Cold light head intensity

I see that there is a cold light head for sale in the For Sale forum. There were subsequent comments about a V54 light tube, and that it made for “fast printing”. I tried a cold light head several years ago (can’t remember what kind of tube), and I tried an LED head. Both suffered from the same problem, at least from my perspective. I currently have an Omega D2V with the standard head, and I use the PH212 bulbs. Those bulbs are a very bright light source, and I have no trouble composing and focusing. But with the cold light and LED heads, I had a lot of difficulty composing. The light sources were just not bright enough.

Longer printing times is not an issue with me. But I do have issues with composing with the lower intensity light sources. Will a V54 tube fix that? Is it indeed much brighter than other cold light tubes? Or is this just a result of my old age and failing vision? Any comments would be appreciated.

I have the same issue. If I'm reading your issues correctly, the issue of not seeing the image on the easel and acceptable printing times is that your eyes see differently than BW paper. BW paper is sensitive to blue light so a cold light head that looks dim to you is very bright to blue sensitive silver gelatin paper. My favorite light source is still the good old fashioned incandescent lamp. My variable contrast filters are made for incandescent lamps and they're nice and bright for when I compose my print on the easel. One trick you can try is to turn off your safelight when you compose on your easel. Hope that helps.

SuperChromega would probably be better for you.

Back in the heyday of cold light heads, there were a couple of tubes available--standard and hi-intensity. I never had any issues working with the standard bulb, but I was a LOT younger then. I eventually switched to the Aristo VC4500 head with V54 tube specifically to enable VC printing. In my 60's now and don't have any issue with proper focus or long exposure times for the print. As a matter of fact, at full aperture of the enlarger lens to focus the light is a bit too bright for me; and, I've had to dial back the brightness level with most modern VC papers in order to get reasonable exposure times--that is, something that allows time for dodging.

so if you're happy with the light output from your current head and you've tried cold light heads before and didn't think the light output was good enough, then why are you even considering getting another one. doesn't make any sense to me. What advantage do you think you will be getting.

I have a cold light from my Omega D3, the Omega model with electric shutter. I don't have any issues with focusing when printing 4X5 or 6X9 but at 6X6 and 35mm seems dim, to dim for critical focusing. I guess because much of the light is not focused down by a condenser for a smaller negative. So, if you are printing LF then I don't think you will have an issue, but if the print from 35mm then you might. I also only the cold light when printing graded papers.

RobC said:

so if you're happy with the light output from your current head and you've tried cold light heads before and didn't think the light output was good enough, then why are you even considering getting another one. doesn't make any sense to me. What advantage do you think you will be getting.

Click to expand...

I've always heard about the advantages of printing with a cold light head. No dust. A different "look". But I feel I never got to try one because of the light intensity issue.

A different "look".

Click to expand...

If one were using the same paper as those using a incandescent bulb (and assuming equal spectral filtration) why would the prints look any different. Sounds like one of the old myths that haunt photography.

I used a cold light head for years. Never had any issues, but again, I wasn't making 20 x 24's from 135. I started out with the Zone VI head for the Beseler, had an Aristo T1212 head for the Omega F down to the D57 head for the Durst. They all performed fine within their respective parameters. If I didn't have a dichroic head, I'd be right back to the cold light head. I'd never go back to a condenser head. If you get it and don't like it, I suspect you could sell it for what you paid for it.

V54 was just the color of the light (blue-green). Intensity was another choice. I happen to have an especially powerful 12X12 V54 unit for one
of my 8x10 enlargers; but I paid a premium for it. It's convenient because it is indeed cool in temperature and quite compact in terms of head room. The "look" is mainly just due to diffusion. I can achieve exactly the same "look" with a colorhead.

I have Chromega, D2 incandescent, Aristo original that I put a v54 tube into. I have perfect color vision and better than 20/20 and find no significant in any. My Aristo has a heater so the light comes on at full brightness right away.

The V54 has more green so better VC printing is possible. It is impossible to filter out the blue with yellow to get more green from a standard where there is none to be had.

There are hi and lo power versions of either or both tubes, so be sure of what you buy/have. Mine is high.

I recall the V54 when it came out and spoke with the technician/owner who drove it's design. Previous cold light tubes were heavy in the blue range, enough so that they recommended using them with about a 40 yellow color correction filter for better balance. Of curse, this impacted the intensity of the usable light.

In the V54, they included a balance of phosphors to make it more amenable for use with variable contrast filters.