Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 70,315   Posts: 1,536,691   Online: 906
      
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 16 of 16
  1. #11

    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Brighton UK
    Shooter
    Med. Format RF
    Posts
    256
    Quote Originally Posted by Ian Grant View Post

    Most people do the flashing separately to the exposure often using a second enlarger.
    Ian
    I used to use two enlargers until it was pointed out that I could achieve the same result just by putting a scrap of diffusion filter gel (usually Rosco Tough White) over the lens to scramble the light.

    Regards
    Jerry

  2. #12
    bsdunek's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Michigan
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,111
    Images
    194
    Quote Originally Posted by Nicholas Lindan View Post
    That's really an informative paper, Nicholas. Thanks for sharing.
    Bruce

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


    BruceCSdunekPhotography.zenfolio.com

  3. #13
    Ian Grant's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    West Midlands, UK, and Turkey
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    16,252
    Images
    148
    Quote Originally Posted by jerry lebens View Post
    I used to use two enlargers until it was pointed out that I could achieve the same result just by putting a scrap of diffusion filter gel (usually Rosco Tough White) over the lens to scramble the light.

    Regards
    Jerry
    With my Durst I could just use the diffuser filter used for my clour analyser, good thinking

    In practice it's the time it would take to change timer settings and variations with filtration, columns height, neg density that make using the second enlarger system quicker. I know my basic flashing exposures with the Durst set to f16 at the top of the column, and they remain constant regardless. I mainly use a De Vere 5108 and I'd rather not be flashing it's 2000W's of bulbs

    Ian

  4. #14

    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Daventry, Northamptonshire, England
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    6,937
    I am presuming that the diffuser filter is used to avoid removal of the negative from which you wish to flash the print. Given that the flashing exposure has to be quite precise and be the same each time, can you be sure that the correct flash exposure with the diffuser and the particular neg would be replicated with another neg.

    In other words provided the enlarger is set at the appropriate height,aperture and correct exposure for flashing does a diffuser ensure that this is repeated each time irrespective of whether a negative is contrasty or "thin"

    I'd be concerned that a different neg might result in a different exposure under the diffuser or is this not the case? I had always assumed that this is the advantage of the RH Designs flasher lamp which ensures that the correct flash exposure is repeated each time by having it at the same height over the easel and set for the right exposure after testing for the correct flash exposure.

    pentaxuser

    pentaxuser

  5. #15

    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Brighton UK
    Shooter
    Med. Format RF
    Posts
    256
    Quote Originally Posted by pentaxuser View Post
    I am presuming that the diffuser filter is used to avoid removal of the negative from which you wish to flash the print. Given that the flashing exposure has to be quite precise and be the same each time, can you be sure that the correct flash exposure with the diffuser and the particular neg would be replicated with another neg.

    pentaxuser
    I treat each negative individually and make a fresh pre-flash test for each one, ie. I don't assume that the same pre-flash settings are appropriate for all negatives. The diffuser allows for this and, as you say, it can be done on the spot without removing the neg (btw, I've never had problems with coverage)

    I can see the attraction of a consistent exposure, but it wouldn't necessarily fit in with my preferred work flow, which requires greater flexibility.

    Different strokes, as they say...

    Regards
    Jerry

  6. #16
    henk@apug's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Belgium
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    181
    Quote Originally Posted by Nicholas Lindan View Post
    If you always flash with the same filtration there will be no problems and no worries.
    [/URL]
    Thanks for clearing things out.
    Flashing at the same grade the print is made makes a lot of sence in fact. With
    fixed grade papers this is also exactly what happens.

    For me there is only one drawback to use a second enlarger. If preflashing with a time higher than the optimum, white borders would become "contaminated", so the paper has to be flashed in the easel at both enlargers, so recomposing is necessary after flash

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



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