Paper negative enlarger prototype

NedL

Subscriber
Joined
Aug 23, 2012
Messages
3,388
Location
Sonoma County, California
Format
Multi Format
.. the jeep is kind of slate colored it was like a giant grey card....
Excellent! Mine's white I should have thought about that!

Wow I'm really impressed with the detail from 35mm-sized paper negatives! That's great!

Would it be possible to use a filter under the enlarger lens? I made a simple holder that holds a filter under the lens of my enlarger, just a piece of insulated solid copper wire, bent to form a "U" shape that the filter rests on. If you have a green filter that you use on a camera, you could try putting it under the lens for part of the exposure and it should tame the contrast quite a bit.

Great stuff, keep going!!
 
OP
OP

bergytone

Member
Joined
Sep 8, 2014
Messages
168
Location
Grand Haven,
Format
Multi Format
blindpig, here's a front view of the "opaque projector" I crudely drew in the dimensions of the slot in the light tubes and the desired light projection on the view area. With a tiny negative like the 35mm in the top, even illumination is easy. A big negative (like 6 x9 ) is a different story. My design is like a miniature version of yours. My angles might be a bit more obtuse than yours... that was a function of the lens I am using. I wasn't ready to buy a nice expensive 150mm lens until I proved the concept first. So my light box is just a bit more squashed. And as Joe V mentioned about eliminating the reflections and glare, my strong side angles mean the lens never sees the direct reflection off the glossy RC paper. And you had commented on glass reflections, well, for this first test and with a tiny negative, I'm using a glassless negative holder.



and no comments on "number 5 alive" from the movie 'short circuit'
 

Attachments

  • front view.JPG
    280 KB · Views: 555
Last edited by a moderator:

Joe VanCleave

Member
Joined
Jan 20, 2004
Messages
677
Location
Albuquerque,
Format
Pinhole
A filter holder under the enlarger lens is how I use my 4x5 Beseler. That last photo of the Vivitar enlarger frame appears to show a filter holder next to the lens.

As for the problem with light falloff when printing from larger negatives, both of my condensor enlargers have a second bellows, between the negative and light source above, that needs to be adjusted for different sizes. I'm not sure how you could adjust for this with your light source.

I'm really excited about this project, looking forward to more progress.

~Joe
 

blindpig

Member
Joined
Dec 5, 2013
Messages
123
Location
Nixa,Mo.
Format
Multi Format
Eric, I agree with Joe it appears you have a filter holder below the lens on your enlarger and like Ned and the others I use below the lens contrast filters.You'd just need to swing it under the lens and put the filter on top. I'm thinking you could fabricate a"box" to set on top of your existing negative carrier area which would be several inches tall with another negative carrier on top.this added distance might allow the proper light angles to give you a more even coverage on the larger negatives.If this crops off some of the light you may have to open up the negative opening as it is now.I think glassless negative carriers is the way to go.
Your 35mm paper negs are a pretty slick idea.Keep up the good work.
Don
 
OP
OP

bergytone

Member
Joined
Sep 8, 2014
Messages
168
Location
Grand Haven,
Format
Multi Format
Yeah, you guys are right, there is a 'safelight red' filter below the lens from the original vivitar enlarger. I can take out the red filter and drop in the ilford multigrade filters. Is there any chance that these filters will distort the image? Or is it the case that if they are close to the lens the effects will be minimal? I'll give it a try, see what happens.

The 35mm paper negative worked pretty well, but without sprockets advancing the paper after each shot was much like using roll film without a red window. The take up spool in the Nikon is a slip type, and didn't move the paper at all, as it relies on the toothed wheel to move the film. So I had to first manually wind the paper onto the take up spool in the darkroom until it was fully pulled out of the cassette. Then, to take a shot I had to cock the shutter, trip the shutter and then use the cassette rewind lever to pull it back into the cassette an estimated single frame. You can see by the picture of the negatives I advanced it a little too much, but I didn't want any overlapped shots. I didn't even have to push the little rewind release button, since the toothed wheel isn't really in use.

I think with careful winding I can get 20 shots on a strip of paper. The only problem is possible double exposures, so like an old 620 Hawkeye, you've got to remember to advance the paper negative after each exposure.
 

blindpig

Member
Joined
Dec 5, 2013
Messages
123
Location
Nixa,Mo.
Format
Multi Format
This may be way out there but maybe you could cut the paper narrow enough to fit between the sprocket holes and attach the paper to a roll of perforated 35 mm film.Never tried it ,don't know if it's even possible but thought I'd throw it out there.Might be too thick to pass the pressure plate but without attempting it wouldn't ever know....
 

TheToadMen

Subscriber
Joined
Sep 18, 2012
Messages
3,570
Location
Netherlands, EU
Format
Pinhole

Maybe you could cut of a film leader from an exposed film roll and tape it to the paper negative for better loading?
 

blindpig

Member
Joined
Dec 5, 2013
Messages
123
Location
Nixa,Mo.
Format
Multi Format
Oh! I forgot to give my take on the Multigrade filters below the lens.They are designed for this purpose and seem to work very well IMHO.
That said any thing introduced in the image path could affect the results adversely but in this case think you'd be hard pressed to see the difference and the advantage of having some contrast control is worth any small loss in sharpness.
 
OP
OP

bergytone

Member
Joined
Sep 8, 2014
Messages
168
Location
Grand Haven,
Format
Multi Format
blindpig, I did cut the paper narrower than the sprocket teeth. I think you might be on to something. I could tape it onto a section of film like roll film is taped to the backing paper. The combo would be awful thick, and you're right, it might not pass through the pressure plate right. It also would also limit the amount of shots I could get on a 'roll' since it would be so much thicker. As it is, I think I can roll up about 35 inches of paper alone in the cassette, good enough for about 18 exposures if advanced properly.

Talk about backwards from regular roll film... paper negative with a film backing.... what? Seems nuts, but if the camera can pass it, it will work. I've got some bulk ilford 35mm roll film that expired in '76 that I can use for this test. I use it now as a fixer test material!

I will give the filters under the lens a test. I thought they were really designed to be used in the light box of a condenser enlarger. in the filter tray. I haven't had a lot of time to poke around in the dark room lately, but I'll try to get something tomorrow night. Thanks for the input everyone!
 

TheToadMen

Subscriber
Joined
Sep 18, 2012
Messages
3,570
Location
Netherlands, EU
Format
Pinhole
I could tape it onto a section of film like roll film is taped to the backing paper. The combo would be awful thick, and you're right, it might not pass through the pressure plate right.

You could also just use a short film leader and tape it to the paper negative, more like 220 roll film.
That should be easier to load and lesser or no problems with the pressure plate.
 

joan65_es

Member
Joined
Mar 20, 2008
Messages
5
Format
35mm RF
[Negatiu paper, i la part Estesa A Una ampliadora convencional. No hi ha moreNegative paper, i la part Estesa A Una ampliadora convencional. Sentit moreAttach = complet] 150.530 [/ attach] [attach = complet] 150.531 [/ attach]
 

Attachments

  • negPlatans_001.jpg
    297.9 KB · Views: 229
  • AmplitPlatans_001.jpg
    357.6 KB · Views: 272

NedL

Subscriber
Joined
Aug 23, 2012
Messages
3,388
Location
Sonoma County, California
Format
Multi Format
Negatiu paper, i la part Estesa A Una ampliadora convencional. No hi ha moreNegative paper, i la part Estesa A Una ampliadora convencional. Sentit more
I cannot tell if this was made with a conventional enlarger, or with a modified conventional enlarger, but it looks like it worked!
Welcome to APUG!
 

NedL

Subscriber
Joined
Aug 23, 2012
Messages
3,388
Location
Sonoma County, California
Format
Multi Format
Ned, please explain what is going on with this post.... Is this another example of a paper negative enlarger? I'd love to see more details.

I'm not 100% sure about this, I used google translate and the post is in Catalan. But I think joan65_es made a still life paper negative, put it into his normal diffusion enlarger ( you can see a normal looking enlarger with a diffusion head in the 2nd post ), and produced that nice print. The print has very good range of tones and looks smooth. I know Joe VanCleave and others have done this. I've never tried it -- I always imagined it would be hard to focus... But it makes some sense that paper texture might not show through much: the paper itself should diffuse the light. It probably helped to use a diffusion head.

It's amazing how many different things are possible to explore in photography!
 

RalphLambrecht

Subscriber
Joined
Sep 19, 2003
Messages
14,644
Location
K,Germany
Format
Medium Format
 

removed account4

Subscriber
Joined
Jun 21, 2003
Messages
29,832
Format
Hybrid
It's amazing how many different things are possible to explore in photography


I'm with you !

there is a lot of fun to be had .. not suggesting the "conventional" isn't fun,
but sometimes taking a meandering path opens ones eyes to the possibilities
that can be done with the conventional and make one's experience even more
fun .... or.. not. lots of fun to be had no matter the route one takes
 

paul ron

Member
Joined
Jan 22, 2004
Messages
2,706
Location
NYC
Format
Medium Format
nice job! love the concept.
 

ic-racer

Member
Joined
Feb 25, 2007
Messages
16,544
Location
USA
Format
Multi Format
Looks like it works. But why paper negatives? The resolution and tonal range are less than conventional negative film, or is that the desired effect?
 
OP
OP

bergytone

Member
Joined
Sep 8, 2014
Messages
168
Location
Grand Haven,
Format
Multi Format
I'm not sure the resolution of paper is really less than negative film... can you see the "grain" of paper? I posed this question a while back on the forum.
And I think you're right about tonal problems with paper. Multigrade paper has contrast issues due to it's sensitivity to various colors of light. They can be somewhat compensated for, but yes, I guess it's an effect that is desired.

The main reason I've been playing with it is that for some of these vintage cameras the cost of film is crazy just to get 8 shots. I've figured out how to roll up paper with a backing sheet, and make a roll of paper negatives. I happened to have a 400 foot roll of 5" wide photo paper, and I can slit it to 120 size pretty easily.

But, it is kind of a novelty, and the pinhole crowd loves paper negs. I just wanted a way to make enlargements from some smaller paper negatives. It certainly won't replace my 35mm film! But for my 4x5 pinhole it is a cost effective way to play around and experiment.
 

blindpig

Member
Joined
Dec 5, 2013
Messages
123
Location
Nixa,Mo.
Format
Multi Format
IC, paper negs are sharp and can be enlarged a great deal without apparent loss of quality,bergytone will find out when he uses his reflective enlarger more.I'm happy with mine and have just finished a 4X5 sliding box camera intended for just paper negatives both with lenses and a pinhole for added fun. You ought to give it a try,ya might like it.
 

ic-racer

Member
Joined
Feb 25, 2007
Messages
16,544
Location
USA
Format
Multi Format
Ok, seems like a good project. Might be something to try in a 220 film back also.
 
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn more…