Enlarging Rolleiflex and Hasselblad negatives

[mshchem]

Buy a RZ67

 

[FujiLove]

Buy a RZ67

I own plenty of cameras that run the film horizontally, but none of them help me enlarge my backlog of Hasselblad and Rollei negatives.

 

[Pieter12]

I'm finding negatives produced by medium format cameras which run the film vertically through their backs (Rolleiflex, Hasselblad, Bronica SQ etc.) very annoying to enlarge. Are they really a PITA, or am I missing something?

Let me explain...

I'm using a Durst M707 colour enlarger, an RR Beard 16x12" easel and usually print on 16x12" paper. All fairly standard equipment and materials. When I insert a strip of negatives from my Mamiya 6 or Pentax 67, everything's fine: I stand in front of the enlarger, work on the image, print 16x12" images (less a tiny margin) and everything's fine with the world. However, when I insert a strip of negatives from my Hasselblad, the image is rotated 90 degrees to the baseboard which makes composition and cropping very awkward. Luckily my enlarger sits on the corner of the bench, so I can move around the left side and at least see the image the right way up. It's not a very comfortable position, as the enlarger column is close to my left arm, which makes things awkward when moving around, but it's workable. Then I run into the main problem: I can no longer make 16x12" landscape prints. When I turn my easel 90 degrees, the left edge hits the enlarger column so the projected image isn't centred on the easel. The best I can do is print around 11x11" square, or around 11x8" if I want to keep the same aspect ratio of the prints.

Yes, I realise I could cut my film into single negatives, and place them the right way around in the carrier. That's certainly an option for a few one-off photos, but isn't something I would relish doing for everything I print. My negative files would be a huge mess.

Are there any other obvious solutions I'm missing, apart from buying a massive large format enlarger (which isn't an option in my tiny darkroom)? Or is this simply a limitation of cameras which run their film vertically?...not something anyone ever mentions when it comes to buying medium format cameras.

Thanks,

J

1. You never shoot verticals with the 67?
2. Make a full-frame test print. Decide if and how you want to crop it, maybe marking directly on the print. Transfer that to the projected negative. Adjust to taste. A little bit of neck-craning, but not that difficult. Done.

 

[FujiLove]

1. You never shoot verticals with the 67?
2. Make a full-frame test print. Decide if and how you want to crop it, maybe marking directly on the print. Transfer that to the projected negative. Adjust to taste. A little bit of neck-craning, but not that difficult. Done.

Yes, I stand sideways against the enlarger.

I don’t think you’re understanding the problem. I realised weeks ago that with the equipment I have, the issue is physically insurmountable without cutting Hasselblad and Rollei negatives up into individual frames. I’ve done that a few times. Not ideal, but not the end of the world.

 

[Pieter12]

Yes, I stand sideways against the enlarger.

I don’t think you’re understanding the problem. I realised weeks ago that with the equipment I have, the issue is physically insurmountable without cutting Hasselblad and Rollei negatives up into individual frames. I’ve done that a few times. Not ideal, but not the end of the world.

What I am saying is you can crop accurately without rotating the negative 90º

 

[ic-racer]

I'm using a Durst M707 colour enlarger, an RR Beard 16x12" easel and usually print on 16x12" paper.

I re-read the first post. I had no idea of the easel or paper size as they are both unfamiliar in the USA. Maybe pictures of your setup will help elucidate the problem because my picture below is just a guess. But with that easel you are correct, you can't do what you want to do.

 

[pentaxuser]

I re-read the first post. I had no idea of the easel or paper size as they are both unfamiliar in the USA. Maybe pictures of your setup will help elucidate the problem because my picture below is just a guess. But with that easel you are correct, you can't do what you want to do.
View attachment 215956

I have no idea whether your last sentence is accurate or not as throughout I knew too little about the equipment to even attempt an answer but at least you have answered the OP's question after a bit of research. It seems to me that this thread is a good argument for asking more questions initially before attempting answers.

For instance, if I describe a problem with my Pentax camera it doesn't help to tell me to change to a Nikon unless there is clear evidence that this is the only way to solve it

pentaxuser

 

[mshchem]

Really it's pretty straightforward ,modify the enlarger, get a different enlarger, get a different easel. I don't even notice if the image is turned sideways. Like WLF everything is backwards from the mirror, I don't even notice anymore.
That's a pretty big enlargement from such a small cropped negative. I shoot my Hasselblad I like to make 8" or 5" square prints. I've got 6x9 rangefinders for 11 x 14 , I get great results. I don't like really big prints. I like making 6 1/2 x 8 1/2 prints on 8x10 paper.

Best part on a Hassy is the button on the side that flips the mirror up, then it's just a lovely leaf shutter no vibration.

 

[FujiLove]

That's a pretty big enlargement from such a small cropped negative

It's not. I have loads of them in B&W and colour. They all look fine and virtually grain-free (mostly Ektar 100, Delta 100 & 400).

Really it's pretty straightforward ,modify the enlarger, get a different enlarger, get a different easel

Just had a measure, and I'd need an easel where the distance between the left edge and the paper is no more than 1.5". (it's over 3.5" on my RR Beard easel).

Any recommendations?

 

[bernard_L]

However, when I insert a strip of negatives from my Hasselblad, the image is rotated 90 degrees to the baseboard which makes composition and cropping very awkward. Luckily my enlarger sits on the corner of the bench, so I can move around the left side and at least see the image the right way up.

I would have thought that you made a decision about cropping before sitting in front of your enlarger. You might as well complain that the image is in negative rendering; Or complain that with a waist-level finder, the image is flipped left-right, which of course changes everything for a brain used to reading left-right. Or complain that your camera's viewfinder shows you the image in color, not in the final b/w rendering.

Part of photography is combining your experience, brain, technique, and aesthetic sense to produce an image other than what is immediately visible.

Back to your question. Decide on cropping on a contact sheet or a working full-frame print.

 

[FujiLove]

I would have thought that you made a decision about cropping before sitting in front of your enlarger. You might as well complain that the image is in negative rendering; Or complain that with a waist-level finder, the image is flipped left-right, which of course changes everything for a brain used to reading left-right. Or complain that your camera's viewfinder shows you the image in color, not in the final b/w rendering.

Part of photography is combining your experience, brain, technique, and aesthetic sense to produce an image other than what is immediately visible.

Back to your question. Decide on cropping on a contact sheet or a working full-frame print.

Thanks, but like many others you completely missed the point.

 

[mshchem]

I have a few Saunders sing-L-size easels 16 x 20 holds a sheet of paper, with 3/16 inch borders.You would need to cut a mask for the negative.

 

[FujiLove]

I have a few Saunders sing-L-size easels 16 x 20 holds a sheet of paper, with 3/16 inch borders.You would need to cut a mask for the negative.

That wouldn’t solve the problem. I would need an easel with a maximum of 1.5” between the left edge of the easel and the left edge of the paper. As I said above, on my Beard easel this distance is over 3.5”, hence my inability to centre the paper under the lens when it’s turned 90 degrees.

 

[lecarp]

The real "point" is that you have made poor choices. You are using the wrong equipment for what you are trying to accomplish.
What compounds the situation is that you can't be inconvenienced enough to work around your original error in judgement.

 

[randyB]

The pleasures of enlarging Rollei and Blad negs far outweigh the trivial inconvenience of looking sideways at the easel. You either just deal with it or you buy the equipment that solves your problem.

 

[gunnar_g]

The real "point" is that you have made poor choices.

Exactly. Posting here and expecting us to read your question before we tell you what to do? What were you thinking?

 

[John51]

If I understand correctly, there would be no problem at all if you were making borderless prints without an easel. When you try to crop the negs, some of them have the edge of the easel get in the way for 12x16 prints @ the crop you want. That correct?

Instead of looking for an easel that is narrower at the edges, could a longer length enlarging lens fit the required crop onto your existing easel?

 

[Paul Ozzello]

That's a good point. What focal length are you using in your enlarger? If your enlarger column is long enough a longer focal length will project the same size image further up the column and push the image out further - assuming the column is on a slant.

If I understand correctly, there would be no problem at all if you were making borderless prints without an easel. When you try to crop the negs, some of them have the edge of the easel get in the way for 12x16 prints @ the crop you want. That correct?

Instead of looking for an easel that is narrower at the edges, could a longer length enlarging lens fit the required crop onto your existing easel?

 

[MattKing]

That's a good point. What focal length are you using in your enlarger? If your enlarger column is long enough a longer focal length will project the same size image further up the column and push the image out further - assuming the column is on a slant.

