Enlarger frustration

logan2z · Jun 24, 2019

I've currently got a Beseler 23CII XL and Leitz Focomat v35 in my home darkroom. The stock 23C with the proper replacement bulb gave me very short print times, even at f8, so I ended up using an ND filter to cut back the light. Even so, I routinely experience negative popping from the heat generated by the bulb, despite the use of the Beseler heat absorbing glass. This obviously causes corner focusing issues (I have a glassless negative carrier) unless I wait for the negative to pop and stabilize, and I don't like the thought of my negatives being subjected to that kind of heat during printing.

I bought the v35 in the hopes of having a better printing experience. The enlarger is a joy to use, but I've now been experiencing long print times with it - exactly the opposite of the 23C. I believe this is because the enlarger was designed around a Philips bulb that is no longer available and the replacement bulbs don't transmit the same amount of light to the light box because of their wider beam spread. I do tend to overexpose my negatives a bit in the hopes of retaining shadow detail, but they are not what I would consider bulletproof. And these negatives print with comparatively short times on the Beseler, so I have to believe that the bulbs are the culprit, and there are other threads online describing similar issues. I do have a glass carrier on the v35 so at least there are no popping/focus issues.

So, in summary, I have long print times on the v35 or short times/popped negatives on the Beseler.

It seems I have a couple of options. Get a glass carrier for the 23C, but still subject the negatives to high heat, or get a Heiland cold light head for the v35. Both solutions would cost more than I paid for the enlargers/lenses . Maybe there's a different enlarger that I should consider that will solve both issues without breaking the bank. I may end up springing for the Heiland since I really do love using the v35, but I do plan on printing MF at some point so resolving the issues with the Beseler also seems like a worthwhile pursuit.

Any thoughts/suggestions would be appreciated.

ic-racer · Jun 24, 2019

Glass carrier

Pieter12 · Jun 24, 2019

I had problems with medium format negs popping in my Omega D5 because I use a halogen (rather than stock) bulb. I also use an ND filter in the filter compartment fro smaller enlargements. Once I added heat-absorbing glass the popping went away. I don't like using glass carriers--I can't seem to keep them dust-free. And I hate spotting prints.

glbeas · Jun 24, 2019

This may be a case for trying an led bulb to eliminate the heat problem. Not sure which brand works the best but Id bet there a few members here who has been there done that.

Arvee · Jun 24, 2019

I use a 23CII also with the standard PH111A 75w bulb and don't have any popping issues with standard glassless neg carrier/no heat absorbing glass and normal contrast negs (8-10 secs/f/11 exposure times). Are you using the same bulb? Seems awfully strange that you're having negative popping problems; it's really not all that common a problem.

I did experience popping many years ago but that was my fault: I was cooking the negs a bit too long.

Pieter12 · Jun 24, 2019

glbeas said:
This may be a case for trying an led bulb to eliminate the heat problem. Not sure which brand works the best but Id bet there a few members here who has been there done that.

I did some research on LED bulbs, and was left with doubts about their suitability to the enclosed housing of my Omega enlarger. I also had questions about lag time to start and afterglow as well as the output spectrum when using VC papers.

Paul Howell · Jun 24, 2019

I agree that it's strange that a 75 bulb will cause negative popping. I use LED bulbs with my D3, either a GE 800L or 1600L, daylight as I print grade 2 to 2 1/5 with VC paper no issues with contrast. Even with the 1000L bulb no problem with heat build up, or lag time with start or afterglow. I have a voltage stabilizer which drops the voltage from 120 to around 110. If I need to print at grade 3 1/2 to 5 I will switch to a 75 watt enlarger bulb. LED bulbs are now so inexpensive that I would give one a try one and see how it works. You may find a 60 watt bulb without the logo on the top of bulb will work, like a somewhat larger round bulb used in vanities. I once had a old Federal I that converted to a point source, when not printing point source I used a vanity bulb with good results effect.

Patrick Robert James · Jun 24, 2019

If you plan on printing for a long time to come then get the Heiland head, or at least find a solution for the light source. I think there still are solutions. The V35 is way better than the 23c. I always thought those were poor enlargers. Always out of alignment.

