Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 70,530   Posts: 1,543,970   Online: 1102
      
Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 22
  1. #11
    bsdunek's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Michigan
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,116
    Images
    194
    Here's a thread concerning the heat absorbing glass: http://www.apug.org/forums/forum43/8...ss-my-23c.html
    Bruce

    Moma don't take my Kodachrome away!
    Oops, Kodak just did!


    BruceCSdunekPhotography.zenfolio.com

  2. #12
    fotch's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    SE WI- USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    4,125
    I wonder if your negative is to thin? Never have had these problems with a properly exposed negative.
    Items for sale or trade at www.Camera35.com

  3. #13

    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Oregon
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    152
    Images
    7
    Quote Originally Posted by bsdunek View Post
    Here's a thread concerning the heat absorbing glass: http://www.apug.org/forums/forum43/8...ss-my-23c.html
    Thanks for the link.

    So from all the responses, it looks like HA glass would most likely solve one issue and is pretty cheap to boot. On the other hand, it looks like a glass carrier would possibly solve corner sharpness (assuming I've done a good job with alignment) as well as negative popping, but at a significantly higher price (new - I've looked and can't find them used often enough).

  4. #14

    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Oregon
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    152
    Images
    7
    Quote Originally Posted by fotch View Post
    I wonder if your negative is to thin? Never have had these problems with a properly exposed negative.
    The negative looks great. It has a full range of tones with details throughout. Though it is low contrast (foggy dead forest at dusk), it isn't thin. It was shot on FP4.

    Would diluting the paper developer more than the directions imply allow me to use a longer exposure, or would it introduce adverse effects to the print?

  5. #15
    ic-racer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Midwest USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    6,217
    16x20 is pushing the magnification ratio of that lens beyond is design parameters. I have that lens and to do a 16x20 with a non-glass carrier I do the following:
    1) use f11 or f16 for the print (but focus a f2.8)
    2) focus on the center of the image then move the ENLARGER HEAD to focus on the corner of the image (without touching the focus knob). Set the ENLARGER HEAD right inbetween (it helps if you have a scale on the column). This will optimize your depth of field.
    3) put the lenscap on and keep the enlarger light on
    4) when the paper is in the easel, swiftly turn the enlarger lamp off, take off the lenscap and start the timer. This will minimize negative popping.

    I also have a High Magnification lens for 16x20s, but if you follow the steps above, the Nikkor comes almost as close in overall sharpness of the grain on a 16x20.

    I just did some 16x20s last night from 35mm. I use the Schneider HM 45mm lens and a glass carrier. That setup makes it much easer, but the final image is only slightly better than the best the Nikkor can do if you follow the above steps.

    The other 'trick' to doing 16x20s from 35mm is to us any 80mm lens. But that option is usally only for those with big floor standing 5x7 and 8x10 enlargers or horizontal projection.
    Last edited by ic-racer; 10-06-2010 at 11:11 AM. Click to view previous post history.

  6. #16

    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Oregon
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    152
    Images
    7
    Quote Originally Posted by ic-racer View Post
    16x20 is pushing the magnification ratio of that lens beyond is design parameters. I have that lens and to do a 16x20 with a non-glass carrier I do the following:
    1) use f11 or f16 for the print (but focus a f2.8)
    2) focus on the center of the image then move the ENLARGER HEAD to focus on the corner of the image (without touching the focus knob). Set the ENLARGER HEAD right inbetween (it helps if you have a scale on the column). This will optimize your depth of field.
    3) put the lenscap on and keep the enlarger light on
    4) when the paper is in the easel, swiftly turn the enlarger lamp off, take off the lenscap and start the timer. This will minimize negative popping.

    I also have a High Magnification lens for 16x20s, but if you follow the steps above, the Nikkor comes almost as close in overall sharpness of the grain on a 16x20.

    I just did some 16x20s last night from 35mm. I use the Schneider HM 45mm lens and a glass carrier. That setup makes it much easer, but the final image is only slightly better than the best the Nikkor can do if you follow the above steps.

    The other 'trick' to doing 16x20s from 35mm is to us any 80mm lens. But that option is usally only for those with big floor standing 5x7 and 8x10 enlargers or horizontal projection.
    Thanks! I'll try this as soon as I can. Unfortunately my lens didn't come with a cap but I'm sure I can figure something out.

  7. #17

    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Oregon
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    152
    Images
    7
    If I were to buy Beselers universal AN glass carrier, what material would I use to mask the negative?

  8. #18
    Jon Shiu's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    Elk, California
    Shooter
    Plastic Cameras
    Posts
    2,554
    Images
    33
    You can use black paper, tape, plastic or a piece of film to mask.

    Jon
    Mendocino Coast Black and White Photography: www.jonshiu.com

  9. #19
    ic-racer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Midwest USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    6,217
    I cut my masks out of the black plastic material that photographic paper comes it. I set them on top of the glass and hold on with tape.

  10. #20

    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Downers Grove Illinois
    Posts
    1,052
    Neg must be flat to get corner to corner sharpness. A glassless carrier does not do it.

    A less than good enlarging less will still never be good in the corners. Still others will not get good corner at 16x20. They are designed for a max magnification and that is it. 16x is pushing all but the very best.

    A half good test is to focus on one corner and print. If sharp, then a flat neg will mostly likely solve it.
    You need a grain magnifier to see the corners. Not all work in the corners.

    Also the machine needs to be aligned, neg stage, lens stage & baseboard. alll parallel. I use my Omega long mirror to allign and focus in the corners. Later sold as a Peak brand. Short mirror is for center only. It is 10x. It is the only tool you NEED.

    Try to focus 1/3 the way from the center to a corner as a compromise.

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



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