Can you recommend a Black and White Enlarger for a beginner?

ted_smith · Jun 21, 2008

AND THE MASSES REJOICE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

You are absolutely right - the central piece did just unscrew (although it took some tough action to budge it!) and, better still, my mint Rodenstock lens fits into it perfectly!!! I am delighted and so very appreciative to all of you, especially RJ (who I have been e-mailing seperately), Bob, Pentaxuser and Ian. I could not have got this far without all your help and generous dedication of time.

Pentaxuser - I hate to think you felt bad at all? It wasn't your fault I failed to check that detail. I just wrongly assumed they all took 39mm. Better still, thanks to you, I have an apparantly good enlarger and now with sweet quality lens stuck to it.

So yes, when we all meet up (which I hope we will one day) the beers are on me (at least the first one, anyway)!

Now all I need to do is replace the negative holder because it's kinda crap - it's a Durst Setoneg and one of the cropping sliders is buggered so it does not stay in place. That said, the bit with the sliders on say it's a Durst Aumet 45? This is no game for a beginner!!!

Thanks again everyone - you really are true stars.

Ted

Ian Grant · Jun 21, 2008

There's a spare Durst neg carrier in my car, I'll go see what it is. What's the enlarger ?

Ian

ted_smith · Jun 21, 2008

Ian

Thanks again. Is there no end to your good samaritan'ism? It's an Ilfospeed Multigrade 400HS enlarger. I have uploaded a couple of photos of the negative carrier here :

http://www.tedsmithphotography.com/temp/NegCarrier.html

Note the wobbley cropper slide.

This is my actual enlarger - http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/ws/eBayISAPI....m=130225471816&ssPageName=STRK:MEWA:IT&ih=003

Does that help

Ian Grant · Jun 21, 2008

It must actually be a Durst enlarger probably a 138 with a Ilfospeed Multigrade 400HS head. I've just checked the spare neg carrier but it's too small, from a 6x6 enlarger.

The Durst 138's were 5x4 enlargers and in production for quite a few years, certainly since the 50's so there are various models and different versions of the neg carriers. I have a Taurneg, but it has no sliding masks.

Ian

Bob F. · Jun 21, 2008

I thought it might be a L1000 chassis but the image has gone from ebay as it is over 2-weeks ago and I couldn't find a matching image online.

It does not have a round column - it looks a lot like the L1200 but a bit older... You might recognise it if you saw it Ian. The 400HS head is only for up to 6x7cm according to the manual on Ilford/Harman's site, so it might even be smaller than an L1000...

Cheers, Bob.

ted_smith · Jun 21, 2008

Bob - the enlarger is still on e-bay here : http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/ws/eBayISAPI....m=130225471816&ssPageName=STRK:MEWA:IT&ih=003

Ian Grant · Jun 21, 2008

Bob, I was guessing about the model of the chassis, Ted has this habit of going back and re-wring his posts so I can see he's added the links etc now.

Perhaps the Aumet 45 actually is the 645 neg masks. the 45 confused me into assuming 5"x4". If the enlargers used with negative masks the sliding masks are fairly irrelevant, they are really designed for cropping to the neg with glass in the carrier. It looks like the sliding mask might be fixable fairly easily. It's not very different to the M601 carrier here in front of me.

Ian

Nick Zentena · Jun 21, 2008

Ian Grant said:
I

The Durst 138's were 5x4 enlargers

13x8 no? [5x7]

Nick Zentena · Jun 21, 2008

Doesn't the Aumet bit pop out? Those look like sliders holding it in place. That looks like a larger carrier with some sort of reducing insert. But wouldn't be the first time I got confused by Durst holders.

Ian Grant · Jun 21, 2008

The Aumet bit is just a neg mask, you can replace it with glass carriers.

13x8 is closer to 5x4, 9x12 was the main European (non UK) film format - equivalent to 5x4, modern 9x12 and 5x4 dark-slides (film holders) share the same outside dimensions. I think you made a typo Nick.

13x18 is the equivalent of 5x7, and 18x24 equivalent to 10x8. The neg carrier I have here from a Durst 138 is too small to take a 5x7 or 13x18 neg.

Ian

Nick Zentena · Jun 21, 2008

No I mean the 138 was a 5x7 or 13x18 enlarger. Was it really just a 4x5 enlarger?

Ian Grant · Jun 21, 2008

It was a 5x7 enlarger, but I've seen them where the colour head only covered 5x4. The early De Vere 504's actually would take a 5x7 neg even though supposedly a 5x4 enlarger.

Ian

walter23 · Jun 21, 2008

ted_smith said:
Further to this thread (there was a url link here which no longer exists), I now need to purchase an enlarger (I have sourced all the Ilford chemicals, papers etc now).

I shoot 35mm Black & White and so I need an enlarger to create my prints (not interested in venturing into the colour development for a while yet, if ever - I'll stick to the labs for that). I suppose I'd be looking at prints up to 10x8, maybe a bit bigger.

Consider getting a colour head with cyan, yellow & magenta filters. These are very handy for controlling multigrade paper contrast (ie, instead of using the ilford filters you can just dial in the filtration on your colour head).

Sounds like you're mainly doing 35mm, but consider getting something like an omega D5 or D6 (maybe even XL) with a 4x5 head. This is a pretty big enlarger, but it will be very useful if you ever mess with other formats.

Ian Grant · Jun 21, 2008

Walter, Ted's enlarger has an Ilford Multigrade head, so it doesn't need a colour head

Ian

Bob F. · Jun 21, 2008

ted_smith said:
Bob - the enlarger is still on e-bay here : http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/ws/eBayISAPI....m=130225471816&ssPageName=STRK:MEWA:IT&ih=003

Ah - there it is (ebay no longer allows one to search auctions beyond 2-weeks so I couldn't find it).

So, the neg carrier/bellows area looks a lot like my L1200 but the way the column joins the base is different to mine and other L1200s I have seen - hence my guess at L1000, but it's no more than a guess

[edit: just found an L1000 image - not looking the same . OK, now I'm thinking the bit where the column meets the base is just a cover for the bracket where the column bolts onto the base, in which case it could be either... I'm beginning to bore even myself now, so I'll stop... ]

Bob.

nworth · Jun 23, 2008

There are a lot of excellent used professional enlargers on the market these days. That would seem to be the best place for a new worker to start. These are rugged enlargers that last. Just be sure you buy one that is in good condition. I bought my Beseler 23CII new over 36 years ago, but it is still going strong, and I have only replaced the light bulb and one cam. If you decide to buy a new enlarger, there are a lot of inexpensive models that offer good value. If possible, look at one. The most important thing is that it does not spill an excessive amount of light. After that, look for versatility. You will not stay with the same materials or the same film format forever. If you will make a lot of prints, ease of operation and stability become very important. A really good lens may cost more than the enlarger, but you will be very glad you spent the extra money.

ted_smith · Aug 16, 2008

Hi All

Just to give everyone an update on this, I thought you might want to see my first ever results! As many of you helped me to source the kit I needed, I thought it would be nice to show you the results of your suggestions. As I updated previously, I bought an Ilfospeed 400HS B&W enlarger in the end ( a real old thing but really good) and an APUG user called RJ asold me a 50mm Rodenstock lens to go with it. I started having a go at developing film a few weeks ago, and after a few teething problems had a go at my first ever prints last night. Here is me with my work

I'm chuffed to pieces. I see what people mean when they say it's addictive! I was up till 01:30 last night doing it! Great fun

Can you recommend a Black and White Enlarger for a beginner?

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency