Here's a thread concerning the heat absorbing glass: http://www.apug.org/forums/forum43/8...ss-my-23c.html
I wonder if your negative is to thin? Never have had these problems with a properly exposed negative.
Thanks for the link.
Originally Posted by bsdunek
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).
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.
Originally Posted by fotch
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?
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.
Sponsored Ad. (Subscribers to APUG have the option to remove this ad.)
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.
Originally Posted by ic-racer
If I were to buy Beselers universal AN glass carrier, what material would I use to mask the negative?
You can use black paper, tape, plastic or a piece of film to mask.
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.
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.