Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 70,224   Posts: 1,532,568   Online: 1039
      
Page 9 of 9 FirstFirst ... 3456789
Results 81 to 84 of 84
  1. #81
    Bill Burk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Shooter
    4x5 Format
    Posts
    3,193
    Images
    46
    Process Cameras were all that way. Two cranks, one moves copyboard the other moves lens board. The film (think paper) plane is fixed. Some were vertical and you had to stand on a stool to look down at it. Most were horizontal and the vacuum back was at a comfortable table level when open. The ground glass at eye level. There were tape measures that the cranks were tied to that indicated percent enlargement/reduction. You just moved the cranks until both indicated the same ... then you were in focus. You could use the ground glass to calibrate the tapes. But most of the time you dialed in and shot.

  2. #82
    MattKing's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Delta, British Columbia, Canada
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    12,243
    Images
    60
    Quote Originally Posted by Bill Burk View Post
    Process Cameras were all that way. Two cranks, one moves copyboard the other moves lens board. The film (think paper) plane is fixed. Some were vertical and you had to stand on a stool to look down at it. Most were horizontal and the vacuum back was at a comfortable table level when open. The ground glass at eye level. There were tape measures that the cranks were tied to that indicated percent enlargement/reduction. You just moved the cranks until both indicated the same ... then you were in focus. You could use the ground glass to calibrate the tapes. But most of the time you dialed in and shot.
    My wife is grudgingly supportive about the 4x5 enlarger I wheel into our bathroom.

    A process camera would bring about a definitive NO!
    Matt

    “Photography is a complex and fluid medium, and its many factors are not applied in simple sequence. Rather, the process may be likened to the art of the juggler in keeping many balls in the air at one time!”

    Ansel Adams, from the introduction to The Negative - The New Ansel Adams Photography Series / Book 2

  3. #83
    Steve Smith's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Ryde, Isle of Wight
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    8,589
    Images
    122
    Quote Originally Posted by MattKing View Post
    A process camera would bring about a definitive NO!
    But it would make the enlarger seem more reasonable!


    Steve.
    "People who say things won't work are a dime a dozen. People who figure out how to make things work are worth a fortune" - Dave Rat.

  4. #84

    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    325
    Quote Originally Posted by Steve Smith View Post
    I think our enlargers are built the wrong way round!

    They should have the light source, negative and lens at the bottom, projecting upwards onto a piece of ground glass...
    This has actually been the standard setup for commercial printers (ie. package printers) for MANY years. A ground glass is used to focus and align all of the lens decks during initial setup. More familiar to the general public were film-based mini-lab printers; you've probably seen the operator sitting at a desk-like workstation to handle the negatives. Above is the lens tower and the paper transport system.

    These systems have their own difficulties, one of which is the tendency for paper dust to fall out of the lens tower, onto the negative stage.

Page 9 of 9 FirstFirst ... 3456789


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Contact Us  |  Support Us!  |  Advertise  |  Site Terms  |  Archive  —   Search  |  Mobile Device Access  |  RSS  |  Facebook  |  Linkedin