Success! My first good print.

[dcy]

Can I ask,dcy, which of the 3 lower prints has been magnified to form the bigger print that comes up first?

The first one. 99.99% sure.

 

[pentaxuser]

The first one. 99.99% sure.

Thanks This was the one I thought it had to be, as looking at all 3, it looks the one that has some fuzziness in the area Alex refers to. Of course I may be seeing a fuzziness that isn't there or is there equally in all three and have just been "conditioned" by Alex's post but I don't think so

What might cause this to be more fuzzy in that area I have no idea but you'd think that an enlarger with poor alignment would have affected all 3 prints equally

Others may have some ideas

pentaxuser

 

[dcy]

What might cause this to be more fuzzy in that area I have no idea but you'd think that an enlarger with poor alignment would have affected all 3 prints equally

Yeah.

I cannot see the fuzzyness that you and @Alex Benjamin see, but I have another post with a picture of a train where I am convinced the image is very fuzzy on the corners, and I don't see that fuzziness in the DSLR scan. Below I include the scan (left) vs the print (right), and I also crop to the bottom-left corner.

So it is indeed a problem with the enlarger, not the negative.

But what do I do now? I have no idea how to adjust the enlarger plane --- I don't see any knobs to change its tilt... so either I hit the enlarger head with a mallet or I try to tilt easel so it's crooked the same way as the enlarger.

 

[Alex Benjamin]

Just checking the basics: you do use a grain focuser, right?

 

[Alex Benjamin]

@dcy - I should have expanded my post. I you do use a grain focuser, with the negative in, put a piece of white paper on your easel (not photographic paper). Get proper focus on the middle of the photo. Once you have that, move the grain focuser up, down, and sideways. If you're not getting the same focus all over, then you do have alignment problem.

If you are not using a grain focuser, the problem may just be that you're trusting your eyes and they are deceiving you.

 

[Alex Benjamin]

Also note that the problem might have been with your old Olympus camera. I went back to your ealier post of the stop sign photo, and the problem is already there.

Help me diagnose my photos?

I just got around to developing a roll of Kentmere 100 that I had sitting in my fridge. I shot it with an ancient Olympus PEN EE, shortly prior to me upgrading to a Pentax 17. I'm pretty sure the exposure was set to EI 100. I developed it in D76 1+1 for 11 min. The Good: This is the best roll...

www.photrio.com

 

[dcy]

@dcy - I should have expanded my post. I you do use a grain focuser, with the negative in, put a piece of white paper on your easel (not photographic paper). Get proper focus on the middle of the photo. Once you have that, move the grain focuser up, down, and sideways. If you're not getting the same focus all over, then you do have alignment problem.

If you are not using a grain focuser, the problem may just be that you're trusting your eyes and they are deceiving you.

Yes, I am using a grain focuser, but I cannot guarantee that I am using it competently. I read instructions on how to calibrate it and I did my best, but it was finicky, and when I use it to focus, I find that the tiniest movement on the enlarger head is enough make the grains visible or invisible. What I usually do is get the focus in the right ballpark and then grab the grain focuser. I look through, see nothing, then I make the tiniest change to the enlarger that I am able to make, and then try again. Eventually I hit spot where I am able to discern the grain.

I have not been using a paper. I can try that. I also haven't been moving the grain focuser as much as I could have.

Also note that the problem might have been with your old Olympus camera. I went back to your ealier post of the stop sign photo, and the problem is already there.

Help me diagnose my photos?

I just got around to developing a roll of Kentmere 100 that I had sitting in my fridge. I shot it with an ancient Olympus PEN EE, shortly prior to me upgrading to a Pentax 17. I'm pretty sure the exposure was set to EI 100. I developed it in D76 1+1 for 11 min. The Good: This is the best roll...

www.photrio.com

I am sure that the camera is a problem, and I'm happy that now I have a better camera. But the fact that the DSLR scan looks less soft than the enlarger shows that I clearly also have a problem with my enlarger.

Let's assume my enlarger is indeed misaligned. What can I do? Perhaps try to tilt the easel to compensate?

Oh... I have an idea: The one that came with the enlarger and a wide-angle lens I've been using lately. I got that lens to be able to make 8x10 prints out of half-frame --- with the original lens I cannot get the head high enough to fill 8x10. But the prints I've posted were all 5x7. To make those, the enlarger head had to be very close to the easel. I didn't think it made any difference, but perhaps it exacerbates any misalignment and/or focusing inaccuracy. I should use my original lens for 5x7 prints and the wide-angle only for 8x10 prints to keep the enlarger head high up.

 

[Andrew O'Neill]

It's always a good feeling! I still remember my first good print. It took at least 2 years of hard work. Back then, there was NO internet to help guide us along. Consider yourself very fortunate.

 

[Alex Benjamin]

I am sure that the camera is a problem, and I'm happy that now I have a better camera. But the fact that the DSLR scan looks less soft than the enlarger shows that I clearly also have a problem with my enlarger.

Let's assume my enlarger is indeed misaligned. What can I do? Perhaps try to tilt the easel to compensate?

Oh... I have an idea: The one that came with the enlarger and a wide-angle lens I've been using lately. I got that lens to be able to make 8x10 prints out of half-frame --- with the original lens I cannot get the head high enough to fill 8x10. But the prints I've posted were all 5x7. To make those, the enlarger head had to be very close to the easel. I didn't think it made any difference, but perhaps it exacerbates any misalignment and/or focusing inaccuracy. I should use my original lens for 5x7 prints and the wide-angle only for 8x10 prints to keep the enlarger head high up.

Yes, lot's of simple tests you can do before fiddling with your enlarger. Start by making prints with negatives from your new camera; do the grain-focusing test across the print surface; use another lens; use better photographic paper. There's a good chance your enlarger is just fine.

 

[pentaxuser]

Yeah.

I cannot see the fuzzyness that you and @Alex Benjamin see, but I have another post with a picture of a train where I am convinced the image is very fuzzy on the corners, and I don't see that fuzziness in the DSLR scan. Below I include the scan (left) vs the print (right), and I also crop to the bottom-left corner.

So it is indeed a problem with the enlarger, not the negative.



View attachment 402075 View attachment 402076
View attachment 402077 View attachment 402078

Yes there is no doubt that the DSLR scan on the left has produced a better picture It looks much sharper. However can I ask how you did the DSLR scan? Was this a straight scan of the negative in the sense that you used a DSLR camera to take a picture of the negative? If so then how was a straight picture by a DSLR able to sharpen the focus or alter the look of the negative

I know nothing of DSLR pictures or what a scan of that DSLR picture is able to alter However it seems to me that unless a DSLR and scan can turn a fuzzy out of focus negative int sharp focus then doesn't that suggest the negative is in sharp focus and is capable of being printed OK ?

You might ask me why I have said all this when you yourself have said the same thing, namely that the enlarger must be at fault. However is it that simple as in your case isn't both the blocks on the platform out of focus and the leaves on the bush at the top right?

Before you conclude that the enlarger is at fault it might be worthwhile to check the enlarger focus again with a grain focuser. If is of any help I too find that with my grain focuser a very fine.i.e. very slight movement of the focus knob is enough to make the difference between the grain being fuzzy and in sharp focus It can take a bit of practice to get this right


Can I assume that on your enlarger you have a knob that raises and lowers the head which alters the size of the print but is much too coarse to be used for fine focus and for this you have a focusing knob?


You may well have an enlarger that is out of alignment but if that were the case then why is your other picture, the one you are rightly proud of in terms of the enlarger produced prints in much better focus?

Just some thoughts on my part Let us know yours after reading some of our replies. Thanks

pentaxuser

 

[MattKing]

Alignment issues can originate with the negative holder as well.
But whatever the cause, it remains a fact that small prints mean that the range of best focus is going to be small.

 

[dcy]

Was this a straight scan of the negative in the sense that you used a DSLR camera to take a picture of the negative?

Yes.

If so then how was a straight picture by a DSLR able to sharpen the focus or alter the look of the negative

It can't.

doesn't that suggest the negative is in sharp focus and is capable of being printed OK ?

My point exactly.

You might ask me why I have said all this when you yourself have said the same thing, namely that the enlarger must be at fault. However is it that simple as in your case isn't both the blocks on the platform out of focus and the leaves on the bush at the top right?

I saw that the leaves looked out of focus, but I wasn't sure because I'm not confident I can tell the difference between that and motion blur if the leaves are moving in the wind.

Before you conclude that the enlarger is at fault it might be worthwhile to check the enlarger focus again with a grain focuser. If is of any help I too find that with my grain focuser a very fine.i.e. very slight movement of the focus knob is enough to make the difference between the grain being fuzzy and in sharp focus It can take a bit of practice to get this right

But if it was just out of focus, wouldn't the entire image be out of focus? If the image is sharper in the middle than in the corners doesn't that mean that the easel and the enlarger head have slightly different planes of focus?

Can I assume that on your enlarger you have a knob that raises and lowers the head which alters the size of the print but is much too coarse to be used for fine focus and for this you have a focusing knob?

Yes, except the focusing knob also feels fairly coarse. But that might be my fault again for using a wide angle lens. Tonight I'm going to put back the original lens and move the head higher. I imagine that that will make the focusing knob less coarse.

You may well have an enlarger that is out of alignment but if that were the case then why is your other picture, the one you are rightly proud of in terms of the enlarger produced prints in much better focus?

Oh.... !!!!

I didn't think of that.... And that picture was taken with the exact same lens, and the head at the exact same height...

Ok. I'm stumped now.

Thank you for bringing that up. I need to think more.

 

[dcy]

But whatever the cause, it remains a fact that small prints mean that the range of best focus is going to be small.

I did not know that.

 

[dcy]

@dcy - I should have expanded my post. I you do use a grain focuser, with the negative in, put a piece of white paper on your easel (not photographic paper). Get proper focus on the middle of the photo. Once you have that, move the grain focuser up, down, and sideways. If you're not getting the same focus all over, then you do have alignment problem.

I just tried it. --- I cannot get the grain focuser to work except very close to the center of the image. As I move the grain focuser away from the center, the image circle starts to close (looks like an "eye") and disappears completely long before I've reached the edge of the image. My guess is that something casting a shadow / creating a pupil. I do notice that the mirror is slightly recessed inside an enclosure.

I have a Paterson Micro Focus Finder. I think I got it used. Can't remember where. I cannot imagine that it is intended to be so limiting, but then again, as far as I can tell my unit is in good condition.

 

[dcy]

I just found this old post by @MattKing :

Some grain focusers - Peak included - permit you to check the focus in the corners of the print.
Others require you to stay close to the centre.
Having the ability to check the corners is useful - particularly when printing large.

Well. I guess maybe I have one of the ones that only works close to the center.

 

[snusmumriken]

If your tests indicate that the enlarger is out of alignment, you can achieve a lot of correction using shims under one edge of the negative carrier. I used cereal packet cardboard, one layer at a time until I got things right. Then I cut tidier bits of the same card and glued them in. They’ve been there for about 15 years now.

 

[dcy]

If your tests indicate that the enlarger is out of alignment, you can achieve a lot of correction using shims under one edge of the negative carrier. I used cereal packet cardboard, one layer at a time until I got things right. Then I cut tidier bits of the same card and glued them in. They’ve been there for about 15 years now.

Thanks for the tip!

 

[GregY]

I just tried it. --- I cannot get the grain focuser to work except very close to the center of the image. As I move the grain focuser away from the center, the image circle starts to close (looks like an "eye") and disappears completely long before I've reached the edge of the image. My guess is that something casting a shadow / creating a pupil. I do notice that the mirror is slightly recessed inside an enclosure.

I have a Paterson Micro Focus Finder. I think I got it used. Can't remember where. I cannot imagine that it is intended to be so limiting, but then again, as far as I can tell my unit is in good condition.

It is typical for a grain focuser to do that, especially the ones with a round small mirror. Even with the Peak with the large rectangular mirror, I can't see to the edge of the print.
Re: alignment... the negative stage, lens, baseboard & easel, all need to be aligned....parallel to one another.
Sometime takes some work to make that happen.

 

[MattKing]

I just found this old post by @MattKing :



Well. I guess maybe I have one of the ones that only works close to the center.

