I like having 2 enlargers (LPL C7700 & LPL 4500?) as I can flash paper with the one I'm not enlarging with, but I don't have to share with others... To share with others, something with a lens turrent (with 50/80/135 or whatever lenses installed) and maskable neg carrier would be handy. Each setup ready to go. Are you intending these to be used concurently?
Great feedback everyone. I appreciate it.
Yes Nige, I intend to either permit them to be used simultaneously by family and friends, and in dedicated format mode when I'm working alone. I read a post by one photographer here that said they like to have the ability to leave a negative in an enlarger while they work on another to take a break from it for a while. That appeals to me.
I'm familiar with (and own a couple of) most of the enlargers mentioned so far except for the DeVere and any of the LPL models. So I read up on the LPL and see that there's primarily two differences between the 4550XLG and the 4500II, namely column height, baseboard size, and 50 watts of light. Other than those three things (still learning how to count) are there any differences in how they operate? The 4500II seems much better priced used these days. I like the idea of switching out a module instead of an entire head. Perhaps the difference is academic, but it seems like less effort.
As for sinks, if you use two, is one mostly covered and/or used as counter space?
Keep it coming people.
If you call it a "prime lens" because it's a fixed-focal length (i.e. not a zoom lens), then as Inigo Montoya said so eloquently, "You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means."
Yes,when I was up,I like the space to place items so they can dry off.what can I say;I'm spoiled when it comes to darkroom space.
Originally Posted by KennyMark
Two conflicting problems are time and space. The more enlargers the better. I can load up different ones with different negs of different formats using little snatches of time during the week, and then more efficiently print them during a single session on the weekend. And I have
parallel systems for color versus black and white work. Right now I'm trying to figure out how to squeeze in yet another 8x10 enlarger, which
I have footprint space for, but will have a hard time getting thru the aisles for initial installation. But I prefer smaller enlargers for everything from 4x5 down to 35mm. But none of my enlargers are in the sink room - that's a bad mix unless you have no other choice. Chem and water
vapor don't mix well with optics or film handling.
If you're planning on multiple, simultaneous users, you'll need a way to separate the printing stations. Plywood dividers, between the enlargers, extending out 18-24 inches (if printing up to 20x24 inches) will allow users to pull out paper without any exposure from another enlarger. You may want to look for pictures of community/college darkrooms to get an idea for design plans.
Originally Posted by KennyMark
Sponsored Ad. (Subscribers to APUG have the option to remove this ad.)
It's hard to go wrong with LPL enlargers, unless price is an issue. In which case you can get a whole lot of enlarger for very little $ with used Omegas.
If I had $3000 to throw around, a new LPL 4500 or two in addition to my Omega D5XL.
I think it depends on what you really shoot mainly. If you shoot a lot of 35mm, the Leitz is great.....had one, but sold it because I hated the color head for BW printing and I mostly shoot medium format. I'm a huge fan of the LPL VCCE enlargers. The variable contrast head is an incredible luxury that I'd never want to do without again. If I could have my ideal 2 enlargers it would be an LPL VCCE in 4x5 with a drop table for big enlargements and a Leitz with a VC head. If you want three then I'd go with a rescue enlarger for that one......I have an Omega D2V that I couldn't bear to see going to the dump! Also, I have an 8' sink and wish I had about 12. 8 seemed huge at the time.
My reason for using several enlargers is to avoid the pain of being adjusting with every change of lens... it could be great to have a multiformat enlarger, but in my experience it is unpractical. Some enlargers get out of alignment with a simply change in the head`s height... so I prefer to use at least two enlargers.
I work in two darkrooms, #1 with a condenser 35mm head and glassless carrier, and another dichroic 4x5" with glass carrier, #2 with a condenser 6x6 head with two carriers, glassless 35mm and glass 6x6, and a second enlarger, also condenser, with a 6x9 glass carrier.
Think that if you don`t plan to have big enlargements from 35mm film, the 35mm enlarger can be ruled out... in the other hand, if you don`t shoot medium format so often, 35mm enlargers are tiny and very comfortable to work with; in this case, a 4x5" enlarger could be the best companion. As mentioned, it will depend on the formats you use most.
If I were building a new darkroom, and money were not an issue, I`d have a condenser 35mm/6x6 enlarger and a dichroic 4x5" one... to my taste, the best ones are the Durst A300 for 35mm, Durst M805 up to 6x7, and Durst L1200 up to 4x5". If money is an issue, the best amongst the cheapest to my taste are the Meopta Opemus 6 condenser, and maybe a LPL 4550 dichroic. With most cheap (but good) enlargers you can get the very same results, but with a noticeable lower confort level.
About sinks, I like to use two sinks; a small (kitchen type) one for film developing and chemicals drainage, and a big second one for the trays and washing devices.
Big, flat sinks have a slow liquid drainage action, they never get completely clear and it easy to keep chemical remains on it. If chemicals were water and soap, no problem, but if you want to get rid of a selenium solution (or pyro, or whatever dangerous chemical), any trace of chemical could be dangerous for your health.
For this reason I like to have an small sink, with a good drainage action, where residues are easy to drag with water. Better if your trays fit in to be cleaned.
Plastic sinks are not so cool, usually on the small side, but functional and with the better drainage. Wood ones are cheap but take a lot of work (depending on how good you made it), steel ones are supercool, light and strong but usually with not so good drainage.
Just build a darkroom for yourself, or maybe for you plus an assistant; three persons on a darkroom working at a time is not so realistic (at least if you are doing serious work). Simply too much people (you`ll need two sinks, three enlargers, etc... Do you really need it?)
Just my 2 cents.
Last edited by jose angel; 11-21-2013 at 02:22 PM. Click to view previous post history.
I use two 5x7 Durst 138S for all formats. One is setup with a variable contrast head for black and white and the other has a color head that is used for color. The color one can only handle 4x5 film however. I don't find it a big deal to swap the lenses to go from one format to another. I used to use two Omega D5s in the same type of setup before I decided I needed a 5x7 camera.
I do wish I had more negative carriers for the Durst. That's the one thing I don't like swapping formats in.
One of the reasons a individual who works alone in the darkroom has multiple enlargers theses days is they have become so inexpensive.