Posted 11 years ago
LansingMic…
(39 items)
This is an odd sized photograph. It's 4"x4".
If anyone could tell me about this style/size photo that would be great!
This is yet another example from the LeClear Studio of Lansing, Michigan.
LeClear | ||
| Photographs2903 of 5214 |  |  |
In regards to your image format question, there was no standard plate or sheet film format for something square such as 4 x 4 inches. Given it’s a studio image, I’ll rule out roll film as a possibility.
The simplest approach to get something like this is to shoot the portrait on a commonly available format (i.e. 4 x 5 or 4.25 x 5.25 inches) and then enlarge to a desirable size. However, enlargers were not all that common at the turn-of-the-century. Additionally, image quality degraded when an image was enlarged (i.e. they lost a bit of tonality and fine details got fuzzy). Yet it was a very cost effective option.
Another approach would be to shoot a normal portrait that was cut diagonally to get the square [diamond] format. If a normal back was used on a studio camera for a portrait shot, the plate or film format would have to cover the widest part of your image - about 5.75 inches (or so). The nearest standardized format covering this width would be whole-plate (6.5 x 8.5 inches). But that's a lot of wasted photographic material.
Another thought is LeClear could have owned a specialized piece of camera equipment. A builder by the name of Mathias Flammang patented a rotating back that could turn a full 360 degrees. Flammang’s back was available for studio cameras made by American Optical and Scovill as well as their field camera models. You can see an example of this rotating back attached to a field camera on my website at: http://www.antiquewoodcameras.com/flrear01.html
If LeClear had an American Optical or Scovill studio camera equipped with Flammang's rotating back turned to about 45 degrees, a standardized plate or film format of 4.25 x 5.5 inches (1/2-plate) could be used with minimal waste. Although the camera on my website dates to the 1880s to late 1890s, this rotating back was used into the early 1900s. Photographers often kept their cameras and upgraded lenses over time.
IMO, any of these approaches were possible and more research into LeClear would be needed to understand his studio habits.
Wow! Thank you very much, rniederman. I wasn't expecting that much information, but I'll gladly take it!
By the way, your website it great!