Digital Enlarger Head

E

eleskin

Well-known
Local time
2:43 PM
Joined
Feb 5, 2008
Messages
1,080
A few months ago, I was at the Photo Plus Expo, and had a chance to talk to the Ilford Paper and Film people. I asked one gentleman if he knew about an affordable digital enlarger head option in the works. He said to me his company purchased a Devere 504 for evaluation, and said it worked very well indeed. Cost was the problem (25,000-35000$$$$). He also said to me the people who make the unit are looking to produce a much cheaper unit, but need to find a manufacturer (China). I then asked if their price would be like buying a high end LCD projector ($3000-$5000), he said yes.

I wonder if any of you participating in this forum have heard anything new about this technology. I have an Epson, but enjoy the wet print process much more, but love the use of the M8 in that I have many lenses, and like to not develop film all the time.

PS: I still beleive the wet process still yealds a distinct image quality that is unique. I would love a hybrid process of digital camera and wet prints. I know about digital negatives printed from Epsons for contact printing, but the ultimate is a direct print from a light source.
 
I don’t see any market for your premise of making wet prints from a digital
enlarger. Wouldn’t that be a bit like using a horse to pull a BMW? Bill
 
You could just print out a negative image onto some transparency paper and print the digital negative onto real paper.
 
I've seen prints from the DeVere digital enlarger at PMA a little over a year ago, and they aren't bad up to a certain size limit (around 20x24"). It's essentially a conventional enlarger with an LCD screen in place of the negative stage, so print size is limited by the resolution of the screen. The ones from digital originals are kind of strange looking, because they are grainless and have the DOF characteristics of a camera with a tiny sensor, but they are decent prints.

Another option for silver output from digital files is LightJet/Lambda. Ilford makes a B&W paper specifically for this purpose, and of course this method can be used for printing to Fuji Crystal Archive or Ilfochrome.

If you're in the New York area, Precision Photos has two DeVere digital enlargers, according to the DeVere rep I spoke with at PMA. They're basically a headshot repro lab, so this technology is perfect for them. They basically have to print 8x10" glossies in batches of 100 prints with text superimposed on the front. It's easier to do text with digital, but it's easier to print batches of 100 with wet processing, and at 8x10", they're well within the resolution limits of the enlarger. I suspect they might do some custom printing, if you inquired.
 
Somewhere I have a print made with one of these. I took a shot with my M8 and De Vere printed it in a mobile darkroom at Focus. It's VERY impressive -- the (poorly washed) print was in my hand in 5 minutes, and that included walking from where I took the pic to the darkroom -- but hellish expensive.

Cheers,

R.
 
I agree that a "wet" printed silver gelatin print has a look about that ink doesn't come close to. The trouble with comparing digital files with a silver gelatin negative is that the conventional film doesn't have a linear response to light like the digital sensor does. If you look at the so called H&D curve of films you'll see that there is a distinct "toe" for the shadows, "shoulder" as youi aproach the highlights, and even the "straight line" portion isn't really straight. Every film & developer combo has a distinct curve, and the final result is just as dependant on your exposure because that affects where your highlights and shadows intersect the curve. You also gain a couple of stops of lattitude with film compared with digital capture.

However, if you really like to play with your computer then go ahead and buy the digital head. At this stage of the game you could bulk load how many rolls of film with $25,000? Film is a bargain.
 
Is the Lightjet process different in concept to the DeVere enlarger? Or are they one and the same?
There was an outfit in Vancouver B.C. Canada that offered prints made by the lightjet process as of a year ago or so. Don't recall the name, but maybe someone from that area would know?
As I remember their advertisements offered prints on most any material; Fiber based B+W, Ilfochrome, as well as conventional color papers.
 
I've been testing lightjet recently and will report more result as they come in. One thing is for sure, the output I'm getting from lightjet compared to inkjet is night and day. Subjective critique follows here: the lightjet prints don't have that "ink on the surface" look to them, and there's a depth when light hits them on display that i just can't get from inkjet. I show my fine art work and sell it to people who want it to last a long time - in that arena, I really care about longevity of prints and the quality of how they look in a gallery. Lightjet wins for me. The real problem (as someone pointed out in an alternate thread) is that the good papers (silver gel too) are becoming a thing of the past. That beautiful look and feel I got from Agfa is gone and it's very sad. Ilford and Fuji make lightjet paper, but while the quality of the paper is good, it still doesn't replace the variety I had before in photographic papers. I'm not at all a purist or a loup-viewer - to me, the differences are so glaringly obvious that it's truly sad these papers are going away.

To the gent who's considering the digital enlarger - I like the digital shooting process as well, and would love a silver gel process to come out the other end. Paper, though, is the secret and I would wonder if a 5-6k investment in a digital enlarger would yield anything worthy if the good papers are no longer available?

I was curious about printing a digital negative and then working in the darkroom, but printing color using a traditional enlarger - oh dear God I never want to do that again.. Test strips, multiple color corrections and using color chips... ugh. :)

Have a great weekend all.
 
Almost forgot - Bryce: Lightjet is an output process that many companies offer in-house. It uses laser light to imprint an image onto traditional photographic paper. The only downside is that only Fuji and a few others make compatible papers, so your choices (while good) are limited. For me, it's the only game in town. Would love something I could do myself again though.
 
I have a visual effects professor who ehibits whis work across the U.S. in various museums and galleries. He uses lightjet exclusively and his prints look AMAZING.

Keep in mind, he's doing digital fine art with it ,but neverthe less it's beautiful.



http://www.kenhuff.com
 
Thousands of Fuji Frontier and Durst Lambda units say otherwise.

POINT OF VIEW said:
I don’t see any market for your premise of making wet prints from a digital
enlarger. Wouldn’t that be a bit like using a horse to pull a BMW? Bill
Click to expand...
 
Any news on an affordable digital enlarger head?

Any news on an affordable digital enlarger head?

I am tired of the high paper and ink costs!!!!

We need an affordable digital enlarger head!!!


It is 2009, and they are making great DLP projectors for movie projection for $500!!!

Why cant we see a digital enlarger head for the price of a Leica M8 or a little less?
 
Just think of the money you're saving on film! Or is it really more economical to shoot film and do old fashioned wet prints with an enlarger and gelatin silver paper?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom