Enlarger Bellows Rebuild - modern tricks?

Materials technology has changed a great deal in the past few decades, so I
am hoping (L-A-Z-Y) that there might be a flexible, nonsticky, spray-on
coating that can be applied inside and outside a large bellows (for 10X10"
enlarger).

For smaller bellows I patch pinholes using a material intended for those old
'soft top' hardtops of the Seventies. It applies smoothly, sets up flexible,
and is dead-black. But it won't fix this old bellows.

If none, then I think I might just send the old bellows to England to be
copied.

jjs

In article <u_-dnXpq9Y0SNpvVnZ2dnUVZ_tijnZ2d@supernews.com>,
"John" <john@stafford.net> wrote:

> Materials technology has changed a great deal in the past few decades, so I
> am hoping (L-A-Z-Y) that there might be a flexible, nonsticky, spray-on
> coating that can be applied inside and outside a large bellows (for 10X10"
> enlarger).
>
> For smaller bellows I patch pinholes using a material intended for those old
> 'soft top' hardtops of the Seventies. It applies smoothly, sets up flexible,
> and is dead-black. But it won't fix this old bellows.
>
> If none, then I think I might just send the old bellows to England to be
> copied.
>
> jjs

There are two bellows makers here in the US.

Universal Bellows,

Or you could look at the archive of "God Forbid No- I can hear your
screams now" View Camera Magazine. They had a article several years back
with detailed instructions on making a large custom bellows from scratch.

Personally I have used gaffers type tape to patch the corners of several
of mine.

--
Reality is a picture perfected and never looking back.

"____" <internetphobic@deletedmail.com> wrote in message
news:internetphobic-A135CF.23070016042008@newsgroups.comcast.net...

> Or you could look at the archive of "God Forbid No- I can hear your
> screams now" View Camera Magazine.

God forbid View Camera? Now why would I say that?

In article <yYmdndUvAM2ZoJrVnZ2dnUVZ_g2dnZ2d@supernews.com>,
"John" <john@stafford.net> wrote:

> "____" <internetphobic@deletedmail.com> wrote in message
> news:internetphobic-A135CF.23070016042008@newsgroups.comcast.net...
>
> > Or you could look at the archive of "God Forbid No- I can hear your
> > screams now" View Camera Magazine.
>
> God forbid View Camera? Now why would I say that?

Then by all means find and read the article.

--
Reality is a picture perfected and never looking back.

"____" <internetphobic@deletedmail.com> wrote in message
news:internetphobic-11DC4A.19150017042008@newsgroups.comcast.net...

> Then by all means find and read the article.

The archves are are back issues for sale. I could find no free online
article about bellows.
The article in question is: Building a Camera Bellows, July/August 1996, pp
52-54

I'm pretty sure I can find an article on the 'net. Will just keep looking.
In the meantime, I've ust removed the existing bellows and it may be that I
can repair it after all. Will look into it tomorrow.

In article <cvadnSYUY9uGmZXVnZ2dnUVZ_viunZ2d@supernews.com>,
"John" <john@stafford.net> wrote:

> "____" <internetphobic@deletedmail.com> wrote in message
> news:internetphobic-11DC4A.19150017042008@newsgroups.comcast.net...
>
> > Then by all means find and read the article.
>
> The archves are are back issues for sale. I could find no free online
> article about bellows.
> The article in question is: Building a Camera Bellows, July/August 1996, pp
> 52-54
>
> I'm pretty sure I can find an article on the 'net. Will just keep looking.
> In the meantime, I've ust removed the existing bellows and it may be that I
> can repair it after all. Will look into it tomorrow.

Actually I was thinking the article in question came from an after year
2000 issue.

--
Reality is a picture perfected and never looking back.

"____" <internetphobic@deletedmail.com> wrote in message
news:internetphobic-7C56F2.23531117042008@newsgroups.comcast.net...
> In article <cvadnSYUY9uGmZXVnZ2dnUVZ_viunZ2d@supernews.com>,
> "John" <john@stafford.net> wrote:

>> I'm pretty sure I can find an article on the 'net. Will just keep
>> looking.
>> In the meantime, I've ust removed the existing bellows and it may be that
>> I
>> can repair it after all. Will look into it tomorrow.
>
> Actually I was thinking the article in question came from an after year
> 2000 issue.

We will never know because the four archive pages numbered Page 1 to Page 4
are all the same page: August1988 through Nove/Dec 2001. Permit me to be a
bit assertive and suggest that before you chastize someone for not looking,
that you look yourself.

In article <d9udnQUnVZHbWJXVnZ2dnUVZ_jOdnZ2d@supernews.com>,
"jjs" <jjs.jjs.net> wrote:

> "____" <internetphobic@deletedmail.com> wrote in message
> news:internetphobic-7C56F2.23531117042008@newsgroups.comcast.net...
> > In article <cvadnSYUY9uGmZXVnZ2dnUVZ_viunZ2d@supernews.com>,
> > "John" <john@stafford.net> wrote:
>
> >> I'm pretty sure I can find an article on the 'net. Will just keep
> >> looking.
> >> In the meantime, I've ust removed the existing bellows and it may be that
> >> I
> >> can repair it after all. Will look into it tomorrow.
> >
> > Actually I was thinking the article in question came from an after year
> > 2000 issue.
>
> We will never know because the four archive pages numbered Page 1 to Page 4
> are all the same page: August1988 through Nove/Dec 2001. Permit me to be a
> bit assertive and suggest that before you chastize someone for not looking,
> that you look yourself.

