Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 71,050   Posts: 1,561,153   Online: 790
      
Page 10 of 10 FirstFirst ... 45678910
Results 91 to 100 of 100
  1. #91
    brent8927's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    Oak Park, IL
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    274
    Images
    18
    Quote Originally Posted by Ornello Pederzoli II
    Well, I don't know. I have no idea why anyone would want a ragged border anyway, and I have never made prints that way. The camera, you may notice, gives a clean edge to the negative. The interiors of cameras are treated to minimize flare, I need not remind you.

    I simply suggest thumbing your nose at fashion and making the best quality prints you can make. I don't care what anyone else does. Why should you?
    Others can do what they want, I was simply defending my preferred method of printing. I never said I thought printing with a filed negative carrier was a superior method than printing with one that crops close to the negative, I simply said I personally preferred that method.

  2. #92

    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Shooter
    35mm RF
    Posts
    295
    Quote Originally Posted by brent8927
    Others can do what they want, I was simply defending my preferred method of printing. I never said I thought printing with a filed negative carrier was a superior method than printing with one that crops close to the negative, I simply said I personally preferred that method.
    Fine. I simply want you and everyone else who does it that way to be aware that it may well have adverse effects on tonality. That's all I'm saying.

    OK?

    If you are doing something out of the ordinary, it is only right that you be informed of the consequences. Enlarger companies are not idiots. They don't make negative carriers that impinge on the negative a little just to piss you off.

  3. #93
    brent8927's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    Oak Park, IL
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    274
    Images
    18
    Quote Originally Posted by John McCallum
    Brent, may I suggest a good practical soln is in fact using the cutt matt technique. This way you'll get to keep your neg carriers in their orig condition also. Though I must admit mine are also filed out to full frame size. (I also haven't experienced flare that was significant enough to be a problem).
    Thanks for the suggestion. I have used cut window matts but I just don't like them as much. However, people's preferences and styles do change so I'll keep it in mind.

    On a side note, does anyone know how to print a 4x5 negative full frame? Does it require the use of a negative holder with glass? (I realize contact printing is an option, but I mean if I want a bigger print, and please don't say "buy an 8x10," my 4x5 is big and heavy enough!)

  4. #94

    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Shooter
    35mm RF
    Posts
    295
    Quote Originally Posted by brent8927
    Thanks for the suggestion. I have used cut window matts but I just don't like them as much. However, people's preferences and styles do change so I'll keep it in mind.

    On a side note, does anyone know how to print a 4x5 negative full frame? Does it require the use of a negative holder with glass? (I realize contact printing is an option, but I mean if I want a bigger print, and please don't say "buy an 8x10," my 4x5 is big and heavy enough!)
    I believe you may find some sag in the negative if you try it without glass. That's one of the reasons carriers do have a slightly smaller opening. It helps grasp the negative and hold it flat. In other words, you may have trouble with focus not being even across the entire negative.

  5. #95
    brent8927's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    Oak Park, IL
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    274
    Images
    18
    Quote Originally Posted by Ornello Pederzoli II
    I believe you may find some sag in the negative if you try it without glass. That's one of the reasons carriers do have a slightly smaller opening. It helps grasp the negative and hold it flat. In other words, you may have trouble with focus not being even across the entire negative.
    Without the glass wouldn't the negative just fall through, since I'm using sheet film instead of roll film?

  6. #96

    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    New Zealand
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    2,410
    Images
    4
    It doesn't actually require a glass neg holder. But you could find 'neg-pop' drives you round in circles a bit if you didn't realise what is happening. Suggest letting the enlarger head warm up completely, then aligning the neg and also allowing it to reach temp before focusing.
    Using cut mats would not be as easy here, and it might be worthwhile getting a neg holder for the enlarger.

  7. #97

    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Shooter
    35mm RF
    Posts
    295
    Quote Originally Posted by brent8927
    Without the glass wouldn't the negative just fall through, since I'm using sheet film instead of roll film?
    No, I was talking about a negative carrier that had a slightly larger opening. It would be really tricky, as you point out, to hold.

  8. #98
    Ole
    Ole is offline
    Ole's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    Bergen, Norway
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    9,281
    Blog Entries
    1
    Images
    31
    I use both glass and glassless carriers on my Durst 138S. The glassless 4x5" carrier holds the negative surprisingly flat, and I have yet to experience "negative pop". Even lith prints with 5 minutes exposure time have not been a problem; sharpness is perfect and stable.

    The opening is slightly smaller than the image area, yes. Contrast is visibly higher than with the full-size (13x18cm) unmasked glass carrier, too. A bit less than half a grade - and that it after setting the sliding masks exactly on the edge of the image area.
    -- Ole Tjugen, Luddite Elitist
    Norway

  9. #99
    Bob Carnie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Toronto-Ontario
    Shooter
    Med. Format RF
    Posts
    4,678
    Images
    14
    I would suggest glass to print the whole negative with 4x5, but as some have pointed out 4x5 does not pop as much as the smaller formats, I think due to the thickness of the film. 4x5 glassless carries are made to show all the negative and some rebate, I just prefer the glass carriers in all format work I do , 35mm-11x4. Heating up the negative as John suggests is a good idea and Ornellio is correct that using a glassless carrier for this purpose is difficult.

    When using glass carrier and the need is to show some rebate, I still always mask off the excess light to reduce flare!

  10. #100

    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    11
    Diane Arbus used the filed out negative carriers on her 6x6 prints. Her broder was created by adding small pieces of cardboard to the edges.

Page 10 of 10 FirstFirst ... 45678910


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



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