Are Ilford below lens MG filters replaceable?

Discussion in 'Enlarging' started by gphoto120, Jan 13, 2007.

  1. gphoto120

    gphoto120 Subscriber

    Messages:
    214
    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2005
    Location:
    Abiquiu
    Shooter:
    Medium Format
    Are the gel filters replaceable on these below lens sets or do you have to buy a entire new set if the gel filters need to be replaced. I haven't seen this set in person and was interested in picking up a used set if I can replace the gels filters if needed in the future by cutting the 3x3 filters to fit if necessary.
    Thanks,
    GP
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Jan 13, 2007
  2. reellis67

    reellis67 Subscriber

    Messages:
    1,887
    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2005
    Location:
    Central Flor
    Shooter:
    4x5 Format
    I believe that they are fixed in the plastic so you would need to either replace the set, or as you said cut the larger size down. I though I had a set somewhere, but I can't find it right now. The Beseler set that I did find is all of a peice, for what it's worth.

    - Randy
     
  3. Chris Lee

    Chris Lee Member

    Messages:
    49
    Joined:
    Mar 5, 2004
    Location:
    Winchester,
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    Hi,

    You can break open the plastic frames, and as you suggested cut down 3x3 filters to fit the frames, I do this fairly often when a filter becomes marked.
    Sometimes the frames dont fit back together very securely, but I find a tiny piece of tape along the edge of the frame seems to hold everything together!
     
  4. Mike Kennedy

    Mike Kennedy Member

    Messages:
    1,595
    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2005
    Location:
    Eastern Cana
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    What filter # do you need. I have extras.

    Mike
     
  5. gphoto120

    gphoto120 Subscriber

    Messages:
    214
    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2005
    Location:
    Abiquiu
    Shooter:
    Medium Format
    Thanks for the replies. Actually I was thinking of buying a used set and wanted to know if they could be replaced as needed.

    I do have one other question as I'm just getting back into a darkroom after 15 years: Is there any benefit using the filters above the lens (in a filter drawer) or using them below the lens ? I know there was a preferred placement in the past , but I can't remember the reasoning.
     
  6. David H. Bebbington

    David H. Bebbington Inactive

    Messages:
    2,364
    Joined:
    Dec 12, 2004
    Location:
    East Kent, U
    Shooter:
    Medium Format
    The preferred position is always above the lens, where the filters cannot interfere with definition (although the below-the-lens types don't do this to any practical degree). The official reason for the below-the-lens filters was simply to accommodate enlargers with no filter drawer.
     
  7. wilsonneal

    wilsonneal Member

    Messages:
    578
    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2006
    Location:
    Northern NJ
    Shooter:
    8x10 Format
    This discussion has been on my mind lately. I have been contemplating an Aristo coldlight head for my D2V. Doing so would make using filters above the lens difficult (I usually put them in above the variable condensor). With the Aristo, you wind up having the light source immediately above the negative on a D2. I used to lay a vc filter immediately above the neg, but that required a very clean filter, and I was reluctant to put a filter south of the lens for reason mentioned above.

    If any of you use an Aristo head on a D2, where do you place your filter?
    Neal
     
  8. John Koehrer

    John Koehrer Subscriber

    Messages:
    6,416
    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2004
    Location:
    Montgomery,
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    An Aristo head on a Beseler presents the same problem.
    There was an article a couple of years ago in one of the buff books about building a filter drawer and inserting it just beneath the lamp housing.
    Peg board was the material used, I used three layers, four would have given a bit more room for the filters to slide in & out
     
  9. ann

    ann Subscriber

    Messages:
    2,920
    Joined:
    Sep 10, 2002
    Shooter:
    35mm
    on top of the negative carrier
     
  10. ChuckP

    ChuckP Subscriber

    Messages:
    654
    Joined:
    Jan 8, 2003
    Location:
    NW Chicagola
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    I think most people have no problems with below the lens filters. I used them for a time and didn't see any casual differences. My problem with putting a filter on the carrier is hitting the carrier when changing filters under safelight. Lots of negatives require use of two or more filters for a single print.
     
  11. Vaughn

    Vaughn Subscriber

    Messages:
    5,339
    Joined:
    Dec 13, 2006
    Location:
    Humboldt Co.
    Shooter:
    8x10 Format
    Probably over-kill for you, but I buy the 6"x6" filters for our teaching darkroom here at the university -- I can replace 4 under-the-lens filters with each 6x6...more economical for us.

    Vaughn
     
  12. Kilgallb

    Kilgallb Subscriber

    Messages:
    340
    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2005
    Location:
    Calgary AB C
    Shooter:
    4x5 Format
    I use a set of under the lens filters with my Omega D2. You are correct about the possibility of moving the lens during filter changes. I solved the problem by fabricating a holder for the Ilford Filter Holder that attaches to the wall, not the lens or enlarger. I used one of those goosneck devices machinest use to hold lubricants in place. I have seen the same device use to hold filters and lens shades in place on large format cameras.

    I can now do split grade filtering burning and dodging without worrying about the lens moving.
     
  13. PHOTOTONE

    PHOTOTONE Member

    Messages:
    2,411
    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2006
    Location:
    Van Buren, A
    Shooter:
    Large Format
    Just an observation. A filter "above the lens" or "below the lens" is still in the optical path, if the negative in either case is above the filter. I have never found that below the lens filters degrade the image if clean, and designed for "below the lens" use.