RalphLambrecht · Jun 24, 2019

logan2z said:
I've currently got a Beseler 23CII XL and Leitz Focomat v35 in my home darkroom. The stock 23C with the proper replacement bulb gave me very short print times, even at f8, so I ended up using an ND filter to cut back the light. Even so, I routinely experience negative popping from the heat generated by the bulb, despite the use of the Beseler heat absorbing glass. This obviously causes corner focusing issues (I have a glassless negative carrier) unless I wait for the negative to pop and stabilize, and I don't like the thought of my negatives being subjected to that kind of heat during printing.

I bought the v35 in the hopes of having a better printing experience. The enlarger is a joy to use, but I've now been experiencing long print times with it - exactly the opposite of the 23C. I believe this is because the enlarger was designed around a Philips bulb that is no longer available and the replacement bulbs don't transmit the same amount of light to the light box because of their wider beam spread. I do tend to overexpose my negatives a bit in the hopes of retaining shadow detail, but they are not what I would consider bulletproof. And these negatives print with comparatively short times on the Beseler, so I have to believe that the bulbs are the culprit, and there are other threads online describing similar issues. I do have a glass carrier on the v35 so at least there are no popping/focus issues.

So, in summary, I have long print times on the v35 or short times/popped negatives on the Beseler.

It seems I have a couple of options. Get a glass carrier for the 23C, but still subject the negatives to high heat, or get a Heiland cold light head for the v35. Both solutions would cost more than I paid for the enlargers/lenses . Maybe there's a different enlarger that I should consider that will solve both issues without breaking the bank. I may end up springing for the Heiland since I really do love using the v35, but I do plan on printing MF at some point so resolving the issues with the Beseler also seems like a worthwhile pursuit.

Any thoughts/suggestions would be appreciated.

In my opinion a glass negative carrier is a must to get a flat negative despite the additional concern of keeping it clean of dust, and I'd get a halogen bulb to avoid the disadvantages of cold-light head(warm-up).

craigclu · Jun 24, 2019

If you hate spotting, you might consider a compromise of a dichro head for the Beseler. I'm sure they're floating around for almost free if you're patient. I've been using a VC head for years but happily used a dichro rig successfully for a long time before that. They're dimmer than the condensor head but my optics' sweet spot was at almost wide open so that compensated well for mu duties...

logan2z · Jun 25, 2019

Patrick Robert James said:
If you plan on printing for a long time to come then get the Heiland head, or at least find a solution for the light source. I think there still are solutions. The V35 is way better than the 23c. I always thought those were poor enlargers. Always out of alignment.

I don't know of any existing sources of the Philips 13139 bulb. It seems that there are some sources of 'replacements' but the specs of the bulbs are not the same and the bulbs produce less light. I've tried a couple and they resulted in print times that are much longer than I'd like - tolerable for 8x10 but too long for 11x14. The Heiland is probably the ideal solution but pretty pricey at about $400.

Re: the 23C vs the v35, no argument there, the v35 is in a different league. The 23C can get the job done but is pretty crude in comparison.

logan2z · Jun 25, 2019

RalphLambrecht said:
In my opinion a glass negative carrier is a must to get a flat negative despite the additional concern of keeping it clean of dust

I haven't had any significant dust issues when using the glass carrier of the v35. I carefully clean both sides of the AN glass before inserting a negative into the carrier and, in the few months I've been using the enlarger, have only had one print that needed to be spotted to remove a dust spot.

logan2z · Jun 25, 2019

Arvee said:
I use a 23CII also with the standard PH111A 75w bulb and don't have any popping issues with standard glassless neg carrier/no heat absorbing glass and normal contrast negs (8-10 secs/f/11 exposure times). Are you using the same bulb? Seems awfully strange that you're having negative popping problems; it's really not all that common a problem.

I did experience popping many years ago but that was my fault: I was cooking the negs a bit too long.

Yes, I'm using the same bulb. I should say that I assume the issue I'm having with the 23C is from negative popping. Here's what I'm seeing:

I focus the image using a grain focuser, and then leave the enlarger on and continue to observe the grain through the focuser. After a short time I can slowly see the grain drift out of focus. If I turn off the enlarger and let things cool down and then power it back on and look through the grain focuser, the image is again in focus. I assume that what I'm observing is the negative distorting from the heat of the bulb and then returning to its original state once the heat is removed. I initially thought that the focus problem was due to slippage of the enlarger head but that wouldn't account for the return to sharp focus once the enlarger was shut off. I spoke to Beseler about this several months ago and it seemed like the only solution they had was to try a glass carrier. I paid about the same price for the v35 as Beseler wants for the glass carrier, but that seems to have come with its own set of issues

Hilo · Jun 25, 2019

Did Beseler ever make a fan for the 23CII ?

