BigSteveG
Well-known
Am curently using a 150w bulb. When I stop down to F8 and smaller, the projected image becomes so dim I can't really see what I am doing!! Here's my question: Will a less powerful bulb work better? I know that exposure time will increase. But my thinking is I will be able to open up and see the projected image for purposes of manipulation.
sepiareverb
genius and moron
No, brightness on the paper is a combination of bulb, negative density, degree of enlargement and f-stop. A dimmer bulb will make f-2.8 dimmer than it is now.
ChrisPlatt
Thread Killer
What sort of lamp does your enlarger use?
Is it a screw-in incandescent light bulb?
What is the aperture range of your enlarging lens?
What are your usual exposure times at f/8?
Chris
Is it a screw-in incandescent light bulb?
What is the aperture range of your enlarging lens?
What are your usual exposure times at f/8?
Chris
BigSteveG
Well-known
Chris: Screw in Opal. Range is 5.6-32. 80mm Nikkor. I was doing exposures of 7-10 s w/ my 50mm Schneider. The Nikkor needed 15s.
Larry: will check condensors. They are 80mm condensor being used w/ 35mm negs.
Larry: will check condensors. They are 80mm condensor being used w/ 35mm negs.
BigSteveG
Well-known
It's a little difficult to dodge/burn when you can't see the image.
palec
Well-known
If you're using 80mm lens for enlarging 35mm film, you have to set enlarger head higher, thus loosing some light compared to 50mm lens.
BigSteveG
Well-known
Palec. Makes sense. I'll check again w/ 50mm lens to see. Perhaps I'll break down and buy the condensors.
david b
film shooter
You want to expose the paper for at least 10 seconds.
Seven seconds is not long enough to do anything.
Seven seconds is not long enough to do anything.
ChrisPlatt
Thread Killer
I'd stick with the 50mm lens for 35mm. If the exposure time is too short switch to a lower wattage bulb.
The 6x6 condensors will work fine for 35mm but won't be as bright.
Compose wide open, but use a grain magnifier for critical focus after stopping down.
Chris
The 6x6 condensors will work fine for 35mm but won't be as bright.
Compose wide open, but use a grain magnifier for critical focus after stopping down.
Chris
Bryce
Well-known
I've never had too much trouble seeing what I am doing in enlarging. Seems like the amount of light the paper needs to see for a reasonable enlarging time is also an amount that gives usable visibility.
So here is all I can think of. If you are printing in the harder grades where the contrast filter is not so different than the safelight, glare from the safelight might obscure what you are seeing on the easel.
Can you shield the easel from direct light from the safelight?
How about letting your eyes dark adapt? Do you expose your eyes to white light all but when you are actually printing and therefore they never adapt?
I've read that caffeine can reduce your eyes' ability to dark adapt, though I've never noticed. To me the difference isn't remotely worth giving up my coffee, but if it were costing my ability to print things might be different!
Otherwise I am at a loss, at least for a solution. More light means shorter exposures and yours are already pretty short.
Quote: "I'd stick with the 50mm lens for 35mm. If the exposure time is too short switch to a lower wattage bulb.
The 6x6 condensors will work fine for 35mm but won't be as bright.
Compose wide open, but use a grain magnifier for critical focus after stopping down."
I guess there are more than one way to skin a cat!
I routinely use a 75mm lens for 35mm negatives because it gives more room between the enlarger head and the small prints I like so much. Using paper larger than 8x10 I switch back to 50mm.
I also focus with the lens wide open, for the same reason you would focus an slr with the lens open- greater precision.
Is the other method used where focus shift is a possibility?
Quote: "You want to expose the paper for at least 10 seconds.
Seven seconds is not long enough to do anything."
Couldn't agree more. My darkroom instructor told us to keep exposure times over 15 seconds to allow time for accurate dodging and burning, and under 40 seconds to avoid reciprocity failure related problems. The advice has served my very well.
He also pointed out that the optimum aperture should be used, typically f/5.6 or f/8. In practice I use between 5.6 and 11, unless I want to make it look like my Rodinal negs were developed in something softer. To get both the optimal aperture and the optimal printing time, invest in ND filters.
Quote "If you're using 80mm lens for enlarging 35mm film, you have to set enlarger head higher, thus loosing some light compared to 50mm lens."
Though it seems logical at first, the part of this statement about light loss isn't true. If the ratio of object distance to image distance is unchanged as it must be for a print of the same size, any two lenses stopped down to the same f/ ratio should give the same exposure time.
In practice there are small differences because marked f/ ratios are not all that accurate. I find this mildly annoying when I decide I'd rather have used a different length lens, since it means more trial and error to get a good print! The exposure will always be within a few percent of correct though.
So here is all I can think of. If you are printing in the harder grades where the contrast filter is not so different than the safelight, glare from the safelight might obscure what you are seeing on the easel.
Can you shield the easel from direct light from the safelight?
How about letting your eyes dark adapt? Do you expose your eyes to white light all but when you are actually printing and therefore they never adapt?
I've read that caffeine can reduce your eyes' ability to dark adapt, though I've never noticed. To me the difference isn't remotely worth giving up my coffee, but if it were costing my ability to print things might be different!
Otherwise I am at a loss, at least for a solution. More light means shorter exposures and yours are already pretty short.
Quote: "I'd stick with the 50mm lens for 35mm. If the exposure time is too short switch to a lower wattage bulb.
The 6x6 condensors will work fine for 35mm but won't be as bright.
Compose wide open, but use a grain magnifier for critical focus after stopping down."
I guess there are more than one way to skin a cat!
I routinely use a 75mm lens for 35mm negatives because it gives more room between the enlarger head and the small prints I like so much. Using paper larger than 8x10 I switch back to 50mm.
I also focus with the lens wide open, for the same reason you would focus an slr with the lens open- greater precision.
Is the other method used where focus shift is a possibility?
Quote: "You want to expose the paper for at least 10 seconds.
Seven seconds is not long enough to do anything."
Couldn't agree more. My darkroom instructor told us to keep exposure times over 15 seconds to allow time for accurate dodging and burning, and under 40 seconds to avoid reciprocity failure related problems. The advice has served my very well.
He also pointed out that the optimum aperture should be used, typically f/5.6 or f/8. In practice I use between 5.6 and 11, unless I want to make it look like my Rodinal negs were developed in something softer. To get both the optimal aperture and the optimal printing time, invest in ND filters.
Quote "If you're using 80mm lens for enlarging 35mm film, you have to set enlarger head higher, thus loosing some light compared to 50mm lens."
Though it seems logical at first, the part of this statement about light loss isn't true. If the ratio of object distance to image distance is unchanged as it must be for a print of the same size, any two lenses stopped down to the same f/ ratio should give the same exposure time.
In practice there are small differences because marked f/ ratios are not all that accurate. I find this mildly annoying when I decide I'd rather have used a different length lens, since it means more trial and error to get a good print! The exposure will always be within a few percent of correct though.