condenser & diffusion enlargers--regarding development of negatives

Discussion in 'B&W: Film, Paper, Chemistry' started by superloaf, Nov 20, 2007.

  1. superloaf

    superloaf Member

    Messages:
    18
    Joined:
    Sep 29, 2007
    Location:
    los angeles
    Shooter:
    Medium Format
    so i know there's a difference in the ideal negative depending on whether you're using a condenser or diffusion enlarger but i'm ashamed to say that i really don't know the basics concerning this rule. and i did a search for this already but the info was vague and scattered so i'm appealing for a basic rundown or if you know a link which would explain it, that's good too.

    i have a beseler dichro 67S enlarger but a also have the original condenser head somewhere so i don't know if there's a preference for one over the other (i'm sure that will start a war!)

    anyways, any basic or complex info appreciated:smile:
     
  2. dmax

    dmax Member

    Messages:
    110
    Joined:
    Jan 25, 2006
    Location:
    Los Angeles
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    The basic difference is that for the same negative under test, a condenser enlarger will produce a more contrasty print (because of the Callier effect) compared to a print made with a diffusion head. To compensate for this difference, the recommendation is to develop film to less contrast if using a condenser head, and to develop film for slightly more contrast when using a diffusion head.
     
  3. JBrunner

    JBrunner Moderator Staff Member Moderator

    Messages:
    7,075
    Joined:
    Dec 14, 2005
    Location:
    Basin and Range Province
    Shooter:
    8x10 Format
    Here we go....
     
  4. superloaf

    superloaf Member

    Messages:
    18
    Joined:
    Sep 29, 2007
    Location:
    los angeles
    Shooter:
    Medium Format
    ok, makes sense. that's why i tend to like contrasty negs i guess.

    does this same info pertain to contact printing also?

    and if you have an ideal neg for one head and you print on the other, does that cause a problem or are we talking about slight differences which are easily managed by filters or paper grades? (i'm guessing that it can be managed but that you can never get the same quality print when crossing over?)
     
  5. Lee Shively

    Lee Shively Member

    Messages:
    1,325
    Joined:
    Apr 4, 2004
    Location:
    Louisiana, U
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    People who use both condenser and diffusion enlargers say they have no problem crossing back and forth and getting good results from both. Like most things, experience makes processes easier.
     
  6. Lee L

    Lee L Member

    Messages:
    3,247
    Joined:
    Nov 17, 2004
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    The only discussion based on thorough testing that I've seen on the difference between condenser and diffusion enlargers is in Ctein's Post Exposure, where he spends 13 pages discussing the issues and describing his tests and results. The brief summary of his results takes half a long page. He says that Callier's discoveries aren't on the scale of photographic emulsions, but on structures that are smaller than a wavelength of light, so don't apply to photographic printing.

    His tests across several films and papers shows that when matching overall contrast, a condenser tends to print highlights with greater contrast and shadows with less contrast. So the diffusion head has less tonal separation in extreme highlights, but more open shadows. The degree to which this is true varies with changes in film and development.

    The whole book is well worth a read, and the issues discussed in the section on condenser/diffusion enlargers are more complex than any brief summary such as this post.

    Lee
     
  7. Michel Hardy-Vallée

    Michel Hardy-Vallée Membership Council Council

    Messages:
    4,351
    Joined:
    Apr 2, 2005
    Location:
    Montréal (QC
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    What Lee said: Ctein is the only person who made a test that really matters about diffusion/condensers.
     
  8. kram

    kram Member

    Messages:
    106
    Joined:
    Jun 4, 2006
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    Here, here. 'Post exposure' is a great read. Ctein and Mr. R. Hicks are my two favourite writers on photographic matters.
     
  9. Paul Howell

    Paul Howell Member

    Messages:
    2,658
    Joined:
    Dec 23, 2004
    Location:
    Phoeinx Ariz
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    To muddy the waters, most condenser enlargers use frosted bulbs, so are really semi diffusion. A true point source, small clear bulb with condenser will show more contrast and grain. I converted an old Russian point source to 110, and the results are dramatic. Not having read any data based on test results was the testing based on a point source or semi diffusion?
     
  10. fhovie

    fhovie Subscriber

    Messages:
    1,247
    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2003
    Location:
    Port Hueneme
    Shooter:
    Large Format
    I no longer use the diffusion head. Condenser only - sharper contrastier prints. - Negs can be slightly flatter. It is the way to go.
     
  11. jnanian

    jnanian Advertiser Advertiser

    Messages:
    19,969
    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2003
    Location:
    local
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    they used to say on the film box
    to process film about 30% more if using
    a cold light head ... YMMV