Modifying Durst Femoneg to show full borders?

Discussion in 'Darkroom Equipment' started by Jeff Bannow, Aug 31, 2011.

  1. Jeff Bannow

    Jeff Bannow Member

    Messages:
    1,759
    Joined:
    Mar 1, 2007
    Location:
    Royal Oak, M
    Shooter:
    Medium Format
    I've got a Durst L1200 with a Femoneg carrier. I've been looking for over a year for a Femoneg AM carrier (the version that shows the whole neg when printing 4x5), and have so far not seen any for sale.

    I contacted Jensen Optical / Durst Pro USA and they said they can convert my carrier to an AM version. This is a quote from them:

    If you want to send us your EUROPE Femoneg we can modify it to become an AM Femoneg. If you look at the light opening closely you will see a lip all around the opening. The only difference between AM and EU is that lip being removed in the AM."

    Has anyone tried this? Any downsides to doing this? Seems like a great option, and pretty reasonable to do as well.
     
  2. ic-racer

    ic-racer Member

    Messages:
    7,473
    Joined:
    Feb 25, 2007
    Location:
    Midwest USA
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    Make sure you mixing box opening will cover the entire negative. Depending on the focal length lens and magnification, things can be very close. Even with the Durst 10x10 mixing box, an 8x10 negative has to be centered to the millimeter to totally cover to the film edge. You would not want to go to that trouble only to find the mixing box vignetts the image.
     
  3. Jeff Bannow

    Jeff Bannow Member

    Messages:
    1,759
    Joined:
    Mar 1, 2007
    Location:
    Royal Oak, M
    Shooter:
    Medium Format
    Good point - and since I'm using the Ilford 500 head on this, who knows what the coverage will be.
     
  4. Jeff Bannow

    Jeff Bannow Member

    Messages:
    1,759
    Joined:
    Mar 1, 2007
    Location:
    Royal Oak, M
    Shooter:
    Medium Format
    Checked on the Ilford head and it's nearly 5 1/2" across. Looks like I'm good to go.
     
  5. ic-racer

    ic-racer Member

    Messages:
    7,473
    Joined:
    Feb 25, 2007
    Location:
    Midwest USA
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    That is good. The Omega one is only 5 3/16"
     
  6. Carl Saytor

    Carl Saytor Member

    Messages:
    1
    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2011
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    It always has driven me nuts that 4 x 5 enlargers do not cover 4 x 5, especially the Omegas. My solution was to have a piece of white milky opal glass cut to fit just beneath the omega mixing chamber. There is enough room. The opal glass will mix the light a bit more and grow the source size just a bit. Because it is glass it is much harder to scratch and it is now a softer light source slightly closer to the negative. It will have more coverage and it will help spread the light- this also reduces the side to side color differences common to Omega diffusers. If you are having glass cut, have the edges polished, this removes jaggy edges and will help keep it from breaking when handling. The other trick to help with coverage issues related to the light source is to use a longer lenses. Incidentally, a dremel and a file are two of my favorite darkroom tools, but since I switched to Durst 1200's I have not had to cut out a carrier, yet. I miss the cheap flat omega carriers, but the durst is worth the expensive of femonegs. Good luck.
     
  7. Jeff Bannow

    Jeff Bannow Member

    Messages:
    1,759
    Joined:
    Mar 1, 2007
    Location:
    Royal Oak, M
    Shooter:
    Medium Format
    Yeah, the Durst is worth it. I just wish it was easier to find the Femonegs - the cost I can live with I suppose.