pointed out that this was the only source I have found on the web that dates the logo in any way at all. Doesn't mean it's accurate .

Cheers,
Vlad

Hello All,

Yes, it is possible that the FED-Arsenal was assembled at the Arsenal Zavod in Kiev and that::

1. There were no passports made or all have been lost or are still in archives somewhere.
2. That Arsenal had no means of printing anything.
3. That movement from one building to another caused a loss of FED-Arsenal documents.
4. That it was made unknown from the rest of the factory by two or three workers.
5. The workmanship and chrome-plating were poor due to end of War problems.
6. That the condition of parts from Berdsk was bad and so new parts had to be fabricated upon occasion.
7. The top plate was ground down to eliminate previous FED engravings and then an Arsenal logo was added with a 'FED" engraving as well.
8. That the Soviet military was in desperate need to 200 cameras to photograph war damage and rebuilding.
9.That the Soviet military was okay with poor chrome-plating and engraving due to urgent need.
10. That very few cameras survived due to hard use.
11. That soon many more FED-Arsenals will turn up from relatives.
12. That the vulcanite on the various known examples could vary in style.
13. That old former workers have said that from 65 years ago they remember the camera (among the many cameras made by Arsenal).

But it is also possible that the FED-Arsenal is the work of early forgers who:

1. Never made passports.
2. Had no means of printing passports, did not think it necessary to have one, or were not capable of making them.
3. Was made by one or two forgers, unknown from others in general.
4. Performed poor, at-home electro-plating with chrome over the newly ‘FED-Arsenal’ top plate which had been previously ground to remove old FED or Zorki engraving.
5. Poor workmanship due to lack of sophisticated tools and machine tools.
6. That the “FED” engraving was added, along with the Arsenal logo just to make the camera more attractive to buyers. (Seems like the camera would
just have Arsenal logo if made at Arsenal.)
7. There was no need by the military at the time to have an extra 200 cameras made to photograph war damage and rebuilding.
8. That the military would not have accepted the standards of poor chrome job, replacement parts and varying vulcanite and would have specifications
in mind when making the order for 200 cameras.
9. That many more than are now known would have survived, as is usual with FED cameras.
10. That not so many more will turn up (remains to be seen).
11. That different vulcanite coverings are due to different camera bodies being used by forgers which already had the vulcanite in place.
12. That the former workers were not there 65 years ago, their memories are not accurate, or they remember seeing one in the Arsenal Museum, but that the one in the       museum was not authentic. Evidently, the worker who remembers it was not working at Arsenal until 1952, I am told.
13. That the FED-Arsenal No.000020 was made by forgers using a Zorki body, not anticipating the scrutiny of the details that the camera is now receiving, but only
wanting to make another camera to sell

Although I would not like to close my mind to the idea that the FED-Arsenal has a possibility to be authentic, I would also not consider the theories advanced, so far, as proof that it is authentic. Of course Arsenal Zavod is one of the great camera factories, but that alone does not mean the camera is authentic. It is easy for theories that are not documented to be published and republished, making them appear to be fact when no real proof has been offered.

For example, look at Yuriy Davidenko’s article about TSVVS being produced at ALMAZ. He provides no proof, only writing about the factory, their rocket production, etc. but nothing about that TSVVS was produced there. Now his theory is in books, the internet, forum posts and WIKIs. Personally, I still think that TSVVS has a possibility to have been produced for the Soviet Military in Eastern Germany, that may be why no passports (but another subject altogether). It seems to me that FED-Arsenal is in this process of becoming authenticated without fact, both in this discussion as well as in a film about Arsenal that I am told about (but I have not seen the film or the role the FED-Arsenal plays in it yet).

Sorry for the long post!


Regards, Bill

Dear Bill,

you are absolutely correct. One cannot be hundred percent sure in matters like this. A reasonable skepticism is always good. For me the word "proof" always means the mathematical proof. Mathematics is the only discipline that can be objective. Concerning different proofs based on documents or other evidences it is always a little bit tricky. You should always keep in mind that documents could be modified depending on political situation or could be influenced by the viewpoint of the person who wrote them. The technical documentation is the most precise in this sense. Say if I would forger the documents I would do easily booklets or advertisements. But it would be almost impossible for me to fake the technical documentation since I do not posses the engineering knowledge. And of course the mechanics or optical design is based on extensive mathematical calculations that are hard to fake by nonspecialists since it can be easily found out.

So from the purist point of view I would accept as proof for camera originality only its technical documentation. Of course such an approach leads to nowhere in the case of Soviet cameras. This is because in the USSR many factories that produced toys and cameras were secret military objects. Actually camera or toys production was kind of legend for foreign secret services. Say the heart of Arsenal was the constructor bureau that dealt with military optics and space technologies. And workshop with cameras was something for camouflage. And of course you will get the trouble if you would like to have a look on technical drawings from such factories. They are probably exist but under the seal top secret. It may sound strange may sound like this is good explanation from the standpoint of forger but it is unfortunately the reality I faced with.

Concerning FED Arsenal the story is that I am more sure that the camera existed than it is a fake. There are many arguments pro this decision and I do not see any reasonable argument counter this statement. But you can charge from the purist viewpoint that this is my own belief. But analogously you should admit that TSVVS camera is also probably forgery since nobody saw any technical documentation on this camera. I would say however that the TSVVS is genuine since I have many arguments that supports the statement that it is genuine and almost no arguments against.

I am also sorry for my long discussions.

Hi Alix,

If this camera was a forgery and the forger made some documents, I can imagine that it would be easy to tell that the documents were forged as they would be of a low quality. I am not a purist and could believe that this camera was authentic if there were some other type of proof or strong indications, like in the case of TSVVS. But so far, other than some stories that are not verified and are more like memories, I don't see indications that it is authentic. If it is authentic I doubt this camera was a secret military project. Especially the 'second series' and paperwork would have been made.It is not the case that most Soviet cameras were made without paperwork ... even the KGB workshop of KMZ had manual, passports, etc. as I know because I have the papers and cameras-disguises in my collection. So, in my opinion it is not likely that these cameras would not have papers if authentic.

As far as the "FED-Arsenal story", I am not clear as to what arguments are pro about it. I have only heard that a FED-Arsenal was bought from the Arsenal Museum and that a former employee who is 86 and started working at Arsenal in 1952 has memories of it. That alone is not enough to tip the scales in favor of authenticity considering variations in the details of the different examples, the poor quality of the plating, the ground-down looking top plates, no documentation as of now, and why the logo of FED was engraved on a supposedly Arsenal product (no one has yet addressed that double logo issue or pointed out another Soviet camera that has the logo of two factories).

I don't know where TSVVS was made, but I see no evidence of ALMAZ even though many sites are now saying that it is "ALMAZ TSVVS". This is all due to Davidenko's article which has no facts concerning the camera's origin. People are hungry for answers and will take any theory as truth just to have an answer. Maybe there is evidence for ALMAZ that I have not seen?

So, I don't think it isa good idea to authenticate the FED-Zorki until there is clear information that it is not a fake, Maybe there is no clear information and it is a fake. It is better to leave it up in the air, in my opinion, until the truth is certain or the known facts overwhelmingly point to one or the other. Maybe we will finally know when Vlad (who is very fair, careful, and open-minded) moves the WIKI entry to either the "Arsenal" category or "Unidentified / Contested Authenticity" category!

Regards, Bill