RH Designs Paper Flasher

jstraw · Apr 25, 2007

keffs said:
How about the ceiling?

Steve

Not a bad thought if it's bright enough...figure four feet away, give or take...I can easily find an angle where no part of the enlarger casts a shadow and stand aside so that I don't. At that distance, the difference in light intensity from areas of the paper that are nominally nearer or farther from the flasher would be minimal, re: inverse square rule.

lee · Apr 25, 2007

jstraw said:
Not a bad thought if it's bright enough...figure four feet away, give or take...I can easily find an angle where no part of the enlarger casts a shadow and stand aside so that I don't. At that distance, the difference in light intensity from areas of the paper that are nominally nearer or farther from the flasher would be minimal, re: inverse square rule.

this is a very dim light you might not want to wait long enough for the light if it is mounted on the ceiling. It is powered by a 9 volt battery also. Its light bulb is like a "grain of wheat" bulb they use on model railroad engines I think plus there is a diffusion glass there. You guys are way over thinking this.

lee\c

jstraw · Apr 25, 2007

Even flashing across the sheet and consistant flashing from exposure to exposure from a non-adjustable light source can only be managed via its positioning or by doing tests ever time the enlarger's height changes. You may enjoy all that testing. I sure don't.

If the height varies or if the illumination is not either centered (and high enough to obviate the inverse-square rule) or simply far enough away to obviate the inverse-square rule, then there are going to be inconsistancies.

I don't see how avoiding these inconsistancies is over thinking anything. With all due respect, ignoring them seems like under thinking thngs.

gainer · Apr 25, 2007

Did I forget to mention? My flasher is velcroed to the side of my enlarger head. As a rule, the main concern with empty highlights is at one end of the negative, such as a cloudy sky. The light cast by the fogger will have no noticeable effect in the shadows anyway. The concern about unevenness is less important than a concern about where the unevenness should occur.

In order to use the while-flashing concept with a Zonemeter or equal, it is required that the enlarger lamp and the flashing lamp have the same color temperature. This can be done with a filter such as is used to balance tungsten photofloods with daylight film if needed.

If you have the proper equipment, there is little or no trial and error involved.

lee · Apr 25, 2007

"You may enjoy all that testing. I sure don't."

I don't particularly like all that testing as you say but I do care about making the best possible prints I can make and I care about using the tools as they were designed to be used. There also is a certain amount of testing required in photography. I was taught how to use this piece of equipment by the guy that wrote the manual and whose original idea it was. His name is Les McLean.

I don't care if you want to adapt it to exposed thru the lens of your enlarger. I am just pointing out that if you position the Flasher/Fogger on the bottom of the lens board the unit will work as designed. Gainer has a lot of ideas but I believe RH Designs is the only one that has actually offered a unit like this for sale.

lee\c

jstraw · Apr 25, 2007

lee said:
"You may enjoy all that testing. I sure don't."

I don't particularly like all that testing as you say but I do care about making the best possible prints I can make and I care about using the tools as they were designed to be used. There also is a certain amount of testing required in photography.

There's a difference between testing and "all that testing." I can do the exact same test ONCE per emulsion if I don't move the flasher around or I can do it all over again every time I move the head. For me, that's not a complicated choice.

I was taught how to use this piece of equipment by the guy that wrote the manual and whose original idea it was. His name is Les McLean.

I've heard of people coming along after the introduction of a product or method and refining its use and sometimes, actually inovating. It's all purely anecdotal and it could be apocraphal.

I don't care if you want to adapt it to exposed thru the lens of your enlarger.

I don't. I'm not sure where this idea comes from. Not from me.

I am just pointing out that if you position the Flasher/Fogger on the bottom of the lens board the unit will work as designed.

If "as designed" involves making test strips that are only necessitated by the variations in lensboard height and if that can successfully be obviated by using a fixed position then I'll gladly pass on using it "as designed."

David Brown · Apr 26, 2007

Jstraw:

I understand your question. I was less than enthusiastic about the RH flasher for the same reason. However, it is what it is which is what a few folks have tried to tell you and you've already bought it. Oh, well.

I didn't but one. What I did is what you are trying to do, I think. I experimented with a couple of different small bulbs, like a "night light" thing, and I have placed one near and bounced off the white ceiling of my darkroom. Attach this $4 item to an old Time-o-lite timer that was just sitting in a drawer, and viola', a flasher. Works fine.

But, each neg is different, and so I still make a test strip for each print. It just gets down to that. Yes, just exposing the paper to a fixed point is the same time, but you might not want or need that exact amount for this image this time. So, making a test strip if the flasher was attached to the enlarger neg stage wouldn't be any different.

Mounting the flasher on a swing arm next to the enlarger sounds like a good idea. But, I bet you still end up making test strips. Or, maybe not. I could be wrong ... :rolleyes:

jstraw · Apr 26, 2007

David Brown said:
Jstraw:

I understand your question. I was less than enthusiastic about the RH flasher for the same reason. However, it is what it is which is what a few folks have tried to tell you and you've already bought it. Oh, well.

I didn't but one. What I did is what you are trying to do, I think. I experimented with a couple of different small bulbs, like a "night light" thing, and I have placed one near and bounced off the white ceiling of my darkroom. Attach this $4 item to an old Time-o-lite timer that was just sitting in a drawer, and viola', a flasher. Works fine.

But, each neg is different, and so I still make a test strip for each print. It just gets down to that. Yes, just exposing the paper to a fixed point is the same time, but you might not want or need that exact amount for this image this time. So, making a test strip if the flasher was attached to the enlarger neg stage wouldn't be any different.

Mounting the flasher on a swing arm next to the enlarger sounds like a good idea. But, I bet you still end up making test strips. Or, maybe not. I could be wrong ... :rolleyes:

There's no "oh, well" about it. I'm glad I bought it. I'm making decisions about placement. That's all.

As for each neg being different, my understanding is that flashing is about the paper's emulsion and making sure the minimum, non-image-forming exposure reaches it to overcome the silver's inertia. You may not need it all over the print and you may not need it at all, depending on the negative but it's non-image-forming therefore can do no harm and the amount of light required is independent of anything to do with the negative.

Leon · Apr 26, 2007

jstraw said:
... apocraphal.

is that a new top-o-the-range lens from Schneider?

seriously. Do us all a favour and, when you get it, try it out, work it out and use it as you wish. there's no point everyone here getting uppity about it. Clearly, everyone who uses one here doesnt use it in the way you want to. We all get very good results from it, and I'm sure you will when you work out how you want to use it.

there

'nuff said.

jstraw · Apr 26, 2007

Good advice Leon. Thanks for the suggestions from those that have also made a fixed position a priority.

gainer · Apr 26, 2007

lee said:
"You may enjoy all that testing. I sure don't."

I don't particularly like all that testing as you say but I do care about making the best possible prints I can make and I care about using the tools as they were designed to be used. There also is a certain amount of testing required in photography. I was taught how to use this piece of equipment by the guy that wrote the manual and whose original idea it was. His name is Les McLean.

I don't care if you want to adapt it to exposed thru the lens of your enlarger. I am just pointing out that if you position the Flasher/Fogger on the bottom of the lens board the unit will work as designed. Gainer has a lot of ideas but I believe RH Designs is the only one that has actually offered a unit like this for sale.

lee\c

Using a piece of equipment as it was designed to be used is not always the best thing to do. I started with the idea that I wanted to be able to measure the light falling on any small area of a projected image in logarithmic units. With proper calibration this device allows me to measure the Zone that will result in the print, but in fractions of a zone. The flasher I designed is variable so that between the enlarger lens diaghram and the variable flasher, I can set the zone I want at any point. The rest is artistic license. Once calibrated for a particular type of printing material, there is no guess work, no test strips.

I had my devices built and in use before the commercial ones were on the market, at least as far as I knew. I gave some consideration to marketing, but I already had too many irons in the fire. If anyone among us knows how to translate a circuit diagram into an actual circuit and wants to try the easel densitometer, I can furnish the diagram. It is mostly integrated curcuits which are cheaply available.

RH Designs Paper Flasher

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency