Need a new grain focuser...

[fschifano]

OTOH, I am 3 to 4 diopters myopic; if you are farsighted then the things may be a God send.

...and I'm exactly the opposite, requiring +4.5 diopters to see at 1 meter- More for close work. A grain focuser helps a lot. I use this one and it's pretty good. The real cheap ones aren't worth the money

 

[AlexG]

Instead of using a grain focuser, I use one of these:

The Exact Focusing Film!

They look like this:

Does anyone know where I can get more of these suckers? There absolutely AWSOME. Just stick one in a neg carrier and focus away! I managed to find the one I have now at a garage sale but I havent been able to find ANY information on these things online. I guess I could make one with lith film...but it would be nice if I could come across more of these. Could anyone shed some light on focusing film?

 

[ozphoto]

I used an old square focus finder (can't think of the name) for many years. It was very good to focus with as the viewing area was about 5cm square. Kind of reminded me of one of the old style slide viewers. And I alos had a Paterson one at the same time but it was the "ancient" focussing box I used the most.

When I had the money, I purchased an Omega; cost me $AUD50 from my local camera store.

 

[Chazzy]

Does anyone know the difference between the Peak model i and the Peak model ii?

 

[RalphLambrecht]

2 pages of mostly Peak
1 original post containing "Don't want to spend a lot"
FLOL, guys

C'mon! WTF are you guys thinking. No need to prove your merit as a photographer in this thread by making sure everyone knows you afford yourself the best discernment can offer ..just prove yourself a good listener.
the 1st post links to $250
I'm sure that was a great help

Oh, Ferrari is good quality? OKAY.... lol

Buy this one, you won't regret it. Forget the Peak, they are good but too expensive and the Microsight offers better magnification, which is important for fine-grain film.

http://www.calumetphoto.com/item/BO1010/

 

[RalphLambrecht]

Hang on to this. You can find something similar with Edmund Scientific, but it will cost you a lot of money.

Dead Link Removed

 

[Anon Ymous]

Although I might buy a grain focuser one day, I use dancqu's method. Just focus wide open and then stop down. Removing any filters makes it easier. I should add that I always focus on a piece of paper (possibly an overkill), using a slide that has fine detail like letters. Regarding paper, I should add that it's surface is quite significant. A glossy surface will appear more sharp than a matte one. Try it.

 

[fschifano]

And how will that "Exact Focusing Film" really work? Focus the enlarger with that negative in place, then replace it with the negative you want to print? Nice. Every time you move anything on the enlarger, you need to refocus.

 

[Anon Ymous]

... Every time you move anthing on the enlarger, you need to refocus.

It hasn't been my experience so far. Whenever I used a grain focuser (public darkrooms) I focused for the desired print size. Whenever I changed the negative I checked with the focuser again. It was always in focus, so I didn't bother from some point on. I always got sharp prints. Of course, this has been my (admittedly limited) experience with a specific enlarger. YMMV.

 

[AlexG]

Yeah. 95% of the time I focus with one of those sheets and switch out the carrier, everything seems to be issue-less. I guess the lock on the column helps lot!

To bad those new presicion targets cost so much...I wouldn't mine owning a couple extra.

 

[Jeff Kubach]

I have a grain focuser but I don't use it much!

Jeff

 

[Sirius Glass]

When I was at Kodak and used their darkrooms I could never get the hang of the grain focusers. Later I sent up a darkroom in my place and got a grain focuser from FreeStyle. It took me a while to learn to use it. Now I use it for every negative. That grain focuser was hard to use [it has to be on or near the center line of the enlarger and your eye must be in exactly the right place] so I recently purchased a Peak grain focuser from eBay thanks to a tip from the "The interesting analog photo gear I saw for sale or free today" thread.

Steve

 

[Neanderman]

Seriously, get a Peak. You won't regret it. Ever.

Ed

 

[Sirius Glass]

Seriously, get a Peak. You won't regret it. Ever.

Ed

Amen, a-a-amen, a-a-amen, a-a-amen!

Steve

 

[gainer]

I have used most of them and I can't say the focus I can find with my eyes is any different from that found with a focuser.

Try it yourself: focus visually, then put in the focuser and see if any adjustment is needed. If not, then there isn't much point in the focuser. OTOH, I am 3 to 4 diopters myopic; if you are farsighted then the things may be a God send.

Yeah, like me. I am a true visionary: I can see beyond infinity. For anything closer I need spectacles.

 

[Sirius Glass]

Yeah, like me. I am a true visionary: I can see beyond infinity. For anything closer I need spectacles.

ROTFLMAO!!!

Steve

 

[Jedidiah Smith]

Hehehe! Me too - that was CLASSIC, Gainer.

Jed

 

[RalphLambrecht]

Seriously, get a Peak. You won't regret it. Ever.

Ed

I did regret spending so much on my Peak. It only has 10x magnification, which is not enough for my fine-grained Tmax at 11x14 from a 120 negative. My $60 Microsight with its 20x magnification works much better for me.

 

[RalphLambrecht]

Yeah, like me. I am a true visionary: I can see beyond infinity. For anything closer I need spectacles.

That's one to remember!

 

[youngrichard]

Agree 100%. I messed around with cheapies and then took the plunge and purchased one and have never used anything else ever since. I particularly like the fact that you can move about the whole image area, even to the corners.

Most of us have our enlargers on a bench, so you can see into the corners nearest you, but I haven't yet mastered the trick of seeing the far corners because my head gets in the way. How is it done?

 

[dancqu]

How Much Magnification?

I did regret spending so much on my Peak. It only has 10x
magnification, which is not enough for my fine-grained Tmax
at 11x14 from a 120 negative. My $60 Microsight with its 20x
magnification works much better for me.

You can see the grain with a 20 diameter magnifier and
with what magnification of the negative on the easel? Lets
say for example that the image on the easel is a 6 diameter
enlargement of the negative. Peering through the magnifier
you see the grain 120 diameters enlarged.

You can tweak the focus until the image seen through
the magnifier is sharp but you can't know if the image
is so sharp on the paper. It would take an actual 120
diameter enlargement showing sharp grain to prove
the trueness of the focus.

My point is what rational justifies going to such
extremes in focusing? Like Mr. Lindan, I agree that
when the image looks sharp upon the easel, without
the aid of additional interfering optics, the image is
sharp. And sharper still from stopping down. Most
focus with lens wide open.

Very trusting I'd say basing ones focus on a 120
diameter enlargement as viewed through
a complex of optics.

Better in my mind to view the projected image with
as little mechanical/optical interference as possible.
Focus wide open then stop down. Depth of field is
increased and lens aberrations are reduced. The
stronger of two pair of reading glasses I use
gives me about a 2 diameter view over the
usual close viewing of a print. Dan

 

[Curt]

I went through this recently? after my old Prinz mirror started to flake off a bit. I bought a Peak and it's OK. then I had a chance to get a new Omega Micromega focuser on eBeg. It's much better than the Peak because the eye piece adjusts as the Peak and Prinz are fixed. As for the bottom line the Prinz, Peak, and Omega all focus the same. So it might come down to what is comfortable for you.

 

[ic-racer]

The advantage (to me) of the Peak is the ability to see the edges.
In terms of magnification, if there is not enough resolution to make out the grain, and there are no discrete objectes in the portion of the frame in question, you CAN'T focus. Therefore, as Ralph points out, a higher magnification may be required. Other options would be to choose another negative that has a discrete element on which to focus, ingnore any sense of focus for that print, focus on a portion of the print where there IS a discrete element (sort of like looking for a lost coin where the light is better) or give up.

 

[RalphLambrecht]

The advantage (to me) of the Peak is the ability to see the edges.
In terms of magnification, if there is not enough resolution to make out the grain, and there are no discrete objectes in the portion of the frame in question, you CAN'T focus. Therefore, as Ralph points out, a higher magnification may be required. Other options would be to choose another negative that has a discrete element on which to focus, ingnore any sense of focus for that print, focus on a portion of the print where there IS a discrete element (sort of like looking for a lost coin where the light is better) or give up.

Seeing the edges is a theoretical advantage and thats why I bought the Peak, but it turned out that I rarely need it. My baseboard and negative plane are in parallel. So, when I focus in the middle of the print, all left-over out-of-focus is clearly with the depth of field.

 

[RalphLambrecht]

You can see the grain with a 20 diameter magnifier and
with what magnification of the negative on the easel? Lets
say for example that the image on the easel is a 6 diameter
enlargement of the negative. Peering through the magnifier
you see the grain 120 diameters enlarged.

You can tweak the focus until the image seen through
the magnifier is sharp but you can't know if the image
is so sharp on the paper. It would take an actual 120
diameter enlargement showing sharp grain to prove
the trueness of the focus.

My point is what rational justifies going to such
extremes in focusing? Like Mr. Lindan, I agree that
when the image looks sharp upon the easel, without
the aid of additional interfering optics, the image is
sharp. And sharper still from stopping down. Most
focus with lens wide open.

Very trusting I'd say basing ones focus on a 120
diameter enlargement as viewed through
a complex of optics.

Better in my mind to view the projected image with
as little mechanical/optical interference as possible.
Focus wide open then stop down. Depth of field is
increased and lens aberrations are reduced. The
stronger of two pair of reading glasses I use
gives me about a 2 diameter view over the
usual close viewing of a print. Dan

Dan

I'm not familiar with the term 'diameter', but I assume it simply means 'times'? If so, my point is that 10 and 20x are both too much to focus on an image detail; all I see is specks of density or blank areas with grain, emulsion structure or whatever it is. As I said in another post, I focus on the center of the print, regardless of what is featured there. Sometimes it's an almost blank area, and then the Peak fails me, because its magnification does not show me the grain? as clearly as the 20x magnification of the Microsight from Bestwell. This makes it harder for me to focus. Is this focus accuracy necessary? Probably not, but that wasn't the point. I'm just comparing two focussing aids, I already own.