Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 70,500   Posts: 1,543,293   Online: 965
      
Page 4 of 6 FirstFirst 123456 LastLast
Results 31 to 40 of 56
  1. #31
    Nicholas Lindan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Cleveland, Ohio USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    2,371
    Images
    4
    Quote Originally Posted by John Roberts View Post
    millimetre sizes and this seems really small
    Emmm, hrrrr, hummphh....

    centimeters, it's centimeters -- change the 'mm' to 'cm'.
    DARKROOM AUTOMATION
    f-Stop Timers - Enlarging Meters
    http://www.darkroomautomation.com/da-main.htm

  2. #32
    David Brown's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    near Dallas, TX USA
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    3,301
    Images
    6
    Quote Originally Posted by Nicholas Lindan View Post
    - takes yer choice.
    OK, I realize that I am in the minority here, but I have made a choice and simply stated my opinion (just like everyone else) :rolleyes:

    I own and have used:

    The old Kodak "computer" in their B&W dataguide.
    Mr. Linden's ruler
    an Ilford EM10
    the enlarging attachment for a Gossen Luna pro
    the algebra formula being discussed.

    All of these got me close. "Close!" I still had to fine tune, and - in my experience - a test strip and/or a "work print" or two ended up being made anyway. Starting with a test strip is, for me, the quickest, cheapest and most efficient method.

    YMMV

  3. #33

    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Piedmont, NC
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    59
    Quote Originally Posted by David Brown View Post
    OK, I realize that I am in the minority here, but I have made a choice and simply stated my opinion (just like everyone else) :rolleyes:

    I own and have used:

    The old Kodak "computer" in their B&W dataguide.
    Mr. Linden's ruler
    an Ilford EM10
    the enlarging attachment for a Gossen Luna pro
    the algebra formula being discussed.

    All of these got me close. "Close!" I still had to fine tune, and - in my experience - a test strip and/or a "work print" or two ended up being made anyway. Starting with a test strip is, for me, the quickest, cheapest and most efficient method.

    YMMV
    Even with the EM-10 I still do a test strip...... have you priced cibachrome materials.... I would never just toss in a bigger sheet of paper and run a print like it would be a final.....

  4. #34

    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Cleveland, OH
    Posts
    378
    It should be possible to tweak the formula to be "spot on" at any enlarger height.

    Things that probably aren't being taken into account are paper reciprocity, actual lens-to-print distance (not the hypotenuse of lens-to-print distance and chassis stalk angle), and the aforementioned contrast loss due to light scatter with increase in magnification factor.

  5. #35
    Nicholas Lindan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Cleveland, Ohio USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    2,371
    Images
    4
    Time for a real world test ...

    Conditions: Beseler 45MX, condenser light source, Stouffer 4x5 31-step tablet, 150mm Rodagon, Ilford MGIV RC glossy, #2 1/2 filter, D-72 70F 2 min

    Prints were made at 4x5 (1:1), 5x7, 8x10, 11x14 and 16x20.

    In each case the #1 step was metered with the Darkroom Automation meter. Time was controlled with a DA f-Stop timer. A total of 10 stops of exposure (meter reading + timer setting = 10) was given in each case.

    The results are as consistent as I could ever do with test strips. All the prints were made with the same contrast filtration - results would be a bit closer if contrast were tweaked.



    Time to find new exposure and set it into the timer after changing magnification - less than 5 seconds.
    DARKROOM AUTOMATION
    f-Stop Timers - Enlarging Meters
    http://www.darkroomautomation.com/da-main.htm

  6. #36
    declark's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    So. Cal
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    243
    Images
    79
    Why am I not surprised to find such thorough and thoughtful insight on such a niche APUG forum topic. There's a lot here that I need to still digest. It looks like making a test strip is probably the best bet, but at least the calculations will be useful to even get in the ballpark on the test strip. I find that sometimes I am way off base especially if proper exposure time goes from say 12s to 45s or so, the usual 3s test strip just isn't going to work at the longer exposure, so I will now know where to start with a certain base exposure.

  7. #37
    Nicholas Lindan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Cleveland, Ohio USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    2,371
    Images
    4
    Comparison of methods for determining the exposure correction required for magnification changes using a 50mm lens, Beseler 45 enlarger and condenser lamphousing



    The ruler and the magnification formula provide the same result - the previous difugalty was due to not correctly locating the lens nodal point. In this case the point is 1.1" back from the front flange of a 50mm f2.8 El-Nikkor, FWIW.

    However, although they agree, they both provide the wrong exposure correction - enough to create a shift of about 1/3 of a Zone in some cases. Intriguingly the error doesn't seem to follow any sort of pattern.

    The error doesn't seem to be due to the variation in the distance from the lens to the condenser. Changing the distance by 1", a bit more than the lens travel in the above test, changes the light intensity by less than 0.005 stops. It might be interesting to repeat the test with a diffuse light source.

    So far, it seems only a good meter will provide accurate compensation.
    DARKROOM AUTOMATION
    f-Stop Timers - Enlarging Meters
    http://www.darkroomautomation.com/da-main.htm

  8. #38
    Curt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Pacific Northwest
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    4,550
    Images
    15
    The old Kodak "computer" in their B&W dataguide.
    A lot is/has been said about Kodak but the Data guides both BW and Color have probably helped more people than can be counted. In fact the data from the papers you could order were invaluable.
    Everytime I find a film or paper that I like, they discontinue it. - Paul Strand - Aperture monograph on Strand

  9. #39
    2F/2F's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Los Angeles, CA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    8,008
    Images
    4
    In all practicality, you are fine with an estimate. You will never be spot on via formula anyhow, so will end up wasting a full test print, when you could have just done a test strip. Going from one standard print size to the next (say from 8x10 to 11x14), I would add one stop of exposure as a general adjustment. Going to 16x20? Add two stops versus the 8x10. This is making the quite general estimate that each standard size contains twice as much surface area as the next smallest. This is not exactly true, but it is close enough to make a good test strip. One thing that is true is that when going from 4x5 to 8x10, or from 8x10 to 16x20, you exactly quadruple the surface area, therefore you end up with only one quarter the light. This means that you can theoretically compensate by increasing the amount of light by a factor of four, also known as adding exactly two stops of exposure.
    Last edited by 2F/2F; 12-14-2008 at 03:08 AM. Click to view previous post history.
    2F/2F

    "Truth and love are my law and worship. Form and conscience are my manifestation and guide. Nature and peace are my shelter and companions. Order is my attitude. Beauty and perfection are my attack."

    - Rob Tyner (1944 - 1991)

  10. #40

    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    London, UK
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    410
    Quote Originally Posted by David A. Goldfarb View Post
    Recognize these numbers--4, 5, 8, 11, 16? Both the standard sizes (4x5, 5x7, 8x10, 11x14, 16x20) and approximately the f:stop series. One stop more exposure for every standard increase in size.
    That's really interesting and something I had never realised. However, trust us pesky Europeans to come along with our 12 x 16 paper and ruin the sequence!!

Page 4 of 6 FirstFirst 123456 LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



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