• Welcome to Photrio!
    Registration is fast and free. Join today to unlock search, see fewer ads, and access all forum features.
    Click here to sign up

Smokey prints off Durst M606

Humphrey

Member
Allowing Ads
Joined
Oct 20, 2014
Messages
20
Location
France 87
Format
127 Format
Just tried my recently acquired M606 and had to replace the broken negative carrier glass with a piece I cut from 2mm (.087") picture frame glass. I cannot think of anything else that could affect the image. It has a 150W pearlised lamp with an empty slot in front. The aperture of the lens is fully open.
 
It is a little unclear what you mean by "smoky", but in the hunt for anti-newton glass (detailed in other threads over the years) it was found that the anti-reflection picture frame glass had a bad effect on print sharpness and flare. Is that what you are describing? A picture, of the problem, is worth a thousand words as they say.

If necessary, it is probably possible to use mounting board to make a temporary replacement glassless neg-holder. Cut the apertures in two pieces, then add thicknesses to make the carrier "fat" enough to seat securely. This wouldn't win any prizes for alignment perfection but is quick and easy to do in an emergency. Slightly more permanent is a similar arrangement from plywood sheets, the thin sort available in modelmaking stores.

Another possibility could be very dirty condensers, though that would more likely give uneven lighting than a "smoky" result, simply because it happens above the neg and not below. Yet one more option, try stopping the lens down a couple of stops and compensating with lengthened time - it is always possible that the lens is damaged/dirty/awful.
 
Not familiar with your negative carrier. Is the piece of galss you replaced above or below the negative? As stated by MartinP, some framing glass is so-called anti glare, actually lightly frosted. Below the negative, you should have either of: nothing; or true anti-reflection glass, also called museum glass, quite expensive per sq meter, but the piece you need is small. You might get away without newton rings using ordinary glass, because the emulsion side of the film is often rough enough to avoid Newton rings. I hear that this does not work with Tmax films.
 
I have limited experience with the Durst enlargers ( 40 years ago ) but it seems that a 150W bulb is way too bright for this enlarger. Is the bulb in yours exactly the type that the enlarger calls for? While regular household light bulbs may fit, they are not engineered into the light path as enlarger bulbs are. You may also be missing a heat absorbing glass in the light path. The heat glass reduces the light by only a fraction of an f/stop but is important to keep the negative from buckling/popping. Most enlarger bulbs for hobby use are in the 50/75/100 range. Higher wattage bulbs are made but they usually are for much bigger/older enlargers and Pro/Commercial printers. IMO, the enlarger lens should be stopped down 2-3 stops from wide open. I have one enlarger with a cold light head that is soo bright that I have to stop down to f/22 and then my exposures are still in the 8-15 sec range. I like exposures in the 25-60 sec range for ease of dodging/burning.
 
Dear Humphrey,

I've never actually seen one, but the photos on line make me think that the diffuser surface might need attention.

Good luck,

Neal Wydra
 
Here is the manual by the way, if you need it: http://manuelsphoto.free.fr/ - a bit down in the list.

You can use it as a glassless carrier, if you find the DIFMA or AUDIX parts. Or I guess you could cobble something together.

Sadly I had to get rid of mine a few years back - great enlarger.

This is how the carrier looks like: http://manuelsphoto.free.fr/durst6066.jpg
 
I found an instruction book here:http://jollinger.com/photo/cam-coll/manuals/enlargers/durst/Durst_606.pdf
The diffuser is for a different bulb. I note that the f stops need to be reduced as I currently have them wide open.
It has a 150w pearlised bulb and no diffuser.
I took the lens apart and under magnification, each element looks like the sky at night.

The plate is an IXOPLA 4526 with a Durst Componon1:5,6/80Schneider Kreusenach lens.
I tried cleaning the glass from both sides, but it still looks dusty.
 
How does the prints look like? Show us an example if you can. I am not sure if a bit of dust in the lens is a problem unless you stop down a lot, that is beyond f/8 - f/11. If you can, try another lens to see if it makes a difference. On my 606 there was no diffuser at all. Is the condenser itself clean?
 
It has a 150w pearlised bulb and no diffuser.

"Pearl" bulbs are (usually) slightly frosted and project an uneven pattern of light. Ideally, you should be using a Photocrescenta bulb which has a white glossy coating on the glass. For an M606, the recommended bulb is a P3/3 75W which should still be available from most good suppliers.
 
Another thought: is the lens itself cloudy or hazy? From what I understand, you have some dust in there, right?
 
It looks like the Photocrescenta 150w. I am finding it very difficult getting a really good focus on the enlarger. Maybe it's just my eyes. I never had any trouble in the early sixties
 
Smokey=fogged=light struck?
I'm another thinking the 150 is too bright a lamp.
 
Smokey=fogged=light struck, condenser in place?
I'm another thinking the 150 is too bright a lamp.
 
I think the problem lies with the lens. not only was it dirty with wd40 spray, the coating is damaged and I wonder if one of the lenses is the wrong way round. It is a SK 80 5,6 I might just try a replacement. (are Omega the same as Durst lenses)
 
Some Durst lenses were made by Schneider, some by Rodenstock. Omega el-Omegar lenses made in Germany were Rodenstock, entry level lenses that are good but not stellar.
 
Ummmm, WD40? There's a clue.