Diehipsterdie, please ignore Roger. He has forgotten that everyone was a beginner once. Please do not hesitate to post more questions.
I hope beginners in film are not going to be put off from joining APUG based on Mr Hicks attitude.
Anáil nathrach, ortha bháis is beatha, do chéal déanaimh.
I tell my kids, ignorance is NOTHING to be ashamed of. Failure or FEAR of asking the question, is STUPID.
I have been in photography awhile, but admit I didn't know the difference either as I contact print. Learn something new everyday!
Frances has point out that indeed, she would not have been so abrupt: how do you find out the basics when you don't know?
On the other hand she agree that 'DieHipsterDie' is a pretty offensive nickname in its own right -- urging ANYONE to die is rather unpleasant -- so I can only plead that I was over-influenced by the name.
My further apologies, therefore.
Well - - - I would argue that the F30 is both.
A condenser enlarger uses a lens (or set of lenses) to cause the light from a source to form a beam. The condenser lens(es) sit between the light source and the negative.
A diffusion enlarge uses an optical device to diffuse the light from the source. The diffusion device sits between the light source and the negative.
The Durst F30 (and also F60) enlarges have BOTH condenser lenses and diffusion devices. The diffusion device is a white-painted steel plate that serves as a reflector, bending the beam of light from the bulb at a 90 degree angle and redirecting it downward through the condenser lens to the negative stage. So the actual light source seen by the condenser lenses is not the semi-specular lamp, but rather the very diffused white metal plate reflector.
Actually, the real extremens in enlarger design is between "point source" enlargers and diffusion enlargers. A point source enlarger is one in which the source of light is relatively small. The light from this source is collimated with a condenser to form a very contrasty beam of light. A point source enlarger is characterized as extremely sharp, but very contrasty and emphasizing any flaws tht may exist in the negative.
My Omega DII enlarger has condenser lenses, so it's a condenser enlarger. The light originates in a bulb that sits directly above the condensers. If I use a bare, unfrosted bulb, it approximates a point source in that there is no diffusion device in the light path. If I use a standard household bulb, the frosted glass provides some diffusion. Of course, the original design calls for a #211 bulb, a so-called "opal" bulb which just means that the glass envelope has been given an extreme degree of frosting, it acts more like a diffusion enlarger.
There has been a lot of pointless arguing about which is better - point source, condenser, diffusion. The late Fred Picker always made a big deal about how much better diffusion enlargers were - but of course, that's what he sold. David Vestal did some careful testing and concluded that it didn't matter to a skilled printer.
Ok, smart guy. What does a diffusion chamber look like? You might as well ask me what a geusitier looks like. And it was purchased for $50 used. It turns on, makes a print and that's all I care about. I didn't care one way or another what type of enlarger it was. I'm also not willing to open it up to see if it has a chamber.
Originally Posted by Roger Hicks
With one or two exceptions, everyone on this forum has been extremely helpful.
Oh yeah, "die" is German for "the."
Sponsored Ad. (Subscribers to APUG have the option to remove this ad.)
... except for the ones which have two toligmats (in the Weissacker-Ochsensheisse configuration).
Originally Posted by BWGirl
Sorry, I can't help either. My initial guess would be "hybrid" - diffuse light source, with a condensor. That's the most common type, and one of the simplest ones to make. But there are hundreds of different enlarger types in the market, under at least five times as many names. The best advice I can give you is to learn the difference, and then compare that to your enlarger.
-- Ole Tjugen, Luddite Elitist
Originally Posted by Ole
Ole has put it more tactfully.
And if all you care about is that it cost $50, why do you want to know what sort of enlarger it is?
Not everyone was a beginer, Roger came out of the womb with a Leica strapped around his neck!
Just want to know what I have. That's all.
Originally Posted by Roger Hicks
The more I look as this enlarger, the more it looks like a condenser and diffuser. It has features of both.
Now, where's the ignore user function?
This comment would be valid if there were any decent books still being published containing information on enlargers and darkroom technique. From time to time I look over the offerings at Barnes & Noble and the dearth of photography books is a commentary on the sorry state of photography.
Anyone who has ever read anything about enlargers in a real book would have no difficulty in working this out for himself/herself.