I'd heard there's very little/No difference in a coldlight vs. diffusion head as light sources. I moved to a diffusion head from condensor and the dust factors apparant to me easily. Sharpness? I'm not that observant. They both give sharp prints to me if the negative's sharp lol But anyway, seems there's a bit of controversy over this light source issue.
I think you are right. Years ago I put a diffusion surface (white plexiglass) in my condenser head and could not tell it from my coldlight. Diffusion means you are scattering the light to the maximum degree --- that light strikes the negative from ALL angles. Condensed light strikes the negative at one angle --- orthogonal to the surface. In truth, coldlights, condensers, diffusers, point lights are all in the middle to varying degrees. The above relates only to the optical properties.
The nice thing about a coldlight is that it is very diffuse and at the same time small, efficient, and generates little heat, which can be a real problem. If you have a good diffusion head or color head, you don't need a coldlight if you are not having heat or space problems.
Thanks for the responses. I think I'll just stick with the diffusion head and not worry about a cold light head unless one drops into my lap for a song.
As for my friends, I think I'll stick with them too.
I reposted my FB/RC question in the B+W paper and chemistry forum.
Originally Posted by Loose Gravel
Didn't you have problems with heat buildup with this setup?
I only did it as an experiment to see if diffusion was the same as a coldlight. There were so many myths about coldlights in the early 80s that I had to try a diffusion plate to compare. It was not any hotter than the condenser, but it was very dark. I don't recommend it and prefer coldlights as long as I have closed loop system of some kind.
Sponsored Ad. (Subscribers to APUG have the option to remove this ad.)
As one who also followed the teachings of Ansel and Fred Picker, I printed for years with Cold Light. I do have to admit though that I have returned to the condensor for the past 10 years and don't think I'll be going back the cold light way. It is a personal choice based upon the results I desire and I find that cold light tends to be too flat for my tastes. Also too soft. Imagine what happens when using noise reduction or dust and scratch removal filters in Photoshop... your image quality becomes softer due to pixel "dot gain". This same effect happens with cold light. My images tend to be very soft in quality and cold light just pushes them too far over the edge for me.
A cold light head is a diffusion light source. Placing a piece of flashed opal glass or other diffusion material between the condensers and the negative turns a condener enlarger into a diffusion enlarger. A colorhead is also a diffusion light source.
I have used:
A Beseler 45 enlarger with a condenser head for black and white and color. Color using CC filters in the filter compartment.
A Beseler 23C with a conderser head for black and white work.
An Omega D5 with a dichroic color head for color and black and white.
I have owned a D2V since 1973 and have used it as:
1. A condenser enlarger for B&W work using Polycontrast filters below the lens, and Polycontrast sheet filters in the filter drawer.
2. A diffusion enlarger for B&W using flashed opal glass under the condenser stack using Polycontrast sheet filters in the filter drawer.
3. A diffusion enlarger using an Aristo cold light head and graded paper.
4. A color and B&W enlarger using a Beseler Minolta 45A colorhead diffusion light source.
Why use a diffusion source? If you use a diffusion enlarger, you will find that you need to use a higher contrast paper (usually 1 to 1-1/2 grades higher) for negatives shot to be printed on a condenser enlarger.
This "effect" can be used when shooting negatives for a diffusion enlarger. You can make longer scale negatives if you are using a diffusion light source for printing. In my experience about 1-1/2 stops. This means you can expose the film for greater shadow detail while still retaining detail in the highlights without resorting to as much dodging and burning - or under development.
With a low contrast subject, you can develop longer or use a higher contrast developer than making the same negative for use in a condenser enlarger. Again, making a longer scale negative - or one with greater tonal scale separation.
Dust will still show up with a diffusion light source. Some scratches will be minimized, but not eliminated. As noted in a previous post, a cold light source may help with heat and negative "popping" on long exposures when compared to a condenser enlarger.
Sharpness = edge definition with enlargers. In ranking sharpness, enlarger types are:
1. A point source enlarger will give the highest edge definition and apparent "sharpness."
2. A condenser is second in edge definition.
3. A diffusion enlarger is last in edge definition and making a print look "sharp."
I use a diffusion sources for black and white work because I find it easier to print longer scale negatives with the diffusion light source. I don't mind the tradeoff of edge definition - some people don't like the "softer" look. I think the total final look is "smoother" in both tonality and contrast with a diffusion source.
Choose the light source that you are most comfortable working with, and that enhances the look of your work. Don't choose it by what other photographers use (i.e. Ansel used a diffusion enlarger) - it's YOUR work.