Only if you permit me to assert that I was not chastising you.

--
Reality is a picture perfected and never looking back.

"____" <internetphobic@deletedmail.com> wrote in message
news:internetphobic-BFC159.20065718042008@newsgroups.comcast.net...
> In article <d9udnQUnVZHbWJXVnZ2dnUVZ_jOdnZ2d@supernews.com>,
> "jjs" <jjs.jjs.net> wrote:

>> We will never know because the four archive pages numbered Page 1 to Page
>> 4
>> are all the same page: August1988 through Nove/Dec 2001. Permit me to be
>> a
>> bit assertive and suggest that before you chastize someone for not
>> looking,
>> that you look yourself.
>
> Only if you permit me to assert that I was not chastising you.

OK.I'll go for that. We good?

The Bellows is done, and without a single reference to any help. It is
actually pretty obvious how to make it so.

It sure is much easier working with big bellows than small ones.

The VC website is disorganized. To find pay-for archive material one goes
to the section advertising FREE material.

In article <u_-dnXpq9Y0SNpvVnZ2dnUVZ_tijnZ2d@supernews.com>,
John <john@stafford.net> wrote:
>Materials technology has changed a great deal in the past few decades, so I
>am hoping (L-A-Z-Y) that there might be a flexible, nonsticky, spray-on
>coating that can be applied inside and outside a large bellows (for 10X10"
>enlarger).

Spray-on, no. But Permatex Ultra Black gasket maker (available at your
local auto parts store) works well, though it does not leave
a smooth interior surface. It is rubbery, not sticky, once it dries.

I use a small piece of black gaffer's tape on the outside to make a backing,
then Ultra Black on the inside. Remove the tape backing, or not, after the
gasket maker dries, according to your preference.

--
Thor Lancelot Simon tls@rek.tjls.com

"The inconsistency is startling, though admittedly, if consistency is to
be abandoned or transcended, there is no problem." - Noam Chomsky

"Thor Lancelot Simon" <tls@panix.com> wrote in message
news:fulcj0$9b0$1@reader2.panix.com...

> Spray-on, no. But Permatex Ultra Black gasket maker (available at your
> local auto parts store) works well, though it does not leave
> a smooth interior surface. It is rubbery, not sticky, once it dries.

*SLAPing my head*

I used that stuff when building cars. (Never on a carburator, however.
Baaaad there.)

> I use a small piece of black gaffer's tape on the outside to make a
> backing,
> then Ultra Black on the inside. Remove the tape backing, or not, after
> the
> gasket maker dries, according to your preference.

You made it just too easy. ;) I will stop by the shop on the way home.

TIP - or my two-bits worth. Gaffer's is too sticky for some masking jobs. 3M
has "blue" masking tape. If you look on the side of the roll they have the
stickiness factor from less to more sticky (1 to 5). I use #2 because it
releases easily and doesn't take underlying paint or whatever off the
surface. Highly recommended for small jobs. (Expensive stuff, too.)

In article <lamdnY_obreW3JPVnZ2dnUVZ_ruqnZ2d@supernews.com>,
jjs <jjs.jjs.net> wrote:
>
>TIP - or my two-bits worth. Gaffer's is too sticky for some masking jobs. 3M
>has "blue" masking tape. If you look on the side of the roll they have the
>stickiness factor from less to more sticky (1 to 5). I use #2 because it
>releases easily and doesn't take underlying paint or whatever off the
>surface. Highly recommended for small jobs. (Expensive stuff, too.)

I like that stuff. I use the black gaff tape on bellows because if the
bellows is black, it generally matches well enough to not look too bad
if left in place, it is easy to tear neatly to match the existing width
of the bellows fold being fixed, and the adhesive _seems_ to not be
acidic enough to eat the bellows material underneath and turn it to
dust (though I have never left any in place longer than about 10 years,
and that on a synthetic, not leather, bellows). It gives me some peace
of mind lest the Permatex should come loose and the bellows suddenly
leak light -- that won't happen, with the gaffer's tape on there.

--
Thor Lancelot Simon tls@rek.tjls.com

"The inconsistency is startling, though admittedly, if consistency is to
be abandoned or transcended, there is no problem." - Noam Chomsky

"Thor Lancelot Simon" <tls@panix.com> wrote in message
news:fulllu$env$1@reader2.panix.com...

> [... snip... we are discussing Gaffer's tape ...]
> dust (though I have never left any in place longer than about 10 years,

Only ten years? :)

I should start a separate thread on Gaffer's tape, but I'll risk comments
here - I haven't found any that was the same as the stuff we used in the
early Seventies. This is not a case of selective memory. The original stuff
could be folded over on itself into a small square and stuck in the pocket
for odd emergencies outside of work. It unfolded nicely without leaving
residue in itself and would work again.

At work they order some kind of no-name Gaffers equivalent but it is not
even close. I have just a bit left of my last roll of Bogen's equivalent and
it does not have the same release adhesive.

It's the end of an era, I tell ya. Today I get funny looks from photography
students if I mention Gaffer's. It's like they are thinking Cut, Paste and
Lock Layer is the same.

So, can you recommend a replacement for Bogen's? I suppose it's Manfrotto
now.