Condenser vs diffuser

[Bill Burk]

Sorry Richard, I wasn't being very helpful.

There are clear differences in contrast between Diffusion and Condenser enlargers. You know it by what you said.

The argument that isn't settled is whether the qualities of two prints that were each made from negatives best for each light source is identical.

Fred Picker argued strongly that a Diffusion light source produced a better print. It would make sense because he had a lot of negatives good for Grade 2 on Diffusion enlarger... I am sure his negatives looked awful printed on a Condenser enlarger. Some say his opinion was skewed by marketing (he wanted to sell Zone VI enlargers). So with those suspicions, I'd listen to different opinions...

It's important to carefully choose your light source. My personal finding is that there are clear differences in quality between light sources. Uneven light coverage is sometimes hard to see in individual prints, camoflaged by the image contents. Oddly on the computer or over the Internet, you can see uneven light coverage as you flip images.

Many of my earlier prints from 4x5 were made from an Omegalite D which is a round fluorescent tube in a dome housing. Clearly in my prints you can see light fall-off in the center. I was driven to the Omegalite D because the original 4x5 Condensers of the Omega DII were clearly worse.

 

[Richard Jepsen]

The differences can be subtle. And there are differences between film formats and developers.

I started out in the late 60s using condensers. A large percent of my negs print best on semi-condensers. To make matters worse my base paper was Agfa MultiClassic, a shorter scale paper than most. To improve my prints I migrated to a color head. Years later I reprinted a few negatives with a condenser and like the prints better. The prints had more acutance/snap and looked better behind glass. My base papers had changed and I was moving increasing to Galerie graded were my negatives needed contrast increasing techniques.

There is not a best paper, film or enlarger light source. It's what works best for your negatives and print expression.

Some exceptions to my statement....portraits normally look best using a diffused light source. In -135 format it's hard to beat a Leitz 1c/Valoy2.

 

[David Brown]

I have one of each, sitting side by side. Problem solved ...

 

[blaine.minazzi]

+1 ^^

2 D5 - condenser and a dichro
1 D2 condenser
1 Honeywell / Nikor with both heads.

And yes, there is a difference. Depending on your enlarger, swapping light sources can be anything from a 5 minute simple job, to a real PITA.

Blaine

 

[RalphLambrecht]

Are there any particular advantages of one over the other for black and white work?

with a negative adjusted to the proper contrast for each,both yield identical prints,but a condenser needs more attention to cleanliness not to highlight dust.I was never able to find any sharpness advantagein the condenser;that semms to be more a characteristic of a solid chassis and a good lens.

 

[Sirius Glass]

with a negative adjusted to the proper contrast for each,both yield identical prints,but a condenser needs more attention to cleanliness not to highlight dust.I was never able to find any sharpness advantagein the condenser;that semms to be more a characteristic of a solid chassis and a good lens.

Bingo!

Someone finally stated the correct answer.

Read and understand what THE MAN said!

 

[RalphLambrecht]

and a pain in their own right.

 

[Richard Jepsen]

I found condenser induced sharpness to be partly perception; related to the brightness delta of adjacent tones based on using the same neg projected with different light sources. Darker tones printed on a condenser show more low value separation and influences the perception of sharpness

At times one can't reshoot/develop. You have the neg you have.

I mostly believe the common wisdom one can match prints if development is adjusted.

 

[RalphLambrecht]

or adjust contrast withn VC papers.in the darkroom,expose for the jighlights and adjust contrast for the shadows.

 

[DREW WILEY]

This is kinda like arguing whether it's best to equip your army with long bows or crossbows. The great epic battles between diffuse versus
condenser enlargement were fought back when the paper choice itself was quite a bit different than it now is. The more recent VC papers are
way more versatile than the early versions, and the remaining graded paper selection isn't.

 

[ROL]

This is kinda like arguing.

Thought that was the whole purpose of photo forums.

 

[Dr Croubie]

Thought that was the whole purpose of photo forums.

Thought that was the whole purpose of the entire internet.

 

[tony lockerbie]

I have one condenser enlarger, one condenser/diffused head, and one straight diffuse, covers all bases really. Can't really say one is better than the other, but the straight condenser needs spotless housework.

 

[Richard Jepsen]

Are there any particular advantages of one over the other for black and white work?

Yes, a condenser is brighter and prints faster. May be important with 10x or larger projections and slow papers.

 

[Dr Croubie]

Yes, a condenser is brighter and prints faster. May be important with 10x or larger projections and slow papers.

That'd be no good for me then. I end up using f/16 and 80M80C80Y on my LPL6700 Colour Diffusion to dim the light enough to get 5 second-exposures (until I get Polyglot's timer built it's switching by hand with a metronome, so I'd like to keep it as long as possible to reduce timing errors)

 

[Richard Jepsen]

Are there any particular advantages of one over the other for black and white work?

If working in limited space, needing portability, or purchasing an enlarger off eBay a condenser has the following advantages:

- Not needing a power supply allows the condenser enlarger footprint to be slightly smaller and easily portable; depends greatly on the enlarger. Durst M 601, Leitz 1c or Valoy 2 are portable.
- When buying a used diffusion type enlarger there is a risk of getting a bad power supply.

The best setup is to have a stationary enlarger with both heads.

 

[cliveh]

That'd be no good for me then. I end up using f/16 and 80M80C80Y on my LPL6700 Colour Diffusion to dim the light enough to get 5 second-exposures (until I get Polyglot's timer built it's switching by hand with a metronome, so I'd like to keep it as long as possible to reduce timing errors)

Then you are printing very small prints and/or your negs are very thin.

 

[fotch]

diffusion for people, condenser for products, objects, landscape, depends.

 

[richard ide]

Why would anybody want to photograph depends?

 

[MartinP]

Depends are the parts of swimming pools opposite to the shallow ends, of course . . .

 

[fotch]

Depends are the parts of swimming pools opposite to the shallow ends, of course . . .