Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2007/07/22

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: [Leica] Re: Single vs. 1/2 frame
From: lrzeitlin at optonline.net (Lawrence Zeitlin)
Date: Sun Jul 22 06:52:20 2007
References: <200707221220.l6MCJYwX042283@server1.waverley.reid.org>

On Jul 22, 2007, at 8:20 AM, Mark wrote:

> I remember getting WESS slide mounts from a camera store on Manchester
> Street in Maplewood Mo a suburb of St. Louis in the 70s and the  
> half frame
> slide mounts were labeled "single frame".
> While regular slide mounts for the normal 24x36 format were labeled  
> "double
> frame" and I still have some of those mounts. Each one says that on  
> it.

It was that way for me too. According to photo historians, the first  
commercial 35 mm cameras such as the Tourist Multiple, introduced in  
1912, used the same 35 mm frame sizes as movie cameras. In fact one,  
the Sept, could be used to take short movie sequences. One of  
Barnack's innovations was to double the frame size to 24 x 36 mm,  
i.e. double frame. In fact he wasn't even the first to do it. Up  
through WW2, 35 mm cameras were referred to as double frame. I guess  
it wasn't until the Japanese started popularizing single frame  
cameras in the 50s and 60s that it started being called 1/2 frame.  
Probably to give the idea that you go twice as much for your film  
dollar.

Larry Z


Replies: Reply from jhnichols at bellsouth.net (Jim Nichols) ([Leica] Re: Single vs. 1/2 frame)