fat max laser plumb

[michaelbsc]

I'm standing in a big box store with my phone, so please forgive the spelling.

I just found a Fat Max laser plumb in the tools. It is less than a hundred bucks USD. (sorry to be localized)

Is there any good reason this won't make a sweet enlarger alignment tool?

It auto levels itself. It doesn't require fabrication. And it is a way cool guy toy.

 

[keithwms]

Well buy it then

I don't find these especially useful for enlargement alignment- what I do is inkjet a grid pattern on transparency film and then project that as I would a neg, and work to get everything sharp to the corners. Very bright, easy, quick... and no high power beams to injure the eyes!

But every man of the new millennium needs to have a laser alignment tool, that's just the way it is.

 

[BetterSense]

I'm a fan of the two-mirrors-one-with-a-hole-in-it trick. I just need to figure out how to remove the silver in a little spot. Still haven't.

 

[Bruce Osgood]

I'm a fan of the two-mirrors-one-with-a-hole-in-it trick. I just need to figure out how to remove the silver in a little spot. Still haven't.

Scratch with a knife blade or razzor blade. It doesn't have to be perfectly round.

 

[fotch]

I would think the accuracy needed not be enough. If the accuracy is say 1/4" in 50", which for its intended use is fine, may not be fine enough to use on an enlarger. I like the lines on the negative approach. Seems like they use to sell these in different sizes, I wonder if they still are available.

 

[fotch]

The mirrors sound like it would even a better approach.

Was this something that was commercially made at one time?

 

[Peter De Smidt]

A Versalab Parallel laser alignment tool works really well.

 

[BetterSense]

The mirrors sound like it would even a better approach.

Was this something that was commercially made at one time?

I don't know; I think I read about it on here. It involves putting a face-down mirror with a hole drilled in it in the negative stage and putting another face-up mirror on the baseplate. If things aren't parallel, you will know in a hurry.

 

[Martin Aislabie]

A Versalab Parallel laser alignment tool works really well.

Yes it does

Getting close was easy but that last little bit takes a while - I hadn't realised quite how much an enlarger moves when you touch it

Martin

 

[Kvistgaard]

I don't know; I think I read about it on here. It involves putting a face-down mirror with a hole drilled in it in the negative stage and putting another face-up mirror on the baseplate. If things aren't parallel, you will know in a hurry.

Sounds inexpensive & not too intellectually demanding - just my style, in other words. Would you have a thread URL to share?

thanks
Søren

 

[Mike Wilde]

I just take a black neg, and scratch the emulsion away around the edge of the neg carrier, using a pin. I then take this neg out, and use a steel rule to score similare pin scratches diagonally corner to corner.

Project this neg and adjust til all of the lines are sharp.

 

[michaelbsc]

But every man of the new millennium needs to have a laser alignment tool, that's just the way it is.

Well, even if it isn't that useful for aligning the enlarger, I'm certain I can make up some other excuse for buying it. Maybe aligning the celing fan or something. You never know when those might drift out of spec.

 

[Peter De Smidt]

I hadn't realised quite how much an enlarger moves when you touch it

Martin

I used to use a Philips PCS2000 enlarger. Locking in the head height caused a major shift in alignment.

 

[eclarke]

A Versalab Parallel laser alignment tool works really well.

I second the Versalab and it's not much more money...Evan Clarke

 

[L Gebhardt]

Airgun laser site works well for me. $25 or $30 5 years ago. Easily adjusted in two axis.

 

[dancqu]

Shape not Sharp

Of importance when considering an alignment
of an enlarger is the SHAPE of the projected
image. An enlarger out of alignment will
not project an image true to the shape
of the object being projected.

The projected image of the negative carrier
may be used for alignment. The four square
corners projected upon the baseboard may be
checked using a small carpenters square.

If it's not in shape it's not sharp. Dan

 

[Kirk Keyes]

what I do is inkjet a grid pattern on transparency film and then project that as I would a neg,

Be careful talking about digital negs here on APUG! ;^)

 

[Anon Ymous]

The projected image of the negative carrier
may be used for alignment. The four square
corners projected upon the baseboard may be
checked using a small carpenters square.

If it's not in shape it's not sharp. Dan

Or use a ruler to check if the parallel sides of the rectangle are equal.

 

[dancqu]

Or use a ruler to check if the parallel sides of the
rectangle are equal.

First check with a square to confirm that it is
a rectangle. It could turn out to be a
parallelogram.

BTW a projected image may be sharp but not
square. For the projected shape to be true to
the object being projected the optical axis
must be perpendicular to the planes of
both film and baseboard. That is not
the case for sharp. Dan

 

[Anon Ymous]

First check with a square to confirm that it is
a rectangle. It could turn out to be a
parallelogram...

Parallelogram, or did you really mean trapezium? The most common misalignment should produce that.

Can you misalign an enlarger and get a rhombus from a square frame?

 

[BetterSense]

First check with a square to confirm that it is
a rectangle.

You can verify that it's a rectangle by comparing the diagonal measurements. They should be the same.

 

[WolfTales]

I keep several laser alignment tools on my belt!

 

[Anon Ymous]

You can verify that it's a rectangle by comparing the diagonal measurements. They should be the same.

Let's assume that we have the trapezium ABCD and AB, CD are the parallel sides. If angles A=B and C=D, then the diagonals AC, BD will be equal!

 

[BetterSense]

Correct. That certainly works. But you need an angle-measuring device to measure the angles and see if they are the same. You can compare all four sides of the quadrilateral as well as the diagonals with only a length-measuring device. And since you are only comparing them for equality, it doesn't even have to be accurate (a piece of string etc.).

I don't even have a square around here, but I certainly have something I can mark with a pencil to compare lengths with.

 

[Anon Ymous]

Oh, you missed my point. I didn't suggest to measure the angles. I just wanted to point out that you can have equal diagonals, without having 4 90 degree angles. If you're going to use diagonals, you need to make sure they bisect each other. In any case, comparing lengths seems the best choice for me.