Anti-Newton glass for enlarger

[wiggywag]

Hi!

I have a Ilford 500 diffusion head on my Durst L1200. I mainly print 4x5" negs. I wonder how important is it to use Anti-Newton glass on top of the negative compared to a normal glass on such a diffuse light enlarger system?

[Ian Grant]

My own feeling is you're better off with no glass particularly on top, I don't use any in my De Vere 5108 for 120 up to 10x8 negs and only a bottom glass in my Dursts for 35mm & 120.

If using glass I prefer plain not anti-newton, I have anti-newton glass for the Durst and felt it knocked the sharpness and resolution.

Ian

[Dan Henderson]

Unlike Ian's experience, I began using ANG in my old Omega D2, and noticed no decrease in sharpness.

[johnnywalker]

My own feeling is you're better off with no glass particularly on top, I don't use any in my De Vere 5108 for 120 up to 10x8 negs and only a bottom glass in my Dursts for 35mm & 120.

If using glass I prefer plain not anti-newton, I have anti-newton glass for the Durst and felt it knocked the sharpness and resolution.

Ian

How do you use your Durst with only one sheet of glass? In other words, how do you hold the negative flat?
The only way I can see that working on my Durst L1000 would be to use the top 1/2 of the metal film holder and replace the bottom 1/2 with the glass.

[bowzart]

...If using glass I prefer plain not anti-newton, I have anti-newton glass for the Durst and felt it knocked the sharpness and resolution.

Ian

It can't possibly be as bad as what we had to use 'way back - talc. It worked, but made spotting a nightmare.

[Maris]

A really inexpensive glass with perfect anti-newton properties is non-glare picture frame glass. This stuff has a subtle but easily seen texture that suggests that it would not work in an enlarger but it does; sort of. I make negative carriers using this glass as the top glass and I leave out a bottom glass. A film negative wants to pop upward when the heat from the enlarger hits it. A top glass prevents this. A bottom glass really has nothing to do except gather dust or perhaps prevent the negative falling into the enlarger bellows.

An enlarger with a strongly collimated illumination system, a condenser or point light design for example, will image the texture of anti-glare picture frame glass. My Durst 138S enlarger certainly does.

A semi-condenser or diffusion system enlarger probably won't image anti-glare glass. My Omega D2V certainly does not. And if I put a diffusing screen into the light path of the Durst 138S it doesn't image anti-glare glass either!

So, beating newton rings is easy and cheap for me but only if I am prepared to accept a significantly diffused light source in my enlarger. So far, so good.

[wiggywag]

How do you use your Durst with only one sheet of glass? In other words, how do you hold the negative flat?
The only way I can see that working on my Durst L1000 would be to use the top 1/2 of the metal film holder and replace the bottom 1/2 with the glass.

I use a glass on top of the negative to hold it flat and protect from the heat.

I have a diffusion light head...Ilford 500 system :-)

[Ian Grant]

How do you use your Durst with only one sheet of glass? In other words, how do you hold the negative flat?
The only way I can see that working on my Durst L1000 would be to use the top 1/2 of the metal film holder and replace the bottom 1/2 with the glass.

Exactly as yoy say, the Durst's also take glassless neg holders so I use either a 120 or 35 top plate.

I find far less problems with dust this way.

Ian

[ic-racer]

For projection printing, 4x5 is like an ideal format. Its base is thick enough to lay flat, but it is not so big that it needs tension or glass to keep from drooping in the middle. My 4x5 mixing boxes are not hot enough to cause buckling. Bottom line is that I almost never need to use a glass carrier with 4x5.