Switch to English Language Passer en langue franÁaise Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 69,716   Posts: 1,514,768   Online: 795
      
Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 36
  1. #21

    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Montreal, Canada
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    4,472
    The B66 is a much smaller enlarger than the LPL 4500. Max negative size for the B66 is square medium format. Based on my recollection of the 4500, I doubt the carrier would fit the B66.

  2. #22
    rmolson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Mansfield Ohio
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    307

    glass carriers

    Glass negative carriers
    I use an Omega B22 for my 35 and 120 work, I have mounted slide cover glass on both dustless carriers on the underside of the top part of the carrier . A little super glue and black tape finishes the project. I use a cold light head and have never experienced any problem with Newtons rings. If I do Iíll use an old graphic arts scanner trick. The slide or negative is quickly waved through a burst of off set spray powder ( corn starch ) blown into the air Just enough gets on the film to provide separation from the glass.
    Considering that the scanner used an extremely finely focused light to record the slide detail and the powder did not reproduce it should be safe enough for an enlarger lens system..

  3. #23

    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    Valley Stream, NY
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    3,216
    Quote Originally Posted by Michael R 1974 View Post
    The B66 is a much smaller enlarger than the LPL 4500. Max negative size for the B66 is square medium format. Based on my recollection of the 4500, I doubt the carrier would fit the B66.
    It will not. The negative carrier for the LPL 4500 is very different - much larger than the carriers for the Omega B series enlargers. The LPL 4500 enlarger will accomodate negatives to 4x5 in. All Omega's B series enlargers max out with medium format. Some go only to 6x6 cm., like the B-66; others go to 6x9 cm.
    Frank Schifano

  4. #24

    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Montreal, Canada
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    4,472
    Quote Originally Posted by rmolson View Post
    Glass negative carriers
    I use an Omega B22 for my 35 and 120 work, I have mounted slide cover glass on both dustless carriers on the underside of the top part of the carrier . A little super glue and black tape finishes the project. I use a cold light head and have never experienced any problem with Newtons rings. If I do Iíll use an old graphic arts scanner trick. The slide or negative is quickly waved through a burst of off set spray powder ( corn starch ) blown into the air Just enough gets on the film to provide separation from the glass.
    Considering that the scanner used an extremely finely focused light to record the slide detail and the powder did not reproduce it should be safe enough for an enlarger lens system..
    So you mount the glass under the top cover? I think that would work with my carrier, but I'm wondering, due to the added thickness of the closed carrier, are there any issues with the enlarger head? I expect it will fit in fine, but for example when you close the head down on the thicker carrier, I guess technically it means the condenser lenses are slightly higher above the negative stage than they were when the carrier was glassless. Is this a problem? Are further adjustments required? The B66 isn't really adjustable.

    Instead of slide glass, what if I used filter glass from say a B+W clear filter I have lying around? Just pop the filter out of the ring and use that. Would that potentially work? I'm thinking I could just sandwich it above the negative in the carrier without having to actually attach it anywhere. That way if I need the carrier glassless, I simply don't use the filter.

    I still wondering if using glass only above the negative will result in appreciably sharper prints. Somehow it doesn't seem like it should, but this would be a pretty easy fix and worth a shot.

  5. #25

    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    Valley Stream, NY
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    3,216
    Roll film negatives have a tendency to bulge upward in the negative carrier (support side convex and emulsion side concave), and that's why having only a top glass works. But in order for it to work, the glass and the negative must be in direct contact, so the glass needs to go between the negative and the top cover of the carrier. Otherwise it will do no good at all. I'm thinking that this will cause clearance problems with the carrier, and it won't be able to close fully. If you've ever seen a glass carrier, you'll have noticed that it's made in such a way that the glass and the underside of the top of the carrier are flush to provide that contact. I wouldn't worry about the difference in the condenser height. It's only a very small amount, and not likely to cause an illumination problem. Give it a shot if you think it will work. You've got nothing to lose.
    Frank Schifano

  6. #26

    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Montreal, Canada
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    4,472
    I think I will give it a try next printing session and see how it goes.

  7. #27
    Mark Fisher's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    Chicago
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    1,619
    Images
    151
    I use a half glass carrier (bottom) on a Leitz enlarger and it makes a significant difference. I find that dust is not a huge issue if you make sure you check all surfaces carefully.

  8. #28
    rmolson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Mansfield Ohio
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    307
    slide cover glqass is extreme thin So thickness of the carrier is not that much of a problem The B22 has adjustment screws where the head attaches to the lift arm and the head can be leveled. Also the B22 just rests the light head ( condensenrs or cold light on the negative carrier) There is no pressure.

  9. #29

    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    cuernavaca,mexico
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    72
    i use a double glass carrier. dust is not a problem if you are careful to clean both surfaces and the negative first and then check with a light box and a loupe for any dust before enlarging.

  10. #30
    Mainecoonmaniac's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    2,881
    Images
    6

    Yes it's dusty

    Quote Originally Posted by Michael R 1974 View Post
    Never thought of that either. thanks.

    If I use a glass carrier, is the dust factor as bad as people say?
    With glassless carriers, you only have 2 surfaces for dust. With a glassed carriers, you have 6 surfaces for dust to settle on. It's 3 times more surfaces to keep clean.

Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



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