Durst M605 B/W negative masks

ivenhoe · Aug 16, 2021

Finally bought my first enlarger yesterday, checking it up and waiting for the other darkroom stuff to start printing. There are negative masks for 35 mm (supposedly not original) bigger than the size of the negative. Sorry for the dumb question, but might it be a problem when I start printing? I found those masks on ebay (not original as well, printed on 3d printer), should I buy those in smaller size?

mcfitz · Aug 16, 2021

It's not a problem, this will work well. If you are using an easel to hold your paper, then close the blades around the image projected on the paper.

there are many printers, myself included, who like the possibility to have a narrow black border around the printed image. These negative carriers give you the option to do that.

ic-racer · Aug 16, 2021

Looks like that one has been enlarged so you can print a black border if desired. Otherwise, the original one, with the smaller opening, may hold the negative a little flatter. For best results enlarging greater than 10" or so, use a glass carrier.

ivenhoe · Aug 16, 2021

ic-racer said:
Looks like that one has been enlarged so you can print a black border if desired. Otherwise, the original one, with the smaller opening, may hold the negative a little flatter. For best results enlarging greater than 10" or so, use a glass carrier.

I've got glasses for the carrier, but I have to put it instead of masks. Does it mean I can only use it for 6x6, not for 35 mm?
Also the guy who sold me the enlarger said that it's better not to use them, because it adds a few additional surfaces which doesn't benefit to the overall image quality.

ic-racer · Aug 16, 2021

My D5500 enlargers only have 4x5 size glass carriers. I have 4 glass carriers and I mask them like this for the smaller formats.

Also the guy who sold me the enlarger said that it's better not to use them, because it adds a few additional surfaces which doesn't benefit to the overall image quality.

Holding a 35mm negative flat to make a 16x20 is very challenging without a glass carrier. Don't take my word for it, try it!

Patrick Robert James · Aug 16, 2021

Glass carriers are better. You could use glass on the bottom and a mask on top if your enlarger can do that. The mask you have is almost too large though. It won't do a very good job holding the film flat. It also is too big to get sloppy borders, which is why most people file out their carriers. If you are only going to be printing 35mm you can mask the glass carrier with tape. Any black tape will work fine but I use red rubylith tape. You don't want to print without any mask though since it will cause flare.

Hope that helps you.

Dali · Aug 16, 2021

ivenhoe said:
I've got glasses for the carrier, but I have to put it instead of masks. Does it mean I can only use it for 6x6, not for 35 mm?
Also the guy who sold me the enlarger said that it's better not to use them, because it adds a few additional surfaces which doesn't benefit to the overall image quality.

Why don't you put 1 mask on 1 side of the carrier and the glass on the other side?

ivenhoe · Aug 16, 2021

Patrick Robert James said:
Glass carriers are better. You could use glass on the bottom and a mask on top if your enlarger can do that. The mask you have is almost too large though. It won't do a very good job holding the film flat. It also is too big to get sloppy borders, which is why most people file out their carriers. If you are only going to be printing 35mm you can mask the glass carrier with tape. Any black tape will work fine but I use red rubylith tape. You don't want to print without any mask though since it will cause flare.

Hope that helps you.

Ok, I'll try all the methods. Without glasses, only with the masks and easel, and then a glass + one mask. It's better to put the glass on the bottom?

Durst M605 B/W negative masks

Attachments

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency