Keeping it flat

[Melvin J Bramley]

I'm never too old to learn!
Negative flatness on the camera film plane is an often overlooked issue when considering the final, print quality.
With that in mind I have noticed enlarger negative carriers that do not 'bite' and the same can be said for print easels.
My 4 x 5 Beseler is most frustrating when carrying a three strip of 6 x 6 negatives.
Not only is there film slack in the carrier , a three strip can only be aligned by physically touching the negative and not just the edges!
The best negative carriers I have used have been on the Durst 'semi professional ' models such as the M605 and a similar built Philips PCS 2000.
As for easels..
My less expensive LPL 11 x 14 easel hold the paper flatter than my very expensive Beseler 16 x 20 four blade!!

Anyone had similar issues.

 

[GregY]

For a while i used the 4x5 glass holder for my Beseler when making larger prints from medium format. Since i no longer have that holder.... i move over to my Durst 138 and use the standard glass 5x7 holder.
No problems
re flatness with any of my 3 Saunders easels.

 

[Dani]

I use the 4x5 glass negative carrier for everything on my Beseler. Just mask the excess light and works great. The base is not in contact with the glass but the pressure of the mask against the negative keeps it as flat as it could be. I have a Beseler 16x20 easel too and it keeps the paper very flat. No complains at all. Maybe you can use magnets to keep those blades flatter.

 

[ic-racer]

Glass, glass, glass....

 

[MurrayMinchin]

For my Beseler 45MXT I made a DIY glass carrier, the bottom piece ever so slightly wedge shaped so that when inserted it came to stop in the same place every time. Used it for pin registered negatives & masks. Whole image, including negatives edge, could be enlarged.

 

[Loren Sattler]

Negative flatness is one of the benefits of the Focomat negative carriers for 35mm. The negative gets pressed between a metal carrier below and glass above the negative.

 

[Sirius Glass]

Whenever negative flatness is a problem, which is rare, I use my 4"x5" glass negative carrier. I also use that carrier with the WideLux negatives always, since I do not have a custom negative holder for it.

 

[DREW WILEY]

You have to use full glass carriers, period. All my enlarging is done with anti-Newton glass on BOTH sides of the negative, every size, every time. But the smallest enlarger I now use is a Durst 138, so I'm kinda spoiled.

 

[john_s]

Does antiNewton glass under the negative cause any reduction in sharpness of the image? I guess it doesn't otherwise you wouldn't do it. But it surprises me a bit.

 

[snusmumriken]

Does antiNewton glass under the negative cause any reduction in sharpness of the image? I guess it doesn't otherwise you wouldn't do it. But it surprises me a bit.

In my experience, yes it does. I found it better to put the glass above and a glassless mask below; but better yet to use a completely glassless carrier and avoid leaving the enlarger on for long periods, which causes popping. (Talking 35mm here)

 

[snusmumriken]

I greatly improved the flatness of paper in my Beard 2-blade enlarging easel by placing a heavy magnet (from an old loudspeaker) on the two blades where they cross. Has to be lifted off each time to open the easel, so I glued a piece of card on the underside to save scratching things.

 

[ic-racer]

Flatness frequently can be achieved with non-glass carriers. The issue for sharp prints is micro changes in temperature (from the enlarger light) cause buckling of the negative during the exposure. Glass prevents this buckling.
Otherwise a well heated negative in a glass-free holder could remain stable during the exposure, but not guaranteed.

Before I got glass carriers for all 5 of my enlargers the sequence was like this:

Watch the negative with the grain focuser up to 20 or 30 seconds until focus stabilizes
Place the lens cap with the lamp still on
Put the paper in the easel
Quickly (but without bumping anything) turn the enlarger off, take the lenscap off, start the timer.
Be ready with all the burning tools and hope the negative does not cool down between burns

I just ordered 4 sheets of glass from Knight Optical for two 10x10in negative carriers. I got plain glass on the bottom for both and AN on the top.

 

[DREW WILEY]

The correct kind of AN glass has no effect on sharpness unless it's not clean; (note, "CORRECT KIND"). You do need to frequently clean any kind of carrier glass. Overall, you should see a distinct improvement in sharpness because the film is staying truly flat, clear across. And if you get into advanced techniques involving registered film masks, etc, glass BOTH SIDES is a MUST.

I have 30X40 inch prints hanging all around me right this moment which prove my point. I'd defy anyone to try to print sharper. And every one of em was done using AN glass both top & bottom. Of course, other things factor as well : top-end enlarging lenses, vacuum easels if needed, everything perfectly aligned, really solid enlarger columns, large format film originals, etc etc.

 

[faberryman]

Let's not lose sight of the fact that a super sharp print of a mediocre photograph is a mediocre photograph. I am not not advocating sloppy technique, just suggesting that there is more to a great photograph than technique.

 

[DREW WILEY]

When I built my largest 8x10 color enlarger, I equipped it with a precision machined pin-registered 30X40 vacuum easel so well built that one can stand on it without deflecting it. It weighs about 300 lbs by itself. Why? Because I got it for free, cannibalized from a huge decommissioned industrial process camera. Then I leveled and aligned everything with a true industrial laser to within about 1/100th of a degree. Why? Because I borrowed that device from work, where I sold those, and it was a fun thing to use. Why not? But any decent machinist level or really well made carpenters level with a machined edge, like from Stabila or Mepro, would be just as good in any practical sense (but not the kind of cheapo extruded levels one finds at Home Centers). Neighbors have a right to their shop projects refurbishing old cars and motorcycles and speed boats. So I have a right to fix up enlarging stations especially nice if I want to. It adds to the overall enjoyable experience of enlarging in my case, even if it is overkill, technically.

That monster rig is out of service at the moment for overdue colorhead maintenance. In the meantime, I'm using my refurbished Durst L184 with its color head and dedicated excellent registered carriers, all equipped with AN glass. One more free thing - the whole nine yards - which probably cost around $27,000 new.

 

[faberryman]

I do not refurbish old cars and motorcycles and speed boats. Fortunately, my neighbors don't either. Time is limited. I'd rather make prints than refurbish my enlarger.

I remember the summer before I went to college. My friends and I were sort of bicycle fanatics. So every morning before we went on a ride we would go up to the university bike shop and replace the grease in our hubs and cranks. It had no effect on the performance of our bicycles, but it seemed like a good idea at the time. And it made us feel like expert bike mechanics. The folly of youth. Some never get over it.

 

[Sirius Glass]

I do not refurbish old cars and motorcycles and speed boats. Fortunately, my neighbors don't either. Time is limited. I'd rather make prints than refurbish my enlarger.

I remember the summer before I went to college. My friends and I were sort of bicycle fanatics. So every morning before we went on a ride we would go up to the university bike shop and replace the grease in our hubs and cranks. It had no effect on the performance of our bicycles, but it seemed like a good idea at the time. And it made us feel like expert bike mechanics. The folly of youth. Some never get over it.

"Youth is wasted on the young." Oscar Wilde

 

[DREW WILEY]

Old age is wasted fixing, and paying for fixing things over and over again that should have been built right in the first place. False economy. Set up a nice darkroom while you can, so you can enjoy it later. I don't think Pablo Casals ever said, "To hell with it if the bow breaks, it's just the music which counts." Nor did Michelangelo, working with marble, likely say to his assistant, "another dull chisel is good enough; just hand me whatever is lying on the floor". Mediocrity just breeds more mediocrity. Tools count.

 

[faberryman]

Old age is wasted fixing, and paying for fixing things over and over again that should have been built right in the first place. False economy. Set up a nice darkroom while you can, so you can enjoy it later. I don't think Pablo Casals ever said, "To hell with it if the bow breaks, it's just the music which counts." Nor did Michelangelo, working with marble, likely say to his assistant, "another dull chisel is good enough; just hand me whatever is lying on the floor". Mediocrity just breeds more mediocrity. Tools count.

I am pretty sure the individual horse hairs of Pablo Casals' bow were not aligned to within 1/100th of a degree of one another using an industrial laser, and yet he was able to scratch out achingly beautiful renditions of Bach's Six Suites for Cello. I am also pretty sure modern sculptors' chisels are sharper than those available to Michelangelo, and yet he was able to hack out La Pietà from a solid block of marble. Sometimes people tend to lose the plot.

Striving for excellence rather than perfection is not a indicator of mediocrity. And overkill is not a virtue.

 

[cliveh]

If negatives are allowed to dry over time in ambient temperature, they will not curve and can be printed in a glassless carrier. Glass surfaces introduces dust.

 

[wiltw]

I greatly improved the flatness of paper in my Beard 2-blade enlarging easel by placing a heavy magnet (from an old loudspeaker) on the two blades where they cross. Has to be lifted off each time to open the easel, so I glued a piece of card on the underside to save scratching things.

Yet extensive testing by one Photrio member Bill Burk within the past year showed that the focus accuracy is NOT undermined for accuracy to a notable degree, by putting a grain focuser directly on the easel surface (no dummy piece of enlarging paper at time of focusing)...
0.070" range of undetectable error has been determined in Bill's test


To quote him,

"It's totally OK to put paper under the grain focuser to account for the thickness of paper because it is more accurate.​

​

It's totally unnecessary, proven by experiments."​

​

Using grains focuser with or without paper on the easel

What you're showing is more like random measurement error, which is already represented well enough in the dots. What I'm talking about are flaws in the system which are repeatable. They are there with the same magnitude and direction every time. So what is the difference between the upper...

www.photrio.com

 

[Sal Santamaura]

Let's not lose sight of the fact that a super sharp print of a mediocre photograph is a mediocre photograph...

Let's not lose sight of the fact that, while sharpness is an objective criterion forums like this can cover usefully, mediocrity is purely subjective and squishy. One person's perfect photograph is another's mediocre failure. And vice versa.

 

[snusmumriken]

Yet extensive testing by one Photrio member Bill Burk within the past year showed that the focus accuracy is NOT undermined for accuracy to a notable degree, by putting a grain focuser directly on the easel surface (no dummy piece of enlarging paper at time of focusing)...
0.070" range of undetectable error has been determined in Bill's test


To quote him,

"It's totally OK to put paper under the grain focuser to account for the thickness of paper because it is more accurate.​

​

It's totally unnecessary, proven by experiments."​

​

Using grains focuser with or without paper on the easel

What you're showing is more like random measurement error, which is already represented well enough in the dots. What I'm talking about are flaws in the system which are repeatable. They are there with the same magnitude and direction every time. So what is the difference between the upper...

www.photrio.com

That’s fine - but the OP wanted to know how to get materials flat. The main point for me was to get clean edges, because light was getting under the easel blades. However, I would point out that the amount a sheet of paper can bow in an easel is a lot more than the paper thickness.

 

[Sirius Glass]

That’s fine - but the OP wanted to know how to get materials flat. The main point for me was to get clean edges, because light was getting under the easel blades. However, I would point out that the amount a sheet of paper can bow in an easel is a lot more than the paper thickness.

The blades of an easel should be able to hold the edges down of double weight fiber paper.

 

[DREW WILEY]

Depends on the paper, humidity, etc. Small easels with lightweight blades sometimes need a little help from removable masking black tape if the paper is especially stubborn about curl.