Within a No.3 Cartridge Kodak camera kit, there was a card for choosing correct camera settings for various conditions. On one side there is stamped text: "ROYAL ARMY MEDICAL CORPS, PORTSMOUTH."; and the unit's logo. This side appear to have instrucyions for taking pictures outdoors and the other in interior conditions.
I have different cultural background and mother tongue, than the person hand writing the card a century ago. Thus, I find myself guessing the content. This is where I need help. I am sure someone familiar with the context can much better understand the hand written letters, abbreviations and fainted words.
My intent is to restore this card digitally, both the information and visually. Can you, please, describe what there is written.
Juha Rinne
Replies
I want to thank You Alan for your input. In addition I am thankfull for the hint to use AI. ChatGPT turned out to be effiecient tool in analyzing and cathering information about this card. Here are my initial results.
This is not about a loose camera nor photographic accessory: the camera survives as a complete working field kit, including:
* No. 3 Cartridge Kodak
* 6 double-sided dry-plate holders (with 12 plates total)
* original black slides with pencil annotations
* ground glass, plate back, and carry case
* and, crucially, a handwritten RAMC exposure card, clearly used in practice
From a museum and research perspective, this appears to be a rare example of a complete early military–medical photographic working system, not just a representative camera model. The exposure card in particular documents how photography was actually practised under service conditions.
What is clear so far
The exposure card is carefully structured on both sides and was clearly intended for repeated field use, not as a theoretical guide or training handout. Its layout and internal logic strongly suggest that it functioned as a working reference for RAMC photographer.
Key points that appear well established:
* The card addresses practical exposure control for both outdoor and interior work:
* The stamp side lists values for Outdoor conditions in ”Sunlit” and ”Faint Sunlight”, with distances explicitly considered. Arabic numerals are likely multiples for the instantaneous camera settin, i.e. how many shots there are needed for correct exposure. Roman numeral ”I” likely indicates to use different shutter mode – Time or Bulb – and respective time measure (I for a single amount of time, appr 2-2,5 seconds).
* On this same side there is table of Allowances, which lists multipliers to be used under certain conditions: Jones – emulsion density measured with Chapman Jones plate tester, subject Relief, Light and if a fast plate is in use.
* The reverse side Interior conditions include specific environments such as ”Conservatory”, implying clinical or semi-clinical settings rather than domestic interiors. Here Arabic numerals likely represent exposure times in seconds and Roman numerals minutes, progressing logically into hour-long exposures.
* Crucially, the card does not merely list base exposures. It incorporates pre-computed working values. This strongly suggests that the data was:
* derived in advance (experimentally or mathematically),
* then copied onto this card for rapid, reliable use in the field.
In other words, the card encodes operational photographic knowledge, not just exposure theory. It reflects an understanding of how this specific class of camera and plate behaved under service conditions, and how that behaviour needed to be ’allowed for’ in real-world medical or military photography.
From a historical perspective, this is significant: such allowance-based exposure cards rarely survive, and when they do, they often lack clear institutional attribution. The RAMC stamp anchors this card to a specific service context and suggests that these values may represent unit-level or service-level photographic practice, rather than personal guesswork.
There are unresolved points – where I’d really value your input
1. The heading (Stamp side)
The top lines read approximately:
> Table of Exposures
> Normal
> Summer Light, i.e. Bright Sky, … Slow Castle plate
However:
* “Normal” appears awkwardly placed and may be a later addition.
* There is a single bracket linking ”Table of Exposures” and ”Normal”, which may indicate a structural or conceptual grouping rather than punctuation.
* The word before ”plate” is almost certainly “Castle”, but the meaning is unclear:
* Is Castle Plate a known commercial emulsion or dry plate?
* Or is this a service term (i.e. the plates issued to us)?
The word ”plate” is clearly written in lower case, separated by a deliberate space.
---
2. Fast vs Slow
The card seems to reference ”slow Castle plate”. Earlier guesses suggested ”fast”, but letterforms do not convincingly match other “f” words on the card.
Has anyone encountered:
* Castle-branded dry plates?
* RAMC or military documentation distinguishing ”slow” vs ”fast” plates in this period?
---
3. The defining word preceeding the second ”sunlit”
Most logically and based on the given table values the definition should refer to subdued light in comparison to plain ”sunlit”. Current candidates are faint, soft and light. Any other candidates? Is the assumption wrong?
---
4. The meaning of underlined letter ”v” in ”v light”, ”v dark” and ”v high relief”?
---
5. The bottom right coner text after ”¼ of”: ” N. Exposure”? This could be logically sound and be inline with plate density multipliers based on Chapman Jones plate tester references above. And would say: ”Plate with quickest ¼ of N. Exposure”
---
6. Distance vs exposure time
One feature that may look odd at first glance:
Exposure times increase as subject distance decreases (e.g. under 10 ft compared to 10 to 30 ft).
This is not macro work, but it does make sense when factoring in:
* long bellows extension
* very small apertures
* slow emulsions
* weak or filtered light (hospital wards, conservatories, tents)
Has anyone seen comparable distance-based exposure tables in Kodak manuals or military/medical contexts?
---
Why this matters (beyond curiosity)
From a research and museum standpoint, this card may represent:
* a locally produced RAMC exposure standard
* or a copy of an official but otherwise undocumented instruction
* possibly issued per camera, per unit, or per photographer
Complete, documented working systems from this period are rare in institutional collections. Most museums hold:
* representative cameras
* loose accessories
* or photographs divorced from the tools used to make them
This card bridges that gap by preserving operational photographic knowledge, not just equipment.
---
What I’m hoping for
If anyone here has:
* seen a similar handwritten exposure card
* encountered ”Castle Plate” as a term or ”Castle” in RAMC context
* access to early Kodak dry-plate literature
* or experience with military or medical photography before WWI
— even partial recollections or “I’ve seen something like this once” comments would be extremely valuable.
Sometimes the missing footnote isn’t in an archive, but in someone’s long-kept notebook.
Many thanks in advance,
and happy to share more images or transcriptions if helpful.
Thank You Alan!
I went through this card with ChatGPT as well and there were interesting findings. I need to analyze them first but hope I can provide here additional information in the coming days. However, already now, You pointed issues that add information!
You used to see something similar but of lower detail shipped with consumer roll film. I have a Johnsons of Hendon exposure calculator, a small plastic device with a thumbwheel to calculate exposure.
You could probably use these figures to get some indication of the plate speed they were using.
Now the indoor one. Same format but the headings are
Objects in Conservatory, Studio, well lighted room, average lighted room, badly lighted room. Not sure on the final category but takes the exposures out to 16 hours. Interestingly there are no thoughts on plate reciprocity characteristics here.
HI Juha. I think I can help with this one. Outdoor one first.
The heading is "Table of Normal Exposures". So the intention is to give users a start point to estimate camera exposures. They define normality as "Good summer lighting with the sun >30 degrees" above the horizon. Plus something about a bright sky, perhaps a pointer to good summer lighting. The comment on the plate is interesting. It may be "fasile", a misspelling of facile, so an easy plate. I have not heard this description before but from what follows I interpret this as an ordinary plate, an indication of plate photographic speed.
The next line is the f/stop settings on the camera, from f/8 to f/64.
Down the left we have a series of guide exposures for each of the f/numbers, done in 2 sets. The first is "Sunlit" with object distance "under 30 feet" or "over 30 feet". The second set is for obviously dimmer light but I cannot make out the heading. The categories are "under 10 feet", "10-30 feet", "30-100 feet" and presumably "over 300 feet". The table entries are the exposure times in seconds with I, II, IV etc denoting time in minutes.
Down the right are some guidelines on exposure compensation, in 4 categories. I am not sure what the first 2 denote but the 3rd is about the lighting and the 4th about the use of a faster plate.