Enlarger alignment is a much-discussed topic. Some of the supposed “alignment problems” are actually due to the warming of the negative, causing it to temporarily change shape. This is called “popping.” The light of the lamp falls on the surface of the of the negative closest to the lamp, warming it.
Condenser lamp heads transmit considerable heat to the negative unless a heat-absorbing or heat-reflecting filter is used between the lamp and negative. These usually have to be purchased and installed by the owner, as they are not standard equipment in most cases.
Dichroic-filtered color and variable-contrast heads generally incorporate heat filters into the design, so that they transmit much less heat to the negative.
In standard negative carrier, the negative is held in a metal carrier. The carrier both restrains the periphery of the negative and acts as a heat sink, but only about the periphery. As the negative warms, the exposed part of the negative warms and expands. The expanding material must go somewhere, and it does—in a “pregnant belly” towards the lamp.
Since the DOF about the object plane is quite shallow, the displaced negative bellies out of the depth of field throwing the middle of the image out of focus. If the user sees this and adjusts focus so that the middle part of the image looks focused, the edges and corners are still held in the original plane. The corners and edges are now out of focus relative to the refocused main part of the image. Refocusing doesn’t fix the problem.
A glass carrier is the practical cure. The glass has two functions:
1. It obviously restrains the negative into a flat plane.
2. The glass acts as a massive heat sink, absorbing the heat received by the negative and helping it to stay close to its original temperature and flat.
Glass carriers have always been expensive. That’s especially true now that most enlargers are now out of production. The enlarger maker’s glass carriers can be hard to find. Some makers never offered glass carriers. Depending on the make and model of the enlarger, it might be possible to make a simple glass carrier out of two same-size sheets of unscratched window glass. I have successfully done this for several enlargers. They work the same as the commercial product and cost little to make.
Get two sheets of 1/8” (3 mm) window glass cut the same size so that they’re larger than the opening in the negative stage and that of the plate above. Slightly radius all 8 edges of each sheet of glass with a fine abrasive so that the glass won’t cut hands or damage a negative.
Place the two sheets together and use flexible cloth tape to bind them together to form a hinge along the rear edge so that the carrier can be opened like a book. It’s easy to make a black paper mask that resembles a print mat. This is a spacer that fits between the top of the negative and the top glass. It provides the necessary air gap between the shiny top of the negative and the top glass to prevent Newton rings.
The cutout in the mask can be sized to exclude spill light from around the edges of the image boundaries on the negative. You might need to make a mask for each format you enlarge. The result is identical to that from an expensive commercial glass carrier. Centering this homemade carrier under the lens takes some practice to get it right. Reference marks can be made on the edges with nail polish or modeler’s enamel to aid in centering.
Enlarger Alignment
The depth of field about the image plane at the negative is quite shallow. An error in alignment here can spoil the focus. On the other hand, the depth of field about the image is reasonably generous. A moderate error there will be unnoticed. The projection will stay crisp.
To understand this, consider the typical DOF values involved. Suppose that you’re using a 50 mm lens at f/5.6 to make a borderless 8” x 10” print from a 35 mm negative. This requires at least 9X magnification. Assuming a circle of confusion of 0.029 mm for the negative, a 9X image will result in a DOF about the plane of the negative of 0.36 mm. The average thickness of printer paper is about 0.004” or 0.10 mm, so the DOF about the negative is about the thickness of 3.6 sheets of printer paper. That’s thin.
This shallow DOF about the plane of the negative accounts for the sensitivity of the alignment between the lens axis and the negative. They must be perpendicular to each other within a small tolerance.
An angular error between the lens axis and the negative of 0.86º or greater along the 24 mm short dimension of a 35 mm negative will cause some part of the image to defocus. Along the 36 mm long dimension, the focus will begin to degrade with an angular error of 0.57º.
On the other hand, the corresponding DOF about the image plane is about 29.3 mm. If the negative and lens axis are perpendicular, then the angular tolerance between the lens axis and the image is 7.8º along the short dimension and 5.2º along the long dimension of the projection. This helps explain why the alignment between the lens axis and negative is critical, while the alignment between the lens axis and the image is much more tolerant of error (assuming that the lens-to-negative alignment is correct).
The angular tolerance at the image plane is sometimes exploited to intentionally tilt the easel to correct converging lines on simple enlargers that lack the movements needed to use Scheimpflug geometry.
When making a 16” x 20” print from a 35 mm negative with a 50 mm lens, we’d need at least 17.8X. At this magnification, the DOF of about the negative is still small at 0.34 mm. But the DOF about the image increases to 109 mm. In each of the DOF values cited throughout these comments, ideally the negative and image lie approximately at the center of their respective DOFs.
My Experience
My first enlarger was an Omega B66XL. The original owner had no baseboard, as it was mounted to a countertop. I bought a scrap sink cutout from a custom cabinet maker for a small price. It has a plastic top glued to a particleboard base. It’s not particularly flat. It has some curvature from front to back and the column is not square to the base from front to back. The column leans forward somewhat but is reasonably perpendicular from side to side. The alignment between the negative and lens axis is good. Nonetheless, it makes crisp prints as it is. That’s why I’ve never bothered to make a new baseboard and adjust the lens-to-baseboard alignment.
My other enlargers have lens axes that are square to the baseboards in addition to proper alignment between the negative stage and lens axis. The prints I make on these accurately aligned enlargers don’t look any different than the ones I make on the Omega B66 with its imperfect front-to-back alignment relative to the baseboard.
Any extra leaning of the column from the weight of the head raised to the highest position that might cause the lens axis to lean marginally rearward is trivially small. Additionally, when the head is in a high position, it’s raised high to obtain a large magnification. But, as noted above, at such large magnifications, the depth of focus about the image plane increases considerably. There will be no discernible loss of resolution in the image due to any additional column lean due to the weight of the head raised to a high position.
My Conclusions
Perfect alignment is a good idea. Accurate alignment between the lens axis and negative within a small tolerance is critically important for good enlarging.
Good alignment between the lens axis and the image plane is also desirable but isn’t nearly as critical as that between the lens axis and negative plane.
Also, the negative must be kept flat within the shallow depth of field surrounding it during focusing and projection. The best way to do this is by restraining the negative in a glass negative carrier.