There was an optional fan for my Durst L1000 but impossible to find, so there is a hole. I put a small fan in there and on the outside I built a small box from wood that takes the air in, but does not let the light out . . . all okay now and I use the very large 200 / 300 watt bulbs !!

However, If you use a 75w bulb you should not have any of these problems. Unless you take too long to set up the negative? I would first look into this before spending at all. I am sure the Beseler is a very capable enlarger.

R.Gould · Jun 25, 2019

Use an LED bulb, I have been using a LED in my Meopta enlarger for 2 years now, no start up problems, instant start, no after glow, perfect prints as afr as the bulb goes, not so with the printer, I use a warm bulb having done tests with both warm and cold tone bulbs and find that the warm works best with both Sdox and Ilford FN paper, Mo good me telling you the Brand I us (Dial from B@A0 as tey would not be available to you they are UK brands,

Ian C · Jun 25, 2019

The heat-absorbing filter is a good idea. I use two, one in the top slot, and another in the bottom slot (must remove the sheet-aluminum filter drawer from the bottom slot to provide clearance). That took care of most of the problem. Even so, I still got some popping on long exposures. Switching to a glass carrier solved the problem. I use the Ilford below-the-lens Multigrade Filter kit. It gives excellent results.

The root cause of negative heating is the light system. Condensers are quite efficient at transmitting light. Unfortunately, that includes the heat component of that light. It’s important to use the correct 75-watt opal photo lamp. The older 23C and early 23CII enlargers used the bayonet-base horizontal-burn PH-111 photo lamp, while the later 23CII uses the PH-140 E-27 screw-base vertical-burn photo lamp. These are US/Canada 120-volt lamps. There are 230-volt lamps for use outside of the US and Canada with different identification codes.

Here are the correct US/Canada lamps. The prices seem reasonable.

PH-111

https://www.freestylephoto.biz/1001265-Sylvania-Bulb-PH111A-120V-75W

PH-140

https://www.freestylephoto.biz/2343220-Eiko-Wiko-Enlarger-Bulb-PH140-120V-75W

Glass carriers are found used on eBay from time to time at much lower prices than new. Until you find one, you can sandwich your negative between two sheets of window glass both cut the same size. The sharp edges should be smoothed with silicon-carbide abrasive paper, and the edges painted black to prevent light piping. If you cut a miniature mat of black construction paper and lay it atop the top surface of the negative before placing the top glass over the negative and bottom glass, the space provide by the thickness of the mat/mask will prevent Newton Rings. Of course, this "sandwich" has to be hand positioned to center the negative under the lens. I've done this before acquiring a proper glass carrier. It works.

This is not as convenient as a Beseler-made glass carrier, but it will work until you locate an affordable used glass carrier.

The amount of heat reaching the negative sufficient to cause it to “pop” is not great. It won’t damage the negative, especially if you use at least one HAG filter between the lamp and negative. The glass carrier (home-made as described above, or the Beseler carrier) will keep the negative flat and the projection uniformly focused during the exposure.

Arvee · Jun 25, 2019

logan2z said:
Yes, I'm using the same bulb. I should say that I assume the issue I'm having with the 23C is from negative popping. Here's what I'm seeing:

I focus the image using a grain focuser, and then leave the enlarger on and continue to observe the grain through the focuser. After a short time I can slowly see the grain drift out of focus...

I believe the problem is leaving the bulb on for that extended period of time. I typically load the carrier, insert it and, with the grain focuser in place, switch on the enlarger and quickly focus. I switch the enlarger off and get paper out of the safe and place it in the pre-positioned easel. I then wait several more seconds for the vibrations to settle before pushing the button on the timer making the exposure, which is usually 10 or so seconds. This routine doesn't allow much heat build-up to occur. If the bulb is left on for an extended period of time beyond that of the routine described here I am sure there will be heat transferred and negs drifting out of focus.

Pieter12 · Jun 25, 2019

I regularly split-print everything and was having problems with negatives popping between exposures. I use a halogen lamp in an Omega D5 condenser enlarger. Once I put a sheet of heat-absorbing glass in the head, the popping went away. I will leave the lamp on for as long as it takes to size, compose and focus, and sometimes have total exposures that run into minutes--taking into account added burning with the 2 filters.

jim10219 · Jun 25, 2019

I have the same issue with my 23C III XL. For whatever reason, the bulb is way too bright, even though it's the standard PH140. An ND filter helps with the short exposure times. Mine are even worse than yours. Without a filter, I'm looking at exposures of 6-7 seconds at f:11 on Illford MG IV.

