| From | Message |
Paul
Guest
3/23/2003
13:44:18
|
 Subject: "Levy" process camera
IP: Logged
Message:
LOOKING FOR ANY INFORMATION ON LEVY PROCESS CAMERAS. IN PARTICULAR, A CAMERA BUILT BY THE "REPROART MACHINERY CO".,PHILIDELPHIA PA. PATENT # C6266 OR S6267.
ANY HELP WOULD BE APPRECIATED
THANKS,
PAUL
|
Michael Cleveland
Guest
4/05/2003
00:29:31
| RE: Levy Process Camera
IP: Logged
Message:
These large copy cameras were standard equipment in print shops for a very long time, so it will take catalog research probably to locate anything very specific connecting models and years. While it seems like they should be of significant value, they are all but impossible to find homes for because of their size. I know of several over the years that never found buyers because so few collectors have space for them. I've passed up several myself for that reason, interesting as they are, even when offered at no cost. I know of a couple of smaller ones that were turned into interesting coffee tables. Generally any real value lies in the optics, but even those have a relatively limited market.
|
TTM
Guest
4/07/2003
17:55:09
| RE: levy camera
IP: Logged
Message:
I have several of these huge Levy cameras, along with other mammoth plate cameras (not for sale).
Most common size I've seen is the Levy 20x20 inch GG size. Levy cameras are listed in my Ostrander-Seymor catalog vintage 1920's, although later versions of the Levy were produced into the 1950's. I could FAX you a copy of some old process equipment illustrations if you wish. Regarding value, I also see them for under $500 US with shipping prohibitive. However, remember back when
early daguerreotypes and early wooden plate cameras were dirt cheap and 'nobody wanted them ' ? And early brass lenses were trashed
because they were 'uncoated' Well, I say, give
the monster cameras time, they may appreciate.
If anyone could figure out a way to shave off the wooden frame to 2/3 of its thickness, one would
have a dandy latge format wood camera, possibly
worth thousands.
Regards,
Tom Mier
Houston, Texas, USA
|
Michael Cleveland
Guest
4/08/2003
00:26:56
| RE: Levy Process cameras
IP: Logged
Message:
I think we may be talking apples and oranges, since you appear to be talking about them from a user's standpoint. As far as large process cameras appreciating in value over time, it's extremely unlikely. The comparison between these and Daguerreotype cameras is invalid because these lack the historical significance of Daguerreotype and wet plate cameras, and because Dag and collodion cameras were portable. I know of no time after the end of the 19th century when Daguerreotype and early wet plate cameras have not been highly sought after. But that was by collectors, not users, and they have never been cheap in the dollars of the decade during anytime in this or the most recent century when seller and buyer were both aware of what they had. Brass lenses have tended until recently to be bargains, not because they were uncoated, but because it takes a real expert to tell the difference between some early Petzval Daguerreotype lenses and nearly identical projection lenses from a few years later, not to mention the difficulty of putting all of the later 19th century brass in any kind of historical context when for years (and to a large extent even today) so little had been written about them. I also have seen many process cameras offered for $500 or less, but have yet to see a single one actually sell for any amount of money (though obviously, I don't have a finger on everything that goes on out there). Clearly, you have bought some. But don't expect a bevy of collectors ever to come knocking on your door to get them. Finally, because these were designed for a high degree of vibration-free stability (i.e., they are massive!), even the smallest of process cameras lack the kind of reasonable portability that would make them useful as field cameras, so really are not potential candidates for any but the rarest of large format users. Whether collector or user, you are a rare exception in having room for several, and to be congratulated both for that and your interest in them. For the most part, however, they will remain outside the realm of real collectibility because only museums will ever have the kind of space needed. But museum space is generally more valuable for other applications than the minor historical value in this type of camera would warrant, so will be better spent on other things. In other words, impressive as they are, they are not recommended as investment material.
|
|
|
