alternatives to filed down negative carriers?

Ornello · Apr 5, 2005

Snapper said:
I got fed up with my neg inserts being a few millimeters smaller than the actual negative, thus cropping off sometimes a valueable part of the image - not exactly full frame. Now I use a glass neg insert so I can print full frame, but now i'm fed up with dust specks - no matter how careful I am, I always end up with a few.

I'm currently filing down a 6x6 insert - it took me weeks on and off just to do one side.... now for the other side... then there's the 6x7 carrier... I'm losing the will to live...

The neg inserts are supposed to crop in a litlle. This is done to optimize your print quality.

Ornello · Apr 5, 2005

jimgalli said:
Don't be bullied into doing it "straight". If you feel like making a neg carrier out of black paper and ric rac scissors, do it. You're doing this for YOU, not everyone else.

Don't be 'bullied' into following fads, by people who do not understand the impact of filing out their negative carriers on their prints.....

Who cares if 99% of the people on the planet like rough edges? There is a reason the enlarger manufacturers make the negative carriers crop into the negative a little. It is not to frustrate self-appointed 'artists' who want to make rough edges. It's to hold the negative as flat as possible and to minimize flare.

Believe it or not, the people who design equipment actually know what they're doing....

VoidoidRamone · Apr 5, 2005

I don't know if this helps at all, but like others have stated, I made a few negative carriers out of mat board. Some have "extremely" rough edges, some are cut about as straight as I can. This carrier I typically use for my toy camera work (the opening is not square or "straight", the print is from this neg carrier).
-Grant

Shmoo · Apr 6, 2005

You could also make a masque out of ruby lith a little larger than your image. You can either do this at the neg. side or on the paper.

brent8927 · Apr 6, 2005

Not sure if this idea already occured to you or if it's been mentioned already, but you could probably get a negative carrier for very little money on ebay, especially a beat up one you could test and file out.

For what it's worth, I've found that I print every negative using the filed down carrier (and no, contrary to what one poster says I see no degradation in image quality); I haven't used the non-filed negative carrier once. If I were in your shoes, and only had one negative carrier, I'd file it, no question. If you don't want the black border (or reflections on occasion, which give some very interesting borders with color prints) then just trim off the edges using the easel or a paper-trimmer.

Unfortunately I have no brilliant ideas for you, but it seems like many other members have offered great advice!

Ole · Apr 6, 2005

brent8927 said:
For what it's worth, I've found that I print every negative using the filed down carrier (and no, contrary to what one poster says I see no degradation in image quality); I haven't used the non-filed negative carrier once. ...

If you have no basis of comparison, how do you know there is no image degradation? Try printing the same negative with the same settings using both carriers before you make claims like that.

AllanD · Apr 6, 2005

Ive had success with this technique:

Mask down a torch (flash light!) with a cone of black card so that that there is only a small (approx 3mm) opening for the light to come out. Put a small piece of brass tubing (from a model shop) into this hole and hold it in place with tape. The torch can now project a very small and cleanly round circle of light. Make sure that light only comes out of the hole !

Find a thin, flat, and opaque piece of material that will fit under the arms of your easel. A custom blind manufacturer sold me some flat black aluminum blind strip that is perfect for straight borders, but card or plastic will do for more wobbly effects.

Before you make your exposure, use small pieces of masking tape to tape the paper to the easel. It only takes a little tape to stop the paper moving.

After exposure, lift the arms of the easel and place the strip material on the paper. Position it roughly so that there is a gap between the paper and the one arm of the easel. This gap will be your border. Hold the strip in place with the arms of the easel. A little adjustment may be necessary to get gap just right. Gluing a little handle to the strip makes positioning easier. Im not a perfectionist, so I judge the gap by eye, but it wouldnt be hard to make a gauge of some sort.

Now you can draw in the border with the torch (think of it as a light pen).

Repeat for the other borders.

I guess it could help if the torch had a grade 5 filter (presuming VC paper) to ensure a harder edge, but I dont bother.

The technique has the advantage that you can crop as you like. Of course, it is a little long winded and a pain for multiple printing (if you are doing multiples of the same print, a dedicated mask becomes worthwhile). Of course, with this light pen you could just do it all freehand !

masochistic_me · Apr 6, 2005

where do i find a file? (not in a cake being hijacked to a prisoner)

so, i've gotten so many great suggestions and things to try out, but i must admit-- well, i went to see 'the high school teacher' this morning to see how all of her students were getting this affect. surely they weren't doing all these great things that are talked about here not because they're high school students but because there's only one class, and its a 'rookie' class, AND they all look the same. there were no rough edges, they had rounded corners, to an extent, and straight edges, it just left a border. anywho-- come to find out, truly and honestly, beseler had sent them some jank neg carriers. they are just a tad bit larger than the reg neg carriers and in turn, create this border. she used it for her students because, well, in her terms, they kinda sucked, and they needed this border to help them with the whole sky bleeding into the white border around the picture. that's a cop out if i've ever heard one, you just teach them to burn the sky (sorry, that's my opinion) but, nonetheless, i got my answer. however, that means i get to file away my neg carrier (i did find a used one on b&h photo) and try my darndest to get it as straight as possible to mimic these fluke ones that the local high school here lucked upon. that may or may not make sense.

however-- i started printing last nite-- and i made my own neg carrier out of mat board, as someone here had suggested-- and it worked. but the effect-- was not what i ended up wanting. *laughs* so, well, you learn right? so right now i'm just printing full image, no border, no nothing-- and i'm liking that ok. we'll see what happens if i get the filed off one.

new question-- what exactly do you use to file off your neg carriers? can i just go to the local hardware store and find something? how expensive are these things?

Ornello · Apr 6, 2005

Ole said:
If you have no basis of comparison, how do you know there is no image degradation? Try printing the same negative with the same settings using both carriers before you make claims like that.

There will be a slight loss of contrast in the mid-tones and highlights...

masochistic_me · Apr 6, 2005

Ornello Pederzoli II said:
There will be a slight loss of contrast in the mid-tones and highlights...

i'm sorry, i'm not very over-educated when it comes to the technicalities of things like this-- but c'mon, do what you like, and allow other ppl to do so as well. if you don't like it, don't do it, don't buy it, don't look at it. if they're doing it and its compromising the quality of their.my photograph, than sobeit, its our stupidity right? let us revel in it already.

sorry.
early morning rant.

Ornello · Apr 6, 2005

masochistic_me said:
i'm sorry, i'm not very over-educated when it comes to the technicalities of things like this-- but c'mon, do what you like, and allow other ppl to do so as well. if you don't like it, don't do it, don't buy it, don't look at it. if they're doing it and its compromising the quality of their.my photograph, than sobeit, its our stupidity right? let us revel in it already.

sorry.
early morning rant.

By all means, do as you like. I'm simply pointing out what may not have occurred to those who started doing this....

John Koehrer · Apr 6, 2005

Hey Me,
You can pick up a file at the local hardware emporium or hobby shop.
Something about a 1/2" wide & fine toothed. Don't be too aggressive as you file, you can't put the material back once it's gone. Cost? A couple of bucks.
As I recollect Beseler made an oversize carrier for 35mm at one time, they're called "full frame".

masochistic_me · Apr 6, 2005

Shaggy said:
Hey Me,
You can pick up a file at the local hardware emporium or hobby shop.
Something about a 1/2" wide & fine toothed. Don't be too aggressive as you file, you can't put the material back once it's gone. Cost? A couple of bucks.
As I recollect Beseler made an oversize carrier for 35mm at one time, they're called "full frame".

ok, so, YOU are the genius. i measured the hole of the neg carrier of said high school teachers "fluke" neg carrier, and its exactly the size of besseler's full format neg carrier. mystery is solved. amazing. now, finding a full format neg carrier to fit my 23c besseler enlarger. life is fun isn't it

brent8927 · Apr 6, 2005

Ole said:
If you have no basis of comparison, how do you know there is no image degradation? Try printing the same negative with the same settings using both carriers before you make claims like that.

I do have experience, what I meant to say is that since I began using the filed down negative carrier I have never used the normal one.

Ole · Apr 6, 2005

brent8927 said:
I do have experience, what I meant to say is that since I began using the filed down negative carrier I have never used the normal one.

I do not doubt your experience, I merely ask whether you have actually done this comparison? Since you say you "have never used" the normal one since you began using the filed down one, it isn't obvious that you have.

Ornello · Apr 6, 2005

brent8927 said:
I do have experience, what I meant to say is that since I began using the filed down negative carrier I have never used the normal one.

Without doing a critical comparison, you cannot see the extent of the loss of contrast.

jd callow · Apr 6, 2005

Ornello Pederzoli II said:
Without doing a critical comparison, you cannot see the extent of the loss of contrast.

and of course you would be the only person on this forum whose critical comparison would be acceptable.

I have printed full frame and and cropped, hundreds of times. Many, many times in the same printing session and on the same paper. I can say that, without any reservations, with my colour negs it makes little difference. There are exceptions, but they are just that exceptions.

Of course why believe my lying eyes when we have a prominent authority amongst us.

Unlike, Scarpitti I mean Pederzoli, many of the apuggers here have my prints and 100's of my prints have been posted for all to see -- you be the judge

Meanwhile, you should always say **** the naysayers when finding your own way in any field. Learn from your own endeavors not be limited by the same fears that box others in.

Ornello · Apr 6, 2005

mrcallow said:
and of course you would be the only person on this forum whose critical comparison would be acceptable.

I have printed full frame and and cropped, hundreds of times. Many, many times in the same printing session and on the same paper. I can say that, without any reservations, with my colour negs it makes little difference. There are exceptions, but they are just that exceptions.

Of course why believe my lying eyes when we have a prominent authority amongst us.

Unlike, Scarpitti I mean Pederzoli, many of the apuggers here have my prints and 100's of my prints have been posted for all to see -- you be the judge

Meanwhile, you should always say **** the naysayers when finding your own way in any field. Learn from your own endeavors not be limited by the same fears that box others in.

I can only reply:

Why spend thousands of dollars on the finest lenses and practice careful exposure and development, just to throw it away on the easel?

Of all the things one can do, this makes the least sense....

Why clean your lenses? Why use a lens hood? Why do any of these things then? It's simply good technique to try to minimize flare at every stage of the process, and it has nothing to do with 'naysayers' as you so inaccurately put it.

Aggie · Apr 6, 2005

Shaggy said:
Hey Me,
You can pick up a file at the local hardware emporium or hobby shop.
Something about a 1/2" wide & fine toothed. Don't be too aggressive as you file, you can't put the material back once it's gone. Cost? A couple of bucks.
As I recollect Beseler made an oversize carrier for 35mm at one time, they're called "full frame".

Also me, when you do the filing, after you get it to the size yu want, carefully at an angle go over the edges on both sides of the carier, that will give you 4 edges to work with. When you file, the edges of the opening will become sharp and have minute burrs on ithe edges. this eliminateds those burrs that can scratch your negative. Either that or take a peice of sand paper and rub vigorusly over the edges. Both methods will work and save you tears from scratches.

jd callow · Apr 6, 2005

Ornello Pederzoli II said:
I can only reply:

Why spend thousands of dollars on the finest lenses and practice careful exposure and development, just to throw it away on the easel?

Of all the things one can do, this makes the least sense....

Why clean your lenses? Why use a lens hood? Why do any of these things then? It's simply good technique to try to minimize flare at every stage of the process, and it has nothing to do with 'naysayers' as you so inaccurately put it.

And all I can say and offer evidence of is there is nothing thrown away except knowledge if people live by your fears.

Flare and bleeding can certainly be a problem -- dodge. If you lose 1,2,3% contrast and the image is improved in the eyes of the photographer by only 4% -- then it is a net gain.

Meanwhile talk is cheap. Please provide examples. Ooops you wouldn't have them because you have never done it.

Ornello · Apr 6, 2005

mrcallow said:
And all I can say and offer evidence of is there is nothing thrown away except knowledge if people live by your fears.

Flare and bleeding can certainly be a problem -- dodge. If you lose 1,2,3% contrast and the image is improved in the eyes of the photographer by only 4% -- then it is a net gain.

Meanwhile talk is cheap. Please provide examples. Ooops you wouldn't have them because you have never done it.

So, people who clean their lenses and use lens hoods do so out of fear? The masking up to the negative edge (and no more) is exactly the same kind of behavior as using a hood and cleaning your lenses. Sloppy borders just so happens to have become popular, which of course means that physics is no longer applicable. It works only where we want it to. Flare does not happen if we don't believe it doesn't or don't know better.

Just think this through carefully, and you'll see.

jd callow · Apr 6, 2005

I'm sorry. Show me. Make a couple prints..

Ornello · Apr 6, 2005

mrcallow said:
I'm sorry. Show me. Make a couple prints..

I don't have an oversized carrier.

Donald Miller · Apr 6, 2005

Ornello Pederzoli II said:
I can only reply:

Why spend thousands of dollars on the finest lenses and practice careful exposure and development, just to throw it away on the easel?

Of all the things one can do, this makes the least sense....

Why clean your lenses? Why use a lens hood? Why do any of these things then? It's simply good technique to try to minimize flare at every stage of the process, and it has nothing to do with 'naysayers' as you so inaccurately put it.

What gives you the right to speak from an elevated viewpoint? If I want to smear my damned lenses with axle grease and they give me what the heck I want then that is my business. If I want to spend more money, more effort, and more time in the pursuit of what I want that is my own business as well. Until you support me for my efforts, in other words when it is your money that is being expended, it is none of your business. The intelligent thing for you to do would be to fry your own smelly fish.

Ornello · Apr 6, 2005

Donald Miller said:
What gives you the right to speak from an elevated viewpoint? If I want to smear my damned lenses with axle grease and they give me what the heck I want then that is my business. If I want to spend more money, more effort, and more time in the pursuit of what I want that is my own business as well. Until you support me for my efforts, in other words when it is your money that is being expended, it is none of your business. The intelligent thing for you to do would be go and fry your own damned fish.

I am assuming, of course, that we are discussing one who does take all the usual precuations against flare in the taking stage. It simply has to be carried over to the printing stage as well, or else these precautions are wasted. My point is that whoever started the fad of sloppy borders did not know (or care) that this can lead to flare.

alternatives to filed down negative carriers?

Ornello

Ornello

VoidoidRamone

Attachments

Shmoo

brent8927

Ole

Moderator

AllanD

masochistic_me

Ornello

masochistic_me

Ornello

John Koehrer

masochistic_me

brent8927

Ole

Moderator

Ornello

jd callow

Moderator

Ornello

Aggie

jd callow

Moderator

Ornello

jd callow

Moderator

Ornello

Donald Miller

Ornello

alternatives to filed down negative carriers?

Attachments

Moderator

Moderator

Moderator

Moderator

Moderator

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency