Enlarger for making large prints

[Lifethruleica]

I would like to start making larger prints...at least 30x40" from 35mm and 6x7 film. Can someone suggest an enlarger for this? I assume I'll need to wall mount, and would prefer to project towards the floor. Also, can someone with experience give me an idea to some of the potential problems I may run into?

Thanks, Frank

 

[ROL]

Any enlarger will do as long as you can get enough distance between the film and the projection surface. You only need high ceilings, or low floors, or both (and possibly ladders ). Wall mounting is preferable, but horizontal projection will introduce another level of complexity into your enlarging system. Condenser and diffuser light sources work better than cold lights in terms of reducing otherwise lengthy exposure times. I do up to 30"X40" here. You can enlarge any format given enough projection distance and sufficient light, but it will be tough to make fine prints much larger than 16"X20" with 35mm, even with Kodak Technical Pan.

Your real issues begin with processing prints as large as you say. You need to plan ahead in terms of sinks and trays. 30"X40" is the largest I can personally handle by myself, and I have a 6' 2" wingspan. There are to many problems to enumerate here. Although in theory producing large prints doesn't have to be any different from normal printing, you will have to experiment and plan the execution of your mural sizes, given your particular lab environment.

 

[Sundowner]

Chemicals seem to be the biggest issue, here...even development, etc, get very problematic in large exposures. When you say "at least 30 x 40" it implies that some prints will be larger. Just the sheer space requirements for trays or tarps or whatever would lead to a LARGE work area.

 

[Ryuji]

If you are doing b&w work only, Durst Laborator 138 is fantastic, particularly for medium format and larger. Making 30x40 from 35mm format can be done, but it will require perfect negative on Tech Pan, APX25, Acros or TMX.

I used to print 20x24 routinely with Laborator 138, and it was a breeze, with more room if needed.

 

[Lifethruleica]

Thanks everyone!

 

[Ryuji]

btw I have Durst Laborator 138 with pretty complete condensers and negative carriers for sale. Item is in Boston.

 

[Lifethruleica]

One other thing...I see I can buy trays for 30x40, but how about easels, printwashers, etc., are these typically homemade?

 

[mdarnton]

My brother was making huge prints in the 60s. I don't remember the full details, but there was a system available at the time consisting of a plastic tube with endcaps. One took the print and laid a blanket over it, rolled the two up together and slid them in the tube, then developed in the tube with a gallon or two of solution.. The secret was the blanket, which was a very porous plastic that separated the layers of the rolled up print and permitted the passage of developer. It closely resembled the green stuff lining grocery meat cooler displays of the time--very similar to today's Scotchbrite kitchen pads, without the abrasive, of course. It beat developing them on the basement floor next to the drain, with a sponge, which is how he started.

Anyone old like me remember this system? It seems like there must be any number of materials available today to construct such a system.

 

[John Austin]

Roll troughs

For big prints from any format, but mainly 10x8", I use a DeVere 5108 floor mounted enlarger and a turret in the darkroom ceiling to take the head for big prints, up to 36x45", and send the baseboard down to the floor - I stand on a milk crate to adjust the filtration since the head computer threw a fit and I replaced the servo motors with simple finger operated knobs



The 42" wide paper I currently use is Foma, but I have worked with Ilford in the 1980s and Agfa MCC 42" rolls after that

The only easy way I know of processing really large sheets is to use shallow troughs each holding about 10 litres of sol'n with the dev' twice the dilution, so Bromophen is used at 1:5 or 1:7 - The print is allowed to carefully roll itself back up after the weights are removed from the edges - This roll is then lowered into the dev' trough and rolled from end to end, having an inland wet bench with an operator at either side is the easiest here - However, take great great great great care to start the rolling process evenly or you will form a crescent crease which will run the entire length of the paper and stuff it up mightily and not cheaply - The greatest danger the paper roll is in is when you lift it from the solution, this must be done with great care, lift one end up and let the liquid slowly drain out, there is a lot of it and it is far too heavy for the roll of paper to handle comfortably, so be patient - It also a good idea to use as little safe light as possible when making big prints as the whole process is somewhat protracted, from the cutting from the roll to getting the print into the fixer

I have started a large print group now that I am returning to big prints - It in the APUG groups somewhere

Pixs of the processing when I have some new negs, which will be about 4 days after I buy a new car, which will be after I sell all my Hasselblad stuff including an SWC

 

[Mark_S]

Where are you located, and how often will you be doing these really big prints?
A few ideas:

In San Francisco, there is a rental darkroom facility which has one darkroom setup for doing murals. They have the ability to deal with very large prints.

If I were to do very large prints at home, I would think about doing the processing in other than trays - one thought would be to use the troughs that they sell at home improvement shops for wallpaper wetting, and roll the paper through the different chemicals. Another possibility would be to make a drum - a 12" diameter piece of sewer pipe would allow you to handle a print which was 36" on the short side - put some chemical in the drum and roll it to keep the chemicals moving over the surface of the print.

 

[ROL]

One other thing...I see I can buy trays for 30x40, but how about easels, printwashers, etc., are these typically homemade?

Unless you plan on making large prints frequently and/or can afford these items, then yes "homemade".

easels
print washer

Many of the posted comments pay little heed to (and you haven't said) whether you are doing archival or plastic. Handling big fiber prints entails an order of magnitude more difficulty, planning, etc., than RC.

 

[ROL]

Making 30x40 from 35mm format can be done, but it will require perfect negative on Tech Pan, APX25, Acros or TMX.

You can enlarge anything, but question is whether the results will be fine prints. It won't be just increased grain size, but the tonalities of the 35mm negative themselves begin ripping apart in large projections, like paint on the surface of a balloon as it is blown up. I've used all these films and the only way you are likely to get decent prints that large is with film at least the size of 120, in my experience. To suggest otherwise really requires proof.

 

[mopar_guy]

A few years ago when Shutterbug still had a few articles on film Photography they had an article on Clyde Butcher. I found this on their site:
http://www.shutterbug.com/content/clyde-butcherbra-photographer-heart-everglades

 

[Lifethruleica]

Thanks everyone for the detailed information...I currently live in Kansas City, MO. There simply is not much support here for photography period. It would be great to go to someplace like San Francisco to print, and it is something I may consider if I move back towards the west coast. I can't say that everything I want to print will be huge, but the nature of selling prints has seemed to move towards the really big sizes over the last few years. Frank

 

[Lifethruleica]

I've seen some really great work of Sebastiao Salgado's (35mm) that was printed to 40+ inches in width...yes, somewhat grainy, but nonetheless I felt was beautiful to look at. These were from the"Genesis" project.

Frank

 

[frotog]

The notion that you somehow need to start with a large neg. or a high res. film in order to make a good mural print (read "fine print" if you like) is absurd. Grain is film, film is grain...if you don't like it, shoot digital.

However, if printing from a small neg. definitely invest in a rodenstock g series lenses. No other lens can compare at mural sizes. Also, make sure you're system is perfectly calibrated as you'll be printing wide open.

Don't get the 138 unless you can wall mount it. The baseboard/column set-up is not designed for prints wider than 24".

 

[Jon Shiu]

It sometimes is difficult to use a grain focuser and reach the focus knob. A string or a rod attached to the knob will work. Also, there is a focuser called Magnasight that you don't have to have your eye close to the eyepiece.

Jon

 

[ic-racer]

Actually you do need a big negative to make a mural size enlargement. If the original is a small negative, you need an internegative, ideally in 8x10. If you enlarge straight from the small negative diffraction will kill you. Calculate the effective aperture of your 50mm lens at f8 making a 50x enlargement.

 

[ROL]

The notion that you somehow need to start with a large neg. or a high res. film in order to make a good mural print (read "fine print" if you like) is absurd. Grain is film, film is grain...if you don't like it, shoot digital.

Or, perhaps, grain aside, your definition of a "fine print" is absurd.

 

[frotog]

Actually you do need a big negative to make a mural size enlargement. If the original is a small negative, you need an internegative, ideally in 8x10. If you enlarge straight from the small negative diffraction will kill you. Calculate the effective aperture of your 50mm lens at f8 making a 50x enlargement.

IC's right in saying that diffraction is a problem - if you use a common lens closed down three stops. If making murals start with a lens that's optimized for making big enlargements, open it all the way and you will get great results. Best thing about it is that you won't have to scotch tape your "fine prints" together in order to make a big print. Imagine that.

 

[frotog]

Another tip re: the op's question... Look for an enlarger with a sloping column (like an omega d2) as you'll need a bit of run with your rise in order to work with paper widths over 40" (even big Durst enlargers need to be kludged to deal with this problem). The turret on the omega baseboard allows you to spin the head 180 degrees and cantilever it out over your bench. A big piece of MDF (heavy but flat) makes a good baseboard to project onto. Place your neg. in a glass carrier and give it a go. Before long you'll be fine printin' those neg's on a single piece of paper (look mom, no scotch tape).

 

[BobD]

Beseler 23-series enlargers have a tilting head that can be used for wall projection/enlarging.

 

[DREW WILEY]

With this degree of magnification you'd need a specialized enlarging lens like a Rodagon G. The enlarger would have to be exceptionally stiff and well leveled. You'd need a fairly strong light source,
and still, at the end, the print would be basically mush if one gets close to it. This is like making
a billboard. But with the right film and developer choice, there are obviously a number of people who
have made compelling images this way.

 

[frotog]

Beseler 23-series enlargers have a tilting head that can be used for wall projection/enlarging.

I'd advise against horizontal enlargement. Hanging your paper from a wall introduces a whole host of new problems you do not want to get involved in.

With a Rodenstock G or the metal barreled nikkor 63mm 2.8 you will get excellent results. In fact so excellent that photo dorks from near and far will rush in to speculate whether or not it qualifies as a "fine print" or merely a "work print". Regardless, victory will be yours as making a mural sized print is often something that most photo dorks just dream about out loud on forums such as this.

I've yet to see a compelling mural print of mush.

 

[Lifethruleica]

Just so I understand, a mural is say 30"x40" and larger? Most negatives will be of 35mm size.

Thanks, Frank