Beard 12x16 2-Blade Easel Margins?

[andrew.roos]

Hi all

I'm considering getting a Beard 12x16 enlarging easel as I would like to be able to print larger than 8x10, and also because my current 8x10 easel is not quite square, which is very frustrating! If I buy the 2-blade model, then does this have a fixed margin size, and what is it? Or is there some way to adjust the margins, and roughly over what range can they be adjusted?

I've tried Google but without success.

Thanks a million,
Andrew

 

[Ian Grant]

The margins are adjustable, they are excellent easels I have a couple.

Ian

 

[andrew.roos]

Thanks Ian, much appreciated.

Andrew

Sent from my GT-I9300 using Tapatalk

 

[pentaxuser]

If it were me I'd want to be sure that when the easel is described as 12x16 this describes the max print size and not paper size. Confusion can arise. The blades are two inches so the 10x12 print size easel can in fact take 12 x16 paper as the top left corner margins can be adjusted in quarter inch steps to a max of two inches.

It follows from this that a 12 x16 print size easel can take 16x20 inch paper. I hope this has explained my point and not added to confusion

pentaxuser

 

[andrew.roos]

Thanks pentaxuser, I understand your point and will ensure that the easel max image size is 12x16.

Sent from my GT-I9300 using Tapatalk

 

[cliveh]

Beard Easels are the bee's knees and the best I have ever used.

 

[Adrian Twiss]

I have a pair of these easels and they are the best I have ever used. Although it was quite a while ago I was able to buy replacement blades for my 12x16 easel as one was slightly bent when I bought it.

 

[youngrichard]

12 x 16

But you will need 9 inches from a perpendicular dropped from the centre of your lens to the front of the column, to get a 12 x 16" landscape print ie to get 12" across you need 9 inches from centre of lens to front of column. Sounds crazy but the borders take up a lot of space, 3". I bought a 20 x 16" Beard to do 20 x 16 on my Durst DA900, but couldn't use it without reversing the column which I really can't do as I can't clamp the baseboard to my bench which abuts on a wall. Sold it on eBay for less than I paid. I only do RC which sits flat very nicely with the help of a spray of Spraymount, on a melamine coated board with narrow stripwood edges. FB is too curly, won't stay flat. I have posted pix somewhere on APUG but can't make the link
Richard

 

[pentaxuser]

It makes one wonder why all enlargers don't adopt the practice of some enlarger manufacturers of having a sloping column.

pentaxuser

 

[andrew.roos]

Thanks for the heads up youngrichard. Fortunately my Meopta Opemus V does have a sloping column, which gives me a little over 12" from the centre of the image on the baseboard to the bracket that attaches the column to the baseboard when the head is fully raised. Actually that could be important since I currently shoot 6x4.5 and since the long side of the frame is across the nagative stri, that means that with the standard neg holder, the LONG side of the image will be in the axis towards the enlarger column.'

Thanks also for your comments Clive and Adrian.'

Andrew

 

[paul_c5x4]

If I buy the 2-blade model, then does this have a fixed margin size, and what is it? Or is there some way to adjust the margins, and roughly over what range can they be adjusted?

The margins can be adjusted in ¼" steps up to 2" (or 6.3mm step up to 52mm if you're metric).

 

[youngrichard]

Why I didn't go to 6 x 4.5

Thanks for the heads up youngrichard. Fortunately my Meopta Opemus V does have a sloping column, which gives me a little over 12" from the centre of the image on the baseboard to the bracket that attaches the column to the baseboard when the head is fully raised. Actually that could be important since I currently shoot 6x4.5 and since the long side of the frame is across the nagative stri, that means that with the standard neg holder, the LONG side of the image will be in the axis towards the enlarger column.'

Thanks also for your comments Clive and Adrian.'

Andrew

Ah that reminds me. I looked at 6 x 4.5 a few years ago and the negatives turned the wrong way as you note meant either cutting negs into ones, or accepting the long axis in direction of the column. So I went 6 x 7 - to me a much more useable ratio than 6 x 9 or 6 x 4,5; or even 36 x 24 come to that. I am not a widescreen fan.
Richard

 

[andrew.roos]

Thanks paul_c5x4, that's just what I wanted to know. Much appreciated.

Andrew

Sent from my GT-I9300 using Tapatalk

 

[Bob Marvin]

RE: 6 X 4.5 negatives turned the wrong way; some enlargers (like my Omega B8) allowyou to rotate the negative carrier.

 

[Ian Grant]

RE: 6 X 4.5 negatives turned the wrong way; some enlargers (like my Omega B8) allowyou to rotate the negative carrier.

That doesn't help unfortunately when they are in strips of 4. When I was using 645 heavily I bench mounted my Durst and had made part of the bench so I could slot it in lower. This made making larger prints from 645 negs much easier.

Ian

 

[Bob Marvin]

I cut my 6 X 4.5 negatives and 6 X 6 negatives into strips of 4 (using different types of negative sleeves). I have no trouble rotating the carrier in my Omega B-8. Perhaps Durst enlargers have less room for this. I think what I like most about this model Omega is the ability to rotate the carrier.

 

[andrew.roos]

I cut my 6 X 4.5 negatives and 6 X 6 negatives into strips of 4 (using different types of negative sleeves). I have no trouble rotating the carrier in my Omega B-8. Perhaps Durst enlargers have less room for this. I think what I like most about this model Omega is the ability to rotate the carrier.

Yes I certainly wish my Meopta could do this!