| View previous topic :: View next topic | 
	
	
		| Author | Message | 
	
		| aoresteen 
 
 
 Joined: 26 May 2004
 Posts: 67
 Location: Newnan, GA, USA
 
 |  | 
	
		| Back to top |  | 
	
		|  | 
	
		| Sirius Glass 
 
 
 Joined: 06 Jun 2010
 Posts: 162
 Location: Southern California
 
 | 
			
				|  Posted: Wed Nov 18, 2015 11:54 pm    Post subject: |   |  
				| 
 |  
				| I have been looking for a 9105-9 mask.  Do you have one to sell? |  | 
	
		| Back to top |  | 
	
		|  | 
	
		| Henry 
 
 
 Joined: 09 May 2001
 Posts: 1650
 Location: Allentown, Pennsylvania
 
 | 
			
				|  Posted: Thu Nov 19, 2015 10:35 am    Post subject: |   |  
				| 
 |  
				| Tony, I'd go with the printed mask data you posted from the Graflex company literature, in preference to the info from that page on this site. On my no. 2 mask, the number "2" is stamped into the metal on the upper back inside (facing the finder optics) edge of the mask, under the flange along the top of the mask. I don't know what it means when the number is missing: after-market item, factory omission, or what? |  | 
	
		| Back to top |  | 
	
		|  | 
	
		| aoresteen 
 
 
 Joined: 26 May 2004
 Posts: 67
 Location: Newnan, GA, USA
 
 | 
			
				|  Posted: Thu Nov 19, 2015 3:43 pm    Post subject: |   |  
				| 
 |  
				| Henry, 
 Thanks for the info.  Using a magnifier I was able to find the numbers that are stamped in my masks.  Turns out I had one #4 and two #2 masks.
 
 Sirius Glass, no #9. Sorry!
 _________________
 Tony Oresteen
 Newnan, GA
 
 WWW.oresteen.com
 |  | 
	
		| Back to top |  | 
	
		|  | 
	
		| aoresteen 
 
 
 Joined: 26 May 2004
 Posts: 67
 Location: Newnan, GA, USA
 
 |  | 
	
		| Back to top |  | 
	
		|  | 
	
		| Henry 
 
 
 Joined: 09 May 2001
 Posts: 1650
 Location: Allentown, Pennsylvania
 
 | 
			
				|  Posted: Fri Nov 20, 2015 9:24 pm    Post subject: |   |  
				| 
 |  
				| Apparently, Graflex didn't distinguish between 6x7 and 6x9 formats in their mask production. My no. 2 mask is proportioned for 6x9, but I always shoot 6x7. Just one more reason that I've called the optical finder only an approximation of what the film sees. |  | 
	
		| Back to top |  | 
	
		|  | 
	
		|  |