To help with the negative popping, I only leave it on for about 30 seconds at a time, max. Then I'll let it cool off for a minute or two before reusing it. If I have it on for too long, I'll pull off the light housing to expose the bulb to more air and let it cool down quicker. It's a hassle for sure. But less of a hassle than using a glass carrier, in my opinion.

logan2z · Jun 25, 2019

jim10219 said:
I have the same issue with my 23C III XL. For whatever reason, the bulb is way too bright, even though it's the standard PH140. An ND filter helps with the short exposure times. Mine are even worse than yours. Without a filter, I'm looking at exposures of 6-7 seconds at f:11 on Illford MG IV.

To help with the negative popping, I only leave it on for about 30 seconds at a time, max. Then I'll let it cool off for a minute or two before reusing it. If I have it on for too long, I'll pull off the light housing to expose the bulb to more air and let it cool down quicker. It's a hassle for sure. But less of a hassle than using a glass carrier, in my opinion.

Odd how different people with seemingly the same setup (bulb, heat absorbing glass, etc.) are having different experiences with popping.

I'm using the RH Designs Analyzer Pro so I am probably leaving the enlarger on longer than some as I measure the negative using the analyzer. Perhaps I should shut the enlarger off and wait a little while for the negative to cool back down before initiating the print. Since my print times are relatively short, I don't think the popping is occurring while I'm actually exposing the paper.

logan2z · Jun 25, 2019

Arvee said:
I believe the problem is leaving the bulb on for that extended period of time. I typically load the carrier, insert it and, with the grain focuser in place, switch on the enlarger and quickly focus. I switch the enlarger off and get paper out of the safe and place it in the pre-positioned easel. I then wait several more seconds for the vibrations to settle before pushing the button on the timer making the exposure, which is usually 10 or so seconds. This routine doesn't allow much heat build-up to occur. If the bulb is left on for an extended period of time beyond that of the routine described here I am sure there will be heat transferred and negs drifting out of focus.

I follow pretty much the same protocol but, as I mentioned in another post, I'm using the RH Designs Analyzer Pro which means I'm leaving the enlarger on while I analyze the negative. This can take some time and may be contributing to the popping issue I'm having.

BMbikerider · Jun 25, 2019

Pieter12 said:
I did some research on LED bulbs, and was left with doubts about their suitability to the enclosed housing of my Omega enlarger. I also had questions about lag time to start and afterglow as well as the output spectrum when using VC papers.

A true LED bulb does not have any appreciable lag time to start which is why they are getting more popular of cars. The switching on is instant - far quicker than tungsten. As for any after-glow, I have never seen any! I have 2 LED bulbs in my darkroom, one is for general light, the other is a cold light so I can assess the colour balance of prints. The degrees kelvin are around 7000 so it works very well. Switch on is instant and there is very definitely no afterglow what so ever.

Methinks you have been reading too many inaccurate Social Media reports.

logan2z · Jun 25, 2019

Patrick Robert James said:
If you plan on printing for a long time to come then get the Heiland head

I just realized that the Heiland LED light source requires a separate controller. The combined cost of the LED light source and the BW controller for the v35 is $1200. I think I may just put up with some longish print times...

Paul Howell · Jun 25, 2019

I would try a standard GE LED bulb, I got 2 for $11 at a big box hardware store, not sure about Besler, but ought to just screw in. I don't have problems with startup or afterglow. ,

Pieter12 · Jun 25, 2019

BMbikerider said:
A true LED bulb does not have any appreciable lag time to start which is why they are getting more popular of cars. The switching on is instant - far quicker than tungsten. As for any after-glow, I have never seen any! I have 2 LED bulbs in my darkroom, one is for general light, the other is a cold light so I can assess the colour balance of prints. The degrees kelvin are around 7000 so it works very well. Switch on is instant and there is very definitely no afterglow what so ever.

Methinks you have been reading too many inaccurate Social Media reports.

I have LED lights throughout my home. The ones in the bathroom have a definite lag time of at least .5 second. Many LED bulbs specs state that they are not to be used in enclosed fixtures.

Enlarger frustration

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency