Yahoo Groups archive

Digital BW, The Print

Index last updated: 2026-04-28 22:56 UTC

Thread

Rolleiflex to be liquidated

Rolleiflex to be liquidated

2015-03-14 by roark.paul@...

Another great company bites the dust --

Rolleiflex Factory to be Liquidated at Auction: Here's a Look Inside


Dad's Rolleicord was the first one I ever used, and I still have my SL66 outfit and a model GX TLR. Lots of the top B&W shooters of the past used them regularly. Cunningham was well known for using one. (Google "picture of cunningham with a rolleiflex".) The fact that Brett Weston use the SL66 influenced my purchase of that model.


A lot of B&W film ran through those cameras.


Paul

PaulRoark.com -- Paul Roark's Photographic Home


Re: [Digital BW] Rolleiflex to be liquidated

2015-03-14 by David Kachel

It\u2019s a real shame to see this happen. I was more of a Pentax 6x7 fan, but all medium format cameras are/were great.
The longevity problem created by the digital switch is difficult to confront, too. You could buy a Rollei and shoot with it the rest of your life. If things went really bad, you might need to replace it once. The bellows on your view camera might need to be replaced a couple of times. And your enlarger might need realignment and an occasional new bulb. As long as you could get film, your old box that holds film was good to go.

Now, your digital camera is obsolete in a couple of years and quits working in just a few more. With analog, when a new film came out, you could buy a roll and get improved images for a couple of dollars. Now, if a new sensor comes out, its of no use to you unless you buy a whole new camera. And certain manufacturers don\u2019t have a problem making your lenses obsolete at the same time. (Isn’t that right, Sony?!)

Though I went 100% digital six years ago, I hate to see this stuff go.


David Kachel

___________________

Artist-Photographer
Fine B&W Photographs

WEBSITE: www.davidkachel.com
BLOG: thetransparentphotographer.com
EMAIL: david@davidkachel.com

PO Box 173
Globe, AZ 85502
(928) 275-0925

RE: [Digital BW] Rolleiflex to be liquidated

2015-03-14 by Jim Bechtel

Yup I agree , but it's a sign of the times with everything that is going on
with digital. Sadly we'll likely see more of it as time goes on.. 

 

So a share for those of us that are stubborn ..well, or think they are.
I'll admit to not shooting 35mm film anymore but still have one heck of a
stable of 35mm camera's and literally hundreds of rolls of transparency and
B&W film..  Like David I have a Pentax 6x7  also have a couple of 4x5's and
8x10's. Plus a zoom back for the 4x5. These I still shoot. And I think I
have enough film to last easily the rest of my life.. I have for many years
used a process of shooting film , drum scanning & print.. Sadly I never got
much into the dark room side of it like so many  did.. when I discovered
drum scanning that was the way I choose to go so abandoned the print side of
my old dark room. I do have a film processer so I can develop my own but
generally  it's easier for me to ship it out for developing to a lab as my
volumes are low..

 

Anyway for the past couple of years I've been doing something a bit off the
wall and it has honestly helped me justify keeping that side of it going..
So I'd like to share that. I have only been doing it with 4x5 so far.. The
only images I am doing this with are images that are worth doing it with so
for me some of my best.. I scan the film or transparency  and when I'm
satisfied with the file and the print I sign the film with a Sharpie. I've
been doing the prints  a bit on the larger side, and attaching the film to
the back of the framed art work and it goes with the sale.  I can still make
another print if needed with the file but am only doing a smaller version.
I have only done three of these so far and I'm hoping to get to maybe three
or four of these a year.. assuming I get the right images and still have the
guts to continue something that many would likely consider pretty stupid.
For me this is justifying keeping this gear and has added a totally
different market that I think will make it work for me. It has really
changed pretty much everything in how I look at it. 

 

jimbo
Show quoted textHide quoted text
From: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com] 
Sent: Friday, March 13, 2015 10:03 PM
To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [Digital BW] Rolleiflex to be liquidated

 

  

It's a real shame to see this happen. I was more of a Pentax 6x7 fan, but
all medium format cameras are/were great.

The longevity problem created by the digital switch is difficult to
confront, too. You could buy a Rollei and shoot with it the rest of your
life. If things went really bad, you might need to replace it once. The
bellows on your view camera might need to be replaced a couple of times. And
your enlarger might need realignment and an occasional new bulb. As long as
you could get film, your old box that holds film was good to go.

 

Now, your digital camera is obsolete in a couple of years and quits working
in just a few more. With analog, when a new film came out, you could buy a
roll and get improved images for a couple of dollars. Now, if a new sensor
comes out, its of no use to you unless you buy a whole new camera. And
certain manufacturers don't have a problem making your lenses obsolete at
the same time. (Isn't that right, Sony?!)

 

Though I went 100% digital six years ago, I hate to see this stuff go.

 

 

David Kachel

 

___________________

 

Artist-Photographer

Fine B&W Photographs

 

WEBSITE: www.davidkachel.com

BLOG: thetransparentphotographer.com

EMAIL: david@...

 

PO Box 173

Globe, AZ 85502

(928) 275-0925





[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Re: [Digital BW] Rolleiflex to be liquidated

2015-03-14 by Jacques Caron

If you're a bit off the wall, I'm too!

I've kept my darkroom just to process my 4x5 B&W negs; since I don't have a drumscan, I'm relying on my flatbed (at 4.2 Dmax that's not so bad) at the max resolution and double scans. Sure the digital files are huge but they are so great printed on paper; none of my digital taken pictures are close to the quality so…

I'm still working in the darkroom a bit.

As for Rolleiflex, must be the way it has to go; unfortunately my pockets aren't deep enough to buy the whole thing.

Jacques
Le 2015-03-14 à 09:29, "'Jim Bechtel' mrjimbo2@... [DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint]" <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com> a écrit :

Yup I agree , but it's a sign of the times with everything that is going on
with digital. Sadly we'll likely see more of it as time goes on..

...
Anyway for the past couple of years I've been doing something a bit off the
wall and it has honestly helped me justify keeping that side of it going..
So I'd like to share that. I have only been doing it with 4x5 so far.. The
only images I am doing this with are images that are worth doing it with so
for me some of my best.. I scan the film or transparency and when I'm
satisfied with the file and the print I sign the film with a Sharpie….

jimbo
_,_._,___


Jacques Caron

Re: [Digital BW] Rolleiflex to be liquidated

2015-03-14 by Bob Frost

-----Original Message----- 
Show quoted textHide quoted text
From: 'Jim Bechtel' mrjimbo2@... [DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint]

Yup I agree , but it's a sign of the times with everything that is going on
with digital. Sadly we'll likely see more of it as time goes on..
...................................

Yes, it's called Evolution, or survival of the fittest, as Darwin noted! 
Nothing sad about it; it's progress.

Bob frost

RE: [Digital BW] Rolleiflex to be liquidated

2015-03-14 by Elliot Puritz

That's an interesting way to work Jimbo.

 

I admit to reprising your experience with 35mm film cameras and film..too
many and too much!  I too work almost exclusively via the digital route.

 

I have kept my 4x5 kit but wonder if I will ever use it again.  I recently
sold virtually all of my Jobo equipment except for a tempering box.  I
thought that I could till develop any 4x5 negatives by inspection ( I had
become reasonably proficient at DBI ) and my 35mm film using the tempering
box.  However, now I wonder if such efforts are still worthwhile.

 

My 8x10 is gone but I still have the "best negatives".  I have had a few of
the negatives scanned and printed by the analog route.  I am in the midst of
comparing such prints with digital ink jet prints made from the same scans.
If more immediate relevance perhaps is a comparison of a few of my "native"
digital files ( from the Monchrome and the Leica Vario ) printed using the
Cone inks and profiles with prints of the same files via the analog route. 

 

One might embrace "digital" as a way to broaden various analog options.  For
example, as some skilled photographers are doing, one might use either
native digital files or scanned analog files and create a larger negative to
be used for Platinum printing.  

 

Might you tell us who develops your film?  Also, do you own a drum scanner,
or have the negatives scanned elsewhere?  

 

Elliot
Show quoted textHide quoted text
From: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com] 
Sent: Saturday, March 14, 2015 9:30 AM
To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
Subject: RE: [Digital BW] Rolleiflex to be liquidated

 

  

Yup I agree , but it's a sign of the times with everything that is going on
with digital. Sadly we'll likely see more of it as time goes on.. 

So a share for those of us that are stubborn ..well, or think they are.
I'll admit to not shooting 35mm film anymore but still have one heck of a
stable of 35mm camera's and literally hundreds of rolls of transparency and
B&W film.. Like David I have a Pentax 6x7 also have a couple of 4x5's and
8x10's. Plus a zoom back for the 4x5. These I still shoot. And I think I
have enough film to last easily the rest of my life.. I have for many years
used a process of shooting film , drum scanning & print.. Sadly I never got
much into the dark room side of it like so many did.. when I discovered
drum scanning that was the way I choose to go so abandoned the print side of
my old dark room. I do have a film processer so I can develop my own but
generally it's easier for me to ship it out for developing to a lab as my
volumes are low..

Anyway for the past couple of years I've been doing something a bit off the
wall and it has honestly helped me justify keeping that side of it going..
So I'd like to share that. I have only been doing it with 4x5 so far.. The
only images I am doing this with are images that are worth doing it with so
for me some of my best.. I scan the film or transparency and when I'm
satisfied with the file and the print I sign the film with a Sharpie. I've
been doing the prints a bit on the larger side, and attaching the film to
the back of the framed art work and it goes with the sale. I can still make
another print if needed with the file but am only doing a smaller version.
I have only done three of these so far and I'm hoping to get to maybe three
or four of these a year.. assuming I get the right images and still have the
guts to continue something that many would likely consider pretty stupid.
For me this is justifying keeping this gear and has added a totally
different market that I think will make it work for me. It has really
changed pretty much everything in how I look at it. 

jimbo

From: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com] 
Sent: Friday, March 13, 2015 10:03 PM
To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [Digital BW] Rolleiflex to be liquidated

It's a real shame to see this happen. I was more of a Pentax 6x7 fan, but
all medium format cameras are/were great.

The longevity problem created by the digital switch is difficult to
confront, too. You could buy a Rollei and shoot with it the rest of your
life. If things went really bad, you might need to replace it once. The
bellows on your view camera might need to be replaced a couple of times. And
your enlarger might need realignment and an occasional new bulb. As long as
you could get film, your old box that holds film was good to go.

Now, your digital camera is obsolete in a couple of years and quits working
in just a few more. With analog, when a new film came out, you could buy a
roll and get improved images for a couple of dollars. Now, if a new sensor
comes out, its of no use to you unless you buy a whole new camera. And
certain manufacturers don't have a problem making your lenses obsolete at
the same time. (Isn't that right, Sony?!)

Though I went 100% digital six years ago, I hate to see this stuff go.

David Kachel

___________________

Artist-Photographer

Fine B&W Photographs

WEBSITE: www.davidkachel.com

BLOG: thetransparentphotographer.com

EMAIL: david@...

PO Box 173

Globe, AZ 85502

(928) 275-0925

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Re: [Digital BW] Rolleiflex to be liquidated

2015-03-14 by John Castronovo

With my Rolleis and Linhofs collecting dust, I think it's time for me to 
revisit pinhole photography Jim. April 26th is pinhole day...

http://pinholeday.org/
http://pinholeday.org/gallery/2014/index.php?formType=list&f_action=refresh&Country=&Province=&City=&groupname=&searchStr=
Show quoted textHide quoted text
-----Original Message----- 
From: 'Jim Bechtel' mrjimbo2@... [DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint]
Sent: Saturday, March 14, 2015 9:29 AM
To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
Subject: RE: [Digital BW] Rolleiflex to be liquidated

Yup I agree , but it's a sign of the times with everything that is going on
with digital. Sadly we'll likely see more of it as time goes on..

Re: [Digital BW] Rolleiflex to be liquidated

2015-03-14 by David Kachel

Anyway for the past couple of years I've been doing something a bit off the
wallŠ

Jim,

I am a firm believer in ³to each his own², (until it comes to trying to make
photographs look like paintings), but thought I would interject this food
for thought.
Have you ever seen this image?


That¹s uncle Ansel with his first interpretation of Moonrise along with a
later one. Believe me, the first one stinks.

What if Ansel had made that first interpretation a limited edition and
³retired² the negative afterwards? The Moonrise we all know and love would
never have existed at all!

This illustrates quite strongly why I am personally against limited
editions, canceling negatives, giving away negatives, etc., etc., etc.
In other words, all the things the art world would have us do by way of
making free gifts (for all practical purposes) of our best works, to the
speculators.
Burn our negatives just before we die? Sure. I¹m all for that. But doing
with our negatives what the (expletive deleted) art world would have us do
so that they can make a profit on our work, instead of us (the REAL reason),
is a very bad idea.

In printmaking, there is plenty of rationale for limited editions because
they are limited by the physical durability of the plate. The limited
edition is just the art world turning a defect into a ³feature². But the
photograph does not wear out and there is no rationale, save the false ones,
for limitations. 

Like the rest of us, including Ansel, you are only going to make at best, a
few dozen really good images in your lifetime. Why make a gift of them to
speculators while we spend our lives scratching for a living?

And BTW, you can bet your socks that after you cash in your chips, those
negatives will immediately be put into action by the people you gifted them
to! To borrow from Ansel, Œkeep the score, and keep performing it until you
have perfected that performance¹.



David Kachel

___________________

Artist-Photographer
Fine B&W Photographs

WEBSITE: www.davidkachel.com
BLOG: thetransparentphotographer.com
EMAIL: david@davidkachel.com

PO Box 173
Globe, AZ 85502
(928) 275-0925






[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Re: [Digital BW] Rolleiflex to be liquidated

2015-03-14 by David Kachel

Oops, I guess the image didn\u2019t go along with the text.
Here is a link to Ansel and his two Moonrises\u2026


Scroll down most of the way to see it.



David Kachel

___________________

Artist-Photographer
Fine B&W Photographs

WEBSITE: www.davidkachel.com
BLOG: thetransparentphotographer.com
EMAIL: david@...

PO Box 173
Globe, AZ 85502
(928) 275-0925

RE: [Digital BW] Rolleiflex to be liquidated

2015-03-14 by Elliot Puritz

David:

 

What an excellent point you have just made.

 

A friend of mine just made the exact same comments about keeping the negatives.

 

Thanks.

 

Elliot
Show quoted textHide quoted text
From: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com [mailto:DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com] 
Sent: Saturday, March 14, 2015 12:17 PM
To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [Digital BW] Rolleiflex to be liquidated

 

  

Anyway for the past couple of years I've been doing something a bit off the
wallŠ

Jim,

I am a firm believer in ³to each his own², (until it comes to trying to make
photographs look like paintings), but thought I would interject this food
for thought.
Have you ever seen this image?

That¹s uncle Ansel with his first interpretation of Moonrise along with a
later one. Believe me, the first one stinks.

What if Ansel had made that first interpretation a limited edition and
³retired² the negative afterwards? The Moonrise we all know and love would
never have existed at all!

This illustrates quite strongly why I am personally against limited
editions, canceling negatives, giving away negatives, etc., etc., etc.
In other words, all the things the art world would have us do by way of
making free gifts (for all practical purposes) of our best works, to the
speculators.
Burn our negatives just before we die? Sure. I¹m all for that. But doing
with our negatives what the (expletive deleted) art world would have us do
so that they can make a profit on our work, instead of us (the REAL reason),
is a very bad idea.

In printmaking, there is plenty of rationale for limited editions because
they are limited by the physical durability of the plate. The limited
edition is just the art world turning a defect into a ³feature². But the
photograph does not wear out and there is no rationale, save the false ones,
for limitations. 

Like the rest of us, including Ansel, you are only going to make at best, a
few dozen really good images in your lifetime. Why make a gift of them to
speculators while we spend our lives scratching for a living?

And BTW, you can bet your socks that after you cash in your chips, those
negatives will immediately be put into action by the people you gifted them
to! To borrow from Ansel, Œkeep the score, and keep performing it until you
have perfected that performance¹.

David Kachel

___________________

Artist-Photographer
Fine B&W Photographs

WEBSITE: www.davidkachel.com
BLOG: thetransparentphotographer.com
EMAIL: david@davidkachel.com

PO Box 173
Globe, AZ 85502
(928) 275-0925

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Re: [Digital BW] Rolleiflex to be liquidated

2015-03-14 by Paul Roark

I totally agree that images need to evolve. I also, however, understand the concept of limiting output to increase value.

I'm trying a compromise where I limit the total Arches-carbon prints but make the dye B&W's in open edition. In theory, if one can have sufficiently differentiated products, the total value increases. (Are there any economists out there who would like to take a stab at the cross-elasticity of demand between the different "products" here?) On the limited edition side, I doubt I'll ever get close to the limit, and if I do, the price will just go up to the point that I won't. The images can still evolve, and I have something to sell to impulse buyers as well as an appropriate medium to make sets for my kids and others for special purposes. I have no idea if it'll ever work in the sense of maximizing economic value -- almost certainly not for me. But, for probably the majority of us who do this more out of passion for the art and medium, it's made life more interesting.

As to being sad about Rollei's demise, I agree with the evolution there also. I'm totally digital. And everything has a life cycle. Still, when an individual or multi-individual association (including a company) has contributed, I think it is worth acknowledging that. I'll be "sad" to see Intel go also, and Apple, Google, and all things will die, but they have made our lives better.

So, Rollei, thank you and RIP. Many of us will keep our TLR's as the headstone and sample of the best of breed for some purposes in that era of photographic evolution.

Paul


Show quoted textHide quoted text
On Sat, Mar 14, 2015 at 9:38 AM, 'Elliot Puritz' drpuritz@... [DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint] <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com> wrote:

David:

What an excellent point you have just made.

A friend of mine just made the exact same comments about keeping the negatives.

Thanks.

Elliot

From: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com [mailto:DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com]
Sent: Saturday, March 14, 2015 12:17 PM
To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [Digital BW] Rolleiflex to be liquidated

Anyway for the past couple of years I've been doing something a bit off the


wallŠ

Jim,

I am a firm believer in ³to each his own², (until it comes to trying to make
photographs look like paintings), but thought I would interject this food
for thought.
Have you ever seen this image?

That¹s uncle Ansel with his first interpretation of Moonrise along with a
later one. Believe me, the first one stinks.

What if Ansel had made that first interpretation a limited edition and
³retired² the negative afterwards? The Moonrise we all know and love would
never have existed at all!

This illustrates quite strongly why I am personally against limited
editions, canceling negatives, giving away negatives, etc., etc., etc.
In other words, all the things the art world would have us do by way of
making free gifts (for all practical purposes) of our best works, to the
speculators.
Burn our negatives just before we die? Sure. I¹m all for that. But doing
with our negatives what the (expletive deleted) art world would have us do
so that they can make a profit on our work, instead of us (the REAL reason),
is a very bad idea.

In printmaking, there is plenty of rationale for limited editions because
they are limited by the physical durability of the plate. The limited
edition is just the art world turning a defect into a ³feature². But the
photograph does not wear out and there is no rationale, save the false ones,
for limitations.

Like the rest of us, including Ansel, you are only going to make at best, a
few dozen really good images in your lifetime. Why make a gift of them to
speculators while we spend our lives scratching for a living?

And BTW, you can bet your socks that after you cash in your chips, those
negatives will immediately be put into action by the people you gifted them
to! To borrow from Ansel, Œkeep the score, and keep performing it until you
have perfected that performance¹.

David Kachel

___________________

Artist-Photographer
Fine B&W Photographs

WEBSITE: www.davidkachel.com
BLOG: thetransparentphotographer.com
EMAIL: david@...

PO Box 173
Globe, AZ 85502
(928) 275-0925

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]


Re: [Digital BW] Rolleiflex to be liquidated

2015-03-14 by bengui

On 3/14/2015 10:07 AM, Paul Roark roark.paul@... 
[DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint] wrote:
> "As to being sad about Rollei's demise. . . .  and everything has a 
> life cycle.  Still, when an individual or multi-individual association 
> (including a company) has contributed, I think it is worth 
> acknowledging that.  I'll be "sad" to see Intel go also, and Apple, 
> Google, and all things will die, but they have made our lives better".
Thanks Paul,

The Rollei notes are for me poignant nostalgia. I was fortunate to have 
had as my first camera a leather-cased Rolleiflex with a 3.5 Tessar 
lens. I purchased it at the PX in Tripoli, Libya ca. 1950 when I was a 
young 19 y/o airman  Its cost was $50. Great camera that I sadly had to 
sell for ca. $100 in 1954 for college tuition. That served, in those 
days, as my student loan. To be honest, no other camera since, however 
expensive, whatever brand or format (and I've had many "cutting edge" 
models) has offered the same kind of Joie de vivre. Old photographers 
also have a life cycle as Paul noted. Finally, I guess it's not really 
sad whether a Rollei or a revered old negative or one of us fades way to 
the next generation  (hopefully after having made some lives better).

Tom Hefter

Re: [Digital BW] Rolleiflex to be liquidated

2015-03-14 by Matti Koskinen



On 03/14/2015 05:27 PM, 'Bob Frost' bobfrost@... [DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint] wrote:
Show quoted textHide quoted text

-----Original Message-----
From: 'Jim Bechtel' mrjimbo2@... [DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint]

Yup I agree , but it's a sign of the times with everything that is going on
with digital. Sadly we'll likely see more of it as time goes on..
...................................

Yes, it's called Evolution, or survival of the fittest, as Darwin noted!
Nothing sad about it; it's progress.

Bob frost

I think it's more of a moral decay: fb, instagram, cellphones, selfies, things that make me sick of the flood of images. I hated digital so much, that the first images of this year with dslr were this week. I've been using only film lately with Holga, Welta TLR and my newest found from fleamarket: Smena 4!

best

-m

Re: [Digital BW] Rolleiflex to be liquidated

2015-03-14 by Bob Frost

-----Original Message----- 
Show quoted textHide quoted text
From: Matti Koskinen mjkoskin@... [DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint]

I think it's more of a moral decay: fb, instagram, cellphones, selfies, 
things that make me sick of the flood of images. I hated digital so much, 
that the first images of this year with dslr were this week. I've been using 
only film lately with Holga, Welta TLR and my newest found from fleamarket: 
Smena 4!
.............................

So, about time you were replaced by someone more fitted to the current state 
of the world!  ;)

Bob frost

Re: [Digital BW] Rolleiflex to be liquidated

2015-03-14 by Matti Koskinen

On 03/14/2015 10:42 PM, 'Bob Frost' bobfrost@... 
[DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint] wrote:
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Matti Koskinen mjkoskin@... [DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint]
>
> I think it's more of a moral decay: fb, instagram, cellphones, selfies,
> things that make me sick of the flood of images. I hated digital so much,
> that the first images of this year with dslr were this week. I've been using
> only film lately with Holga, Welta TLR and my newest found from fleamarket:
> Smena 4!
> .............................
>
> So, about time you were replaced by someone more fitted to the current state
> of the world!  ;)
>
> Bob frost
>
>
Or, there's the well-known story in the Greek mythology about one N. who 
in the end drowned after admiring his image in the pond....

-m

Move to quarantaine

This moves the raw source file on disk only. The archive index is not changed automatically, so you still need to run a manual refresh afterward.