User talk:U. kulick

Jump to: navigation, search
This is the discussion page for U. kulick. Click here to start a new topic.

Discussion pages are for discussing improvements to the article itself, not for discussions about the subject of the article.


Stereo Photos


I will be adding photos of the stereo cameras soon. I actually joined the Flickr group last night. I'll need to take photos of ones that I do not yet have photos of. I think the only photo have of my cameras alone (without any other cameras) is of the Kodak Brownie Hawkeye Stereo Model 4, which I haven't added information for yet.

I was also planning on adding more to the Canon IX page. I noticed it's unfortunately rather bare.

By the way, you're not the Uwe that I know of, are you? Such a rare name for me to hear...

--Frumious boojum 14:38, 21 March 2007 (EDT)


If you know how to play the guitar, PLEASE, go to This is nt spam. I would just like more than 2 users. It really needs some other that trolls. The thing 17:54, 28 April 2006 (EDT)

Auction link

Thank you for the link! If you want to see extraordinary old cameras, you can make a visit to --Rebollo fr 16:28, 29 May 2006 (EDT)

adding images


As you are one of the few contributors who is regularly adding images to Camerapedia, I wanted to attract your attention to the following point, that I discovered today in Flickr's guidelines. It is not allowed to make a direct link to an image hosted by Flickr without providing with it a link to the corresponding Flickr page. Please have a look at the new version of Help:Adding images for a full explanation. --Rebollo fr 14:14, 10 June 2006 (EDT)


Hi. This new article of yours is written with some brio, which of course is fine in itself; but I wonder if you're keeping a sense of perspective. This is an encyclopedia, remember. Also, I wonder if what you say is true. Just to think of Japanese cameras, there have been "Doryū" and Mamiya cameras that look like handguns; one was, I believe, designed for police marksmanship practice and the other actually "fired" magnesium pellets as well as its shutter. Konishiroku (aka Rokuohsha) made a "machine gun camera" during the war; I've seen one of these (in a glass case in a museum), and it is pretty scary. Yes, if you go to and look under "vintage" > "miscellaneous collectible" > "camera outfits" (I think those are the terms), you'll even see on the second or third page or so that they have one on offer for just $4,299. Konica/Minolta took its servicing commitments very seriously, and these have been taken over by Sony; so you could buy this and take it in to Sony for a CLA. Just watch the Sony staff have heart attacks and drop on the floor as you take this entirely legal and harmless device out of your bag. (Unlike the Doryū, if I remember right, which had a certain notoriety for minor explosions and thus was better wielded at arm's length -- like a real handgun, of course.) -- Hoary 04:43, 20 August 2006 (EDT)

Wikimedia Commons


I have commented out the pictures that you inserted from Wikimedia Commons, this is because that site does not allow deep linking: see this page at Wikimedia Commons. This is not an image rights problem but a bandwith issue.

In most cases, you can probably upload the corresponding image to your Flickr account and insert the picture into Camerapedia from Flickr.

--Rebollo fr 20:46, 10 November 2006 (EST)

Hello, Rebollo, please stop that outcommenting!!!

There are not many images usable an that site, six I've used, and these six will not slow down camerapedia. There are really not many images usable for us, let this little bit of image links stay.

Best regards, Uwe

P.S. Did read the wikimedia policy and changed image location. The links to wikimedia are reduced to those which are not deep!

Yes, the problem is with wikimedia not wanting to share bandwidth. Another problem comes from Flickr's guidelines wanting a link back to them for each image. We can argue against this guideline when using very small images as an internal link and the back link is provided elsewhere (like in the Minolta page), but not when they are the main illustration of the page. So I changed the image's link to the Flickr page. If you want you can add a link to the Wikimedia page under the image or at the bottom of the page.
I'm sorry for these technicalities, of course all would be easier if Camerapedia had its own image hosting service and I hope that this will happen one day.
I had never thought of browsing Wikimedia Commons to find images, it is a good idea and we will certainly find other interesting documents there. But we will have to transfer these images to a Flickr account. A problem is that Flickr only knows two licence types: copyright of Creative Commons. For public domain or GFDL images I think that we must add a comment immediately under the image. This is specially important for GFDL images and it must provide a link to a copy of the GFDL.
Best regards, Rebollo fr 07:05, 11 November 2006 (EST)

28x28 film formats

On this new category: are there likely to be any additions to the category? -- Hoary 01:33, 3 January 2007 (EST)

Sometimes I feel we go too far with categorization. Here an example: [1] (empty except subcat), another [2] (hypercategorization?). I don't know whether other 28×28 mm subcats will follow but the idea fit into the categorization of film formats. (Uwe Kulick, Jan. 07)

I agree with your wider point. As for the narrower one: Do you know of any other 28×28 mm system? -- Hoary 22:09, 3 January 2007 (EST)

Minolta category

Why are you removing some Minolta cameras from the Minolta category (diff, diff, diff) at the same time as you are adding others (diff, diff, diff)? --Rebollo fr 17:01, 8 January 2007 (EST)

I saw that some cameras were left in the Minolta category which were also in the Minolta SR mount cat. I decided to leave only camera series (XD and XG) and "classic Minolta"s in the Minolta category, the other SR-mount entries can be found in the Minolta SR mount cat. Best regards, Uwe

It is true that the Minolta SR mount category is a sub-category of the Minolta category, but I think it is better to have all the Minolta cameras in the Minolta category, even if they are already in Minolta SR mount. By the way, Minolta SR mount also contains non-Minolta cameras, like the Seagull. Best regards, Rebollo fr 17:52, 8 January 2007 (EST)

No, I don't think so. We have Minolta subcategories where people can find the SR mount, AF mount and V mount cameras. Uwe

Deux amis

Could you please have a look at Talk:Ami 66? Thanks. -- Hoary 18:29, 9 January 2007 (EST)

Images removed


What was the problem with the thumbnails that you removed from your Flickr account and from the Nicca and other pages?


--Rebollo fr 18:46, 8 February 2007 (EST)

Hello, the problem was that these images had been only available in icon size, but people always clicked on them to see a larger version. Despite of its few pixels the only image really missing now is that of the Nicca Tower. Best regards, Uwe (9 Feb. '7)

Links to pictures on Flickr

Apropos of Nimslo, Ensign Ful-Vue, and perhaps other of your recent additions, please remember that Help:Adding images tells us:

The Flickr guidelines page states that each picture hardlinked from another site (e.g. Camerapedia) must be provided with a link back to the relevant Flickr page. To respect this, you must insert a Flickr image in the following way:
[URL_of_the_Flickr_page_where_the_image_appears URL_of_the_Flickr_hosted_image]

Thank you. -- Hoary 19:59, 22 March 2007 (EDT)

Sorry to jump into this conversation in Uwe's talk page, but I'm responsible of adding "class=plainlinks" to the Template: Flickr_image, to remove the blue arrows next to the images. They still link back to Flickr but this is no more emphasized by a blue arrow. --Rebollo fr 20:24, 22 March 2007 (EDT)
Whoops, sorry! In penance, I'll write up another Japanese magazine today. -- Hoary 20:27, 22 March 2007 (EDT)

Unwanted users


Thank you for your help reverting the recent unwanted changes. All the Camerapedia admins and regular contributors are aware of the problem now. Unfortunately there are only two solutions: one is to put the site down and is fast to implement, the other is to activate membership approval and it is not necessarily obvious or immediate. In order not to motivate the vandals by letting them know that they are putting us angry, please keep as neutral as possible in the change summaries when reverting.

--Rebollo fr 17:41, 11 April 2007 (EDT)

I don't think that these destructive bots read any comment , they are automats, programmed by some naughty folks. Maybe anti-scientific fundamentalists or bad mannered computer kids who both won't appreciate online knowledge sources of all kind. They just want to have fun by destruction. That's truly not the way things can go on. Where humans work on a site, why should they open all barn doors to let in automats that destroy all??? Stopping automatic user approval is the only solution. Think of motivating authors, not vandals.
U. Kulick, 11 April '7
U Kulick, think a little more about who these "bad mannered computer kids" might be, and how their little minds are likely to work. "They just want to have fun by destruction." No, I think the feeble fun derives from some kind of recognition for their destruction. They're likely to delight in your expression of your irritation: They'll relish it themselves, or they'll relish showing it to their stupid chums. Rebollo fr is right: revert their stupidity in as uninteresting a way as you can, so they have little or nothing to show for their efforts. You may also be right in requiring membership approval, but let's not discuss this kind of thing where "bad mannered computer kids" may be reading. -- Hoary 20:22, 11 April 2007 (EDT)
I don't agree. The machine programmed to disturb or to destroy this site has no mind. And the kids who made it sharp enjoy watching brave change reverting editor heroes maybe more than any comment - comments to think about obviously don't reach their little minds.
The machine programmed to disturb or to destroy this site has no mind. Of course you're right. And the kids who made it sharp enjoy watching brave change reverting editor heroes maybe more than any comment Watching a list of changes and reversions is pretty boring. It's more interesting to watch users getting upset and disagreeing with each other. So please don't write about this, either on this site or on the mailing list. -- Hoary 23:38, 11 April 2007 (EDT)


Hi Uwe, do you got more Franka-Cameras. I seen your added präzifix-picture on the Franka-page.

We are you from? Your forename sounds german.

best regards

jens (strind77) / 17.04.2007

Hello Jens,
Here are all our Franka images, and only one of it shows a camera of mine, the Edixa, made by Franka around the time of the takeover. At the moment the image appears on the Wirgin page.
Thank you for your great image contribution to the Franka page. I recognized this historical company accidentally when I found the brochure which is mentioned as literature about Franka on that page. That was just after a nice day of traveling through Franken last year.
Best regards, Uwe

Hi Uwe,
few pictures of franka-cameras will follow on the page.
I know the author of this little book, Mr. Arnal. I visit him frequently in Bayreuth and so its possible for me to watch his really great Franka-collection. About 450 cameras! Mr. Arnal works on the second part of his book-serie about the camera- and glass-production of the company "Steiner" in Bayreuth - today famous for spyglasses.
Do you come from Schwetzingen? I saw some pictures in your flickr-account.
Greetings from Hameln. Germany
Hi Jens
Addresses of camerapedians will usually not be exchanged inside the encyclopedia. It's astounding to hear of so many Franka camera types. Do you know the "Franka" toy camera? Surely not an original Franka:
Best regards, Uwe
Hi Uwe,
i don't now this fact.
The variety of Franka-cams is incredible, cause it exist a lot of cameras with only minor differences (leathers, logos, finder...)
Yes, i know this "Franka"-cameras. Its a factory in asia. The Franka-Werk Bayreuth closed the doors 1967 or 69. A few years after the Edixa-Wirgin-take-over.
Best regards. Jens

Edixa 125L

Hi Uwe, i get a revue 125L. It's a Franka 125L / same model like your Edixa, but without stripes and orange triangle. If you want, i can put a foto on flickr, so you can upgrade the Edixa 125 page. please give me short info.

best regards jens

Hello Jens,
Yes, please offer that image of the Revue camera
Best regards, Uwe
Yes, please offer that image of the Revue camera
Best regards, Uwe

Hello Uwe,
the image of the Franka Revue is on the flickr camerapedia account.

Leica II

Hi Uwe.

I'm a newbie here, so please excuse me if this is not the proper way to answer you. You said, that you could not se anything on Thats because you need Java to watch it. Yuo can get Java on It's free, and it's quic and easy to install.

Future 3D Photos of Leicas will be made in "Flash" as for example the leicas here:

Btw., did you try to turn it around ?

Rgds. Regnar.

Asahi Bussan and the like


I noticed your creation of pages on separate pages on Asahi Bussan and the like. I agree that this is a better layout than putting everything in the Ricoh page. Howvere these matters are extremely complicated. For example we are not sure that a company called "Olympic Camera" actually existed, we cannot attribute the cameras to this company in a definitive way.

Moreover we need to source the articles extremely precisely, otherwise the risk is very high to spread mistakes and come back to the situation which prevailed before the articles were written. I will expand the Asahi Bussan and Asahi Kōgaku Kōgyō pages if you think there is a need for this, but please don't overburden me with work by lightly adding too many affirmative sentences.

By the way, do you have specific information on the "Asahi Field Camera" related to Asahi Bussan, or did you infer the relationship from the name only?

Best regards,

--Rebollo fr 12:24, 18 January 2009 (EST)

Hello Rebollo_fr
Bussan's ad that You used several times shows the Olympic Enlarger and says that this was made by the "O.C. Works". Obviously "Olympic Camera Works" was Bussan's own translation of the name of the company that You mentioned as " K.K. Olympic Camera" on the Ricoh page. I've found a similar ad showing one year earlier the Olympic B and C, the Super Olympic and the Asahi Field Camera, beside the enlarger and the tripods. I expect that this field camera was made by anyone else, not Riken, Bussan or Olympic. And that the bakelite cameras are the only ones which we can see as products of the Olympic Camera Works if no further sources say more.
Best regards U. Kulick 12:40, 18 January 2009 (EST)
The mention "made by XXX Camera Works" is terribly deceiving on Japanese advertisements of the period. For whatever reason, the wholesale dealers often wanted to hide the true name of their suppliers, and invented dummy names composed with the camera's brand name and the suffix "Camera Works": see various other examples in the page on Camera Works. One reputable Japanese author does mention a "K.K. Olympic Camera" company, but I suspect he fell in the same trap. My belief today is that the cameras were made either in a factory directly set up by Asahi Bussan, or in some subcontracting company whose name might remain unknown forever.
I'm extremely interested to see a copy of the advertisement you mention. The products by Asahi Bussan were among the very first Japanese cameras exported to the West, and any document related to this is invaluable.
Best regards, Rebollo fr 12:50, 18 January 2009 (EST)

U. kulick, I'm sure that you mean well but Rebollo fr has understated the problems in your recent set of edits, which, after careful thought, I have reverted. Please see Talk:Asahi Bussan and feel free to comment there. Thank you. -- Hoary 21:33, 18 January 2009 (EST)


Thank you for adding this, it was blatantly missing! I think they also made lenses, didn't they?

Best regards, --Rebollo fr 17:04, 7 March 2009 (EST)

You're right, I looked into ebay, seeing tele lenses and tele lens kits probably made by Novoflex. The company homepage reports of former making of "Rapid Focus" lenses. Probably they made also special macro lenses for usage with bellows. Best regards, U. Kulick 18:03, 7 March 2009 (EST)

Argus C3 links

Dear U. kulick,

I've updated one link and added two in the Argus C3 article. Surprisingly, I've seen that you've undo my small contributions.

Argus Collector's Group website was on, but that website is no longer updated since 2005. They moved to, as it can be read in the old site.

One of the links that I added is an excellent Chinese article that compares every version of the Argus C cameras. It's one of the best articles about the camera in the world and I think everyone in Camerapedia interested in Argus should read it. Google Translator makes a bad translation, but it is still readable.

The other link I added is my personal site about the Argus C3 in Spanish. I hope you didn't erase the link because it is a non English site. Although it is in Spanish (and any website translator could be used) I think that it is a very complete site about the Argus C3.

I'm looking forward to hear from you,

--Danipuntocom 14:46, 30 December 2010 (EST)

Sorry. Please see Talk:Argus_C3
OK, thanks! Happy New Year! --Danipuntocom 11:50, 31 December 2010 (EST)

Adding Images

Hi, thanks for correcting my edits, where can I find info on how to properly add images from the pool? Martinpaling 05:57, 12 February 2011 (PST) U. Kulick 05:59, 12 February 2011 (PST)


Hello Uwe, many thanks for editing my new pages. I am new for making a page in the wiki, sometimes I can do some wrong things. eg. I want to rename Avus page and add Voigtlander. Then I realize that it must be Avus as to the rules, and want to change again and I could not do. Now see that it is corrected :) Thanks again--Dr.Süleyman Demir 00:58, 20 February 2011 (PST)

Hello Süleyman, yes, the rule is "keep the page name short". I use that rule only for very characteristic names like "Avus", otherwise I would use "Voigtländer Avus". Best regards, U. Kulick 03:57, 20 February 2011 (PST)


Hello! Could you please look at Template talk:Cc-by-1.3? Thanks. -- Hoarier 18:46, 12 May 2011 (PDT)

Still video cameras

Canon RC-760 "The RC camera series for interchangeable lenses was Canon's answer on Sony's Mavica series. Both camera series used floppy disks as image storage medium, but Canon used a non-standard smaller kind of floppies, the video floppy disks.

Since you wrote the original, where you comparing this camera to the Mavica line of camera. Or were you referring to different formats of video floppy since there were sort of 2 kinds of video floppy formats. Maybe comparing to more modern digital camera 1.4mb FD mavica that came out much later? Tkmedia 19:30, 12 July 2011 (PDT)

Edit summaries

Hi Uwe - you've done a great deal of work in the last couple of days, but haven't given edit summaries for almost any of it. Please give them - it makes it much easier to see what's going on. Cheers! --Dustin McAmera (talk) 16:22, 16 October 2012 (PDT)

Recent changes

Uwe -

Did you miss my previous request for edit summaries? Certainly you have gone on working without giving any; and some of what you are doing definitely needs clear summaries, and should, I think, have been discussed with the rest of us beforehand (changing the flickr image template without discussion?) --Dustin McAmera (talk) 03:18, 27 October 2012 (PDT)

minolta alpha

quite a while ago you merged the cell table for minolta af cameras. Maybe I'm not looking hard enough, but are you sure there are Japanese versions of spxi and 2xi? --Tkmedia (talk) 19:14, 1 October 2013 (PDT) U. Kulick (talk) 07:09, 3 October 2013 (PDT)

I've questioned them as well. While they may exist, i just cant seem to find a press release or any info on a japanese release. I never seen the bodies used in shops in hong kong or japan, only dynax and maxxum. I have yet to see a photo of the bodies.--Tkmedia (talk) 07:41, 3 October 2013 (PDT)

Time Magazine Camera query

discussion moved to Talk:Time Magazine Camera

Personal tools