The issue is accentuated for you because you are using a high magnification, short focal length enlarging lens.
It is just one of the results of enlarging from very small negatives with the relatively short enlarger you have.
Those of us who use longer lenses with bigger film formats and taller enlargers don't struggle with the problem until the focus finder is closer to the corners of the image.
Which lens are you using - focal length, brand and model, maximum aperture?
If the lens is of reasonable quality, it should be able to give you sharp corners when stopped a couple of stops down from the widest opening - assuming it is in good condition.

 

[koraks]

Oh... I have an idea: The one that came with the enlarger and a wide-angle lens I've been using lately. I got that lens to be able to make 8x10 prints out of half-frame --- with the original lens I cannot get the head high enough to fill 8x10.

This is probably part of the issue. Please see @MattKing's questions above:

Which lens are you using - focal length, brand and model, maximum aperture?

I suspect that the wide angle lens you're using has considerable field curvature. As a result, when focusing the projected image, you essentially have the choice to either get the center of the image in focus, or the corners, but not both. Maybe the lens is really intended to be used with e.g. minox negatives (8x11mm). To an extent you may be able to ameliorate the problem by stopping down lots and rely on depth of field to compromise your way out of it, sacrificing some sharpness to diffraction in the process.

Either way, I'd start by just using a reasonably good 50mm enlarging lens and then see how it goes. Save the weird stuff for later.

Also, keep in mind that if you have 4 unsharp corners and a sharp center frame, then misalignment of the enlarger can NEVER be the cause of the problem. Don't waste time on that tangent.

 

[dcy]

Which lens are you using - focal length, brand and model, maximum aperture?

My main lens --- the one that came with the enlarger, and the one I intend to use for 5x7 prints --- is a Rodenstock, 50 mm, f/2.8

The wide angle lens that I got for 8x10 prints is a Spiratone, 35mm, f/3.5

 

[dcy]

I suspect that the wide angle lens you're using has considerable field curvature....

Either way, I'd start by just using a reasonably good 50mm enlarging lens and then see how it goes. Save the weird stuff for later.

Also, keep in mind that if you have 4 unsharp corners and a sharp center frame, then misalignment of the enlarger can NEVER be the cause of the problem. Don't waste time on that tangent.

Oh... I did not consider field curvature. I assumed that if it was made for an enlarger then it has an essentially flat field. Also didn't realize that wide angle would be weird stuff. The focal length is 35 mm.

In any event, the original 50 mm Rodenstock lens is back on the enlarger. Next time I'm in the darkroom I will try to find a negative with enough detail in the corners to figure out if I have 2 unsharp corners or 4.

 

[koraks]

I assumed that if it was made for an enlarger then it has an essentially flat field.

Ideally, yes. No guarantees.

See how it goes with the 50mm Rodenstock. On the train photo, there's a chance that the bottom left and top right corners are unsharp, but the other two are OK. That could still be consistent with an alignment issue, although it's a little odd to have opposing corners go unsharp. It would mean a misalignment on both the x and y axis. What's especially odd is that in the stop-sign print, at least the bottom two corners appeared to be unsharp, suggesting a different misalignment pattern (if it's misalignment in the first place). It doesn't hurt to double check whether your film carrier sits firmly in the enlarger and there are no protrusions etc that make it slide in at an offset somehow. Also ensure that your easel sits on a flat surface, is level and doesn't wobble.

 

[snusmumriken]

Make yourself a test negative, as follows. Take a piece of black, developed film, such as a film leader. Lightly scratch a grid of fine lines on the emulsion side, using a very sharp point, such as the tip of a knife. It doesn’t have to be neat. Put this in your enlarger (emulsion down, of course), open the aperture fully, and study the projected pattern (with all the other lights off). The back of a scrap print makes a better focusing surface than the shiny enlarger easel. You’ll be able to see clearly where any unsharpness lies. You don’t need an expensive grain focusser for this.

 

[khh]

Remember to stop down the enlarger lens from wide open when you're done composing and focusing and are ready to start making test strips and print. With the Rodenstock, the sharpest setting would probably be around f/4 to f/5.6 (assuming you don't need depth of field to compensate for other issues).

If you do go down the path of checking the alignment of your enlarger, The Naked Photographer has a pretty good series on en larger alignment. But he doesn't have your spesific enlarger, unfortunately.