Good morning and welcome. It’s a sunny day here in 1896 and George Eastman is launching the latest in his rapidly expanding line of Kodak Cameras, the Kodak Bullseye 2. Needless to say, your favourite magazine, APReview is on hand to bring you the facts on this exciting new device.
It’s only four years since the Boston Camera Company launched a camera of the same name. Mr. Eastman liked that camera so much that he bought the company and has now re-launched the camera under the Kodak brand. And here it is:
Kodak’s official press release:
(Quite staggering to think that someone will cut this out of a newspaper and the scrap of paper will be sold 117 years later for $2 to someone via something called eBay).
It’s hard not to admire the svelte, dashing, lines; although we must admit that a pair of bellows stuck on the front would have been more to our liking. We are not convinced that these modern looks really work.
Kodak tell us that the camera is covered in finest seal grain leather (whatever that is) which will last so well that, more than 100 years in the future, some sad old man will be able to slap boot polish all over it and make it look OK. We’ll believe that when we see it, which we won’t because we expect to be dead.
The front of the camera features three controls, which quite honestly is two more than is normally necessary. We are not in favour of this over-complication of the photographic process; but let’s see what these controls are for.
The first control operates the shutter. Push the lever to one side to open the shutter, and then after counting the required number of seconds, push it back to the starting point to close the shutter. So far, so normal. But the next control is a bit of a game-changer. Pull it up and then operate the shutter. In an act of frankly staggering mechanical complexity, the shutter will open and then close again!! Kodak reckon this exposes the shutter by about 1/60th of a second; but why anyone would want such a fast shutter speed is beyond us. We have always been open the shutter, have a cup of tea, close the shutter sorts of chaps; but this Eastman fella reckons that his new films will accommodate faster shutter speeds. Seems a little reckless to us. Whatever next; 1/100th second? Ha ha!
The final control allows you to set one of three aperture hole sizes.Again, surely this is just adding complexity for the sake of it? Have one hole and enjoy it, that’s what we say; and our wives agree.
We are not convinced that this proliferation of controls is a good idea for most photographers who should be focusing on capturing the moment rather than fiddling around with apertures and shutter speeds.
Talking of focusing; well we don’t need to talk about that because the focus is fixed and everything will appear to be at approximately the same level of sharpness (i.e. not very much). So no opportunity to bang on about “subject isolation” with this camera.
Returning to the top of the body, you will note the viewfinder which is indeed refreshingly bright, although we somewhat doubt Eastman’s claim that you will be able to see your subject without encasing your head in a big black cloth. We certainly hope he is wrong, renaming big black clothes to “viewfinder darkening apparatus” and selling them at inflated profits to our readers is a key part of our magazine business model.
Next to the viewfinder is the ratcheted winder for the film.
And it is here that we find the greatest surprise; the film is tiny! Measuring a mere three and half inches, this film is ridiculously small and we doubt that the camera has the ability to produce reasonable images with such a tiny film size. Certainly our regular readers with their field cameras are going to think twice before downgrading to this little machine; even if it does mean that you would no longer require the two horses that are needed to transport a field camera and its associated equipment.
It gets worse. Kodak owners have been used to returning their cameras to Kodak to have their films processed and replaced once they have completed a roll. That’s how it should be. But this camera uses the technology introduced by the Boston Camera Company and uses a film with a paper backing. This means that, when complete, the film can be removed by the owner and a new film inserted! Although this does mean you don’t have to spend two weeks waiting for your camera to be returned once you have finished a film, the implication and the dangers of this feature are enormous. Potentially, owners might try and develop their films themselves; and we all know how dangerous and explosive developing chemicals can be in inexperienced hands (at least, I think we do). Bad move Kodak, nothing good can come of it.
The backing paper provides the answer to why there is a little red window on the back of the camera:
The paper will have frame numbers printed on it, so you can watch the little window and see your next number appear as you wind on the film. Essentially pointless, but it may amuse some.
At the bottom of the camera there is the mount for the tripod. Kodak reckon that this new high speed 1/60th second shutter will allow people to take photos without a tripod (and presumably also without the black cloth over their head, how ridiculous are they going to look…?). Frankly we think this is a claim too far; but we were unable to test for ourselves because Kodak were not supplying rolls of film (to be known as Kodak 101 film) to journalists, claiming the cameras were pre-production versions with provisional “firmware” (by this, we think they meant the carrying handle).
We had a chance to talk to Kodak’s research scientists and they reckoned that the Bullseye was just a stepping stone to greater things. The current price of $8 was just too high, attracting only professionals and wealthy amateurs.
Quite honestly, that’s the way we at APReview like it; but Kodak have plans to introduce a cardboard version of the camera in the year 1900, priced at just $1; it will sell more than 150,000 units in the first year and bring photography for the first time ever to the masses; a hideous thought. They told us it would be called the Greenie, or the Brownie; we forget as we had rather lost interest at this point. They then said that Kodak will become the biggest name in photography before disappearing down a hole of complacency. Yeah, right.
They also had predictions about the future of film. This is an artist’s impression of the future drawn up by one of their scientists (rather lifelike we must admit):
Rather than the Kodak 101 film being a dead-end of miniaturisation, Kodak envisage films and cameras becoming even smaller (what opium have they been smoking?), and there will be a film called a 120 which will be very popular. Then, although people will mock its pathetic size initially, 135 will be widely adopted and people on “forums” (we like the name and will use it in future for our letters page) will call it “full frame” and pretend it is somehow special. Finally, there is something that they reckon will easily hold 1000 photos; but they could not explain to us how the negatives would be stored (presumably some form of advanced origami will be required).
Wildest of all, they predicted that one day a camera would be built into a phone and become the most popular method of taking photos. They even had a working prototype but we don’t think it has a future.
So there we are gentle readers, the 1896 Kodak Bullseye 2. A pointer to the future or a pointless diversion into miniaturisation and complexity? Why don’t you write to our letters page; sorry, our “forum”, and tell us what you think?
In our next issue we get back to proper photography: Can you operate a Daguerreotype with less than two assistants and should they always wear a uniform?
Toodle pip!
Comments 🔗
2013-11-07| Andrew saysI think you should just leave the EM1 at home and take this to Japan…the heart of " miniaturisation and complexity" …no need for extra lenses and maybe Fuji would run you off a quick batch of 101 Velvia ( or Acros )… 25-30 photos should be all you need to sum up the week…