The OP's enlarger, plus all Durst enlargers I am familiar with, use vertical columns, not inclined ones.
To meet the OP's needs, either the baseboard has to be separated from the column or the head needs to be mounted to the column with an accessory that moves it farther from the column.

 

[Paul Ozzello]

Ahh too bad.

if you can't extend the distance of the enlarger head you might want to consider getting a different enlarger, if only to make larger prints. 16" isn't very large - you can easily print sharp hasselblad negatives up to 44"

The OP's enlarger, plus all Durst enlargers I am familiar with, use vertical columns, not inclined ones.
To meet the OP's needs, either the baseboard has to be separated from the column or the head needs to be mounted to the column with an accessory that moves it farther from the column.

 

[FujiLove]

Ahh too bad.

if you can't extend the distance of the enlarger head you might want to consider getting a different enlarger, if only to make larger prints. 16" isn't very large - you can easily print sharp hasselblad negatives up to 44"

I’m just cutting the negatives into individual images. Inelegant, but solves the problem.

 

[MattKing]

I’m just cutting the negatives into individual images. Inelegant, but solves the problem.

This highlights the issue you are experiencing, and helps explain why it is a problem. I don't know that most people understood why it was a problem - most have either a rotating carrier or an inclined column..
The vertical column prohibits you from turning the easel.
The negative holders prohibit you from turning the negatives if they are in a strip.
The only way to turn the negative in your negative carrier is to cut up the strips into single negatives, which I will agree is not ideal.
The only way to avoid the problem for vertical compositions in camera is to turn your Rollieflex or Hasselblad sideways at time of exposure.
Even Sirius would probably agree that that makes the Hasselblad awkward to use.

 

[FujiLove]

This highlights the issue you are experiencing, and helps explain why it is a problem. I don't know that most people understood why it was a problem - most have either a rotating carrier or an inclined column..
The vertical column prohibits you from turning the easel.
The negative holders prohibit you from turning the negatives if they are in a strip.
The only way to turn the negative in your negative carrier is to cut up the strips into single negatives, which I will agree is not ideal.
The only way to avoid the problem for vertical compositions in camera is to turn your Rollieflex or Hasselblad sideways at time of exposure.
Even Sirius would probably agree that that makes the Hasselblad awkward to use.

Yes, that pretty much sums it up. As others have said, my enlarging equipment doesn’t really work for Rollei and Hasselblad negatives, at least for the paper size and crop I want to use.

 

[lantau]

This highlights the issue you are experiencing, and helps explain why it is a problem. I don't know that most people understood why it was a problem - most have either a rotating carrier or an inclined column..
The vertical column prohibits you from turning the easel.
The negative holders prohibit you from turning the negatives if they are in a strip.
The only way to turn the negative in your negative carrier is to cut up the strips into single negatives, which I will agree is not ideal.
The only way to avoid the problem for vertical compositions in camera is to turn your Rollieflex or Hasselblad sideways at time of exposure.
Even Sirius would probably agree that that makes the Hasselblad awkward to use.

I ran into the same problem (LPL 7700), having recently acquired a Saunders VT1400. Fine piece of hardware and I really enjoy to finally work in a proper way. But wanting to crop a 6x6 into a landscape format I realised that I couldn't turn the easel. And it'd be uncomfortable to work with the Saunders in that orientation. The two negatives where at the end of their strip of three. So I let the film strip hang out at the front of the head. But for the centre negative I'd have to cut the strip as I can't push it back any further into the universal glass carrier.

 

[FujiLove]

I ran into the same problem (LPL 7700), having recently acquired a Saunders VT1400. Fine piece of hardware and I really enjoy to finally work in a proper way. But wanting to crop a 6x6 into a landscape format I realised that I couldn't turn the easel. And it'd be uncomfortable to work with the Saunders in that orientation. The two negatives where at the end of their strip of three. So I let the film strip hang out at the front of the head. But for the centre negative I'd have to cut the strip as I can't push it back any further into the universal glass carrier.

So glad you wrote this. I didn't realise I can insert negatives into the front of my carrier! (or it looks like I can...can't check it right now as there's a negative in it that I'm in the middle of printing). Obviously, this doesn't solve the problem for negatives in the middle of strips, but this will make things a lot easier. If this works, I may even be tempted to cut my future Hasselblad and Rollei negatives into strips of two instead of three, and use an extra sheet to file them. That would be better than dealing with single negatives.