Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 71,846   Posts: 1,582,717   Online: 888
      
Page 7 of 10 FirstFirst 12345678910 LastLast
Results 61 to 70 of 92
  1. #61

    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    464
    Images
    6
    Einstein and Oppenheimer got together and wrote a treatise on the physics of Contact Printing... it was four pages shorter than this topic.

  2. #62

    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Portland, OR
    Shooter
    4x5 Format
    Posts
    3,268
    Quote Originally Posted by ic-racer View Post
    Realistically I can get 90mm of column elevation, and I measured an exit pupil of 4mm on a 50mm lens stopped all the way down.

    Questions, comments, math errors??
    Yes, math errors.

    Your enlarge can only go 90 mm? That's about 3 inches. I'm sure you meant 90 cm, or 900 mm. That makes your incorrect 0.022 result become 0.0022.

    I would suggest that your estimate for 0.5mm of separation to be too small. You will probably get at least a couple of millimeters separation as both the paper and the film will have some curvature too them.

    Also, you haven't accounted for the scattered light that will spread through your negs as them shine down onto the paper from a few millimeters up. You really should use a glass to hold the paper down to minimze this.

  3. #63
    richard ide's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Markham, Ontario
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,216
    "Einstein and Oppenheimer got together and wrote a treatise on the physics of Contact Printing... it was four pages shorter than this topic."

    Just wait until this thread advances to the actual processing of said contact prints.
    Richard

    Why are there no speaker jacks on a stereo camera?

  4. #64

    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    London, UK
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    430
    I've been looking at this thread with an increasing sense of incredulity as despite many posters pointing out the simple truth; that contact printing, in principle, is as easy as walking in a straight line, (glass, negative, paper, turn on light), it still appears an impossible quest.

    I've only two comments to make which are suggested with the best intentions. As others have said, if the glass is scratched or dirty and leaves visible white marks on the print, obviously buy a new sheet of heavy glass, ideally with bevelled edges or at least with masking tape applied to prevent bleeding fingers in the darkroom. However, if the glass is in top condition and dust keeps appearing, just buy a can of compressed air to blast the offending articles out of your printing vicinity.

    My other point, (and I am really starting to realise how boring this post is), is the holy text sought for explaining contacting. OK, Mr Adams kept it brief, because as others have mentioned, there is nothing much to say, (glass, negative, paper, turn on light), but a fascinating resource is the book Darkroom 2, published by Lustrum Press in 1978. The two books in this series simply feature leading American photographers giving an insight into their darkroom practise through folio pages, interviews, and a complete breakdown of the equipment, chemicals and procedures used to shoot, process and print their work. Participants included W. Eugene Smith, Arron Siskind, Ralph Gibson, (founder of Lustrum I think), and most importantly for us here, Cole Weston. Young Cole, son of Edward, has 18 pages to cover contact printing his father's work, and if that's not enough information on the subject, I really don't know what to say. It has wonderful photos of a smiling Cole holding up a roll of toilet paper to illustrate how to clean the glass, and light bulbs for illumination, which puts all ideas of mathematical calculations out of the window. It was that simple all along. But in all seriousness, these books are invaluable resources and give a wonderful insight into how photographers work in the darkroom. Wynn Bullock on tonal print balance and Ralph Gibson on achieving his ideal contrast, (both in the first volume), are marvelous essays. They are long out of print but a quick search on abebooks.com reveall that they can be found quite easily and relatively cheaply.

    Happy contacting!
    Mike

  5. #65
    Ian Leake's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Switzerland
    Shooter
    8x10 Format
    Posts
    1,370
    Images
    48
    Quote Originally Posted by Mike Crawford View Post
    ...a fascinating resource is the book Darkroom 2, published by Lustrum Press in 1978. The two books in this series simply feature leading American photographers giving an insight into their darkroom practise through folio pages, interviews, and a complete breakdown of the equipment, chemicals and procedures used to shoot, process and print their work. Participants included W. Eugene Smith, Arron Siskind, Ralph Gibson, (founder of Lustrum I think), and most importantly for us here, Cole Weston. Young Cole, son of Edward, has 18 pages to cover contact printing his father's work, and if that's not enough information on the subject, I really don't know what to say. It has wonderful photos of a smiling Cole holding up a roll of toilet paper to illustrate how to clean the glass, and light bulbs for illumination, which puts all ideas of mathematical calculations out of the window. It was that simple all along...
    Thanks for reminding me about this Mike. I shall go away and read that section again

  6. #66

    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Eastern, Australia
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,020
    Images
    55
    g'day all

    Mike, i've read those books, they are brilliant and simple

    this post, like many others on this site, is just another example of the mis-taken belief that over complicating an issue will make up for lack of experience, confidence and common sense

    it don't need to be rocket science

    Ray

  7. #67
    ic-racer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Midwest USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    6,382

    Zeroing in...

    Update and test results.

    So, to update, prior to buying a print frame or formal proof printer box, I have ordered some glass from the glass shop. I decided on 10x12, one-half inch thick.

    It is a little frustrating waiting for this sheet of glass from the glass shop, so I thought I would try some things.

    Q: How much pressure do you need to hold the neg/paper in contact for a sharp image with A) Collimated light and B) Diffuse light.

    A: Depends on the paper. I started with the stiffest paper I had, Forte double weight. Room humidity 55%. This paper still curled up ad the edges with 20! sheets of 11x14 glass pressing on a 9x11 area. The foam used for this test was about 15 Shore (A). I had another 20 or so sheets of glass to put on there but it was getting heavy and cumbersome.

    I also tried a base consisting of a one-quarter inch sheet of foam rubber about Shore 40 (much stiffer than the first) and it was A) too stiff and B) not flat enough by manufacture tolerances. I did not try the Shore 40 on top of the Shore 15 foam.

    Ilford double weight fiber base was held flat under the 20 sheets of glass and the Ilford RC paper also was also held flat.

    With this setup I was unable to test collimated light (the light was diffused by all the glass).

    I did try a single clear thin piece of framing with weights or pressure on the edges, however, the glass bends and is not in good contact in the center. So, again, I was unable to do this test with collimated light until the thick glass comes in.

    So, to recapitulate:

    It is impractical to obtain good control with VC paper with a light source consisting of "any light bulb"

    Overlay glass needs to be 1) free from bubbles or scratches if one intends to use collimated light. Minimum thickness for a 'gravity pressure' system has not been stated and needs to be determined (for my own work that is).
    ANY small imperfection or dust on the glass or negative with show up with precision when using a collimated source.

    A diffuse light source removes the shadows from dust and all imperfections in the glass. Dust that gets caught between the neg. and paper still shows up.

    If the paper and negative are in close enough contact, both collimated and diffuse light sources produce identically sharp prints.

    For a contact printing system to be useful in making fine prints (in my darkroom), there must be provisions for the frequent placement of test strips or paper in the system, without compromising the cleanliness of the negative. Also, when using strips of paper, the negative needs to be in-contact with a clean surface.

    For a contact printing system to be useful in making fine prints silver prints on VC paper it has to be designed in such a way that the negative can be loaded on the glass in the light (to facilitate dust removal). The may require inversion of the system or adhesive to attach the negative to the glass.

  8. #68
    Alex Hawley's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Kansas, USA
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    2,895
    Images
    63
    Quote Originally Posted by ic-racer View Post
    Minimum thickness for a 'gravity pressure' system has not been stated and needs to be determined (for my own work that is).
    ANY small imperfection or dust on the glass or negative with show up with precision when using a collimated source.
    Now you're getting somewhere. You need to determine pressures with the various thicknesses of papers, film, as well as the printing frame latching system. If you're going to optimize tis system, these numbers need to be quantified. There also need to be a quantificaiton of the pressure variation across the negative/paper laminae on both the X and Y axis. Then we need to know how this pressure varies with the latch spring material be it spring steel, stainless steel or brass. Please include the material grades, heat treatment, typical yield and ultimate strengths. I would also like to see how you determined the spring constants for the various components if you use a mass-spring modeling system.

    As for the light source, glass imperfections, and dust particles, the realationship needs to be established as to minimum sizes of particles and imperfections that can be tolerated with respect to light source distance from the exposure plane.

    Please include all calculations and assumptions to that we may follow the methodology for your conclusions. I would like to be able to validate this work.
    Semper Fi & God Bless America
    My Photography Blog

  9. #69

    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    London, UK
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    430
    Good lord Alex, I think you are on to something here.The paper to film thickness variation was obviously the key to any significant variation that the printing frame latching system might possibly yield. We were damn fools not to see it before. However is the notion of the X and Y axis still valid when we still have no definite proof that the minimum size and tolerance ratio of glass imperfection has still not been at least 97% validated.

    The answer awaits.

    Count me out of this thread. I enjoy printing too much to look any more!
    Cheers and good luck,
    Mike

  10. #70
    Alex Hawley's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Kansas, USA
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    2,895
    Images
    63
    Quote Originally Posted by Mike Crawford View Post
    However is the notion of the X and Y axis still valid when we still have no definite proof that the minimum size and tolerance ratio of glass imperfection has still not been at least 97% validated.
    Mike, the pressure variation in both the x and y directions is important so that a pressure compensating mechanism can be constructed. One of the major problems with traditional latches is that the pressure tends to concentrate where the latch is attached or makes contact with the pressure back. It then deceases radially until it is met by the similar pressure gradient from an adjacent latch.

    This needs to be known before the defect sizes are determined since the minimum allowable defect size will vary inversely with the pressure gradient. With current designs, different size particles and glass defects have varying degrees of effect on the prints.
    Semper Fi & God Bless America
    My Photography Blog



 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



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