• 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

The precise enlarger...

I have for my Bessler MX a mounted Scheinder 135mm for 4x5 that is fitted with an adjustable lens board from I think the old Zone IV Studios. Its a two-part board, with a large rubber (?) piece in-between, and three screws connecting the two boards, which then allows a micro amount of adjustment for the lens to Neg stage. It seems pretty well thought out, but I don't do much 4x5, and according to my Veraslab Laser, it does do what its supposed to do. I think some good ideas are yet to be discovered in alignment.
 
It is, and has been for a long time, my opinion that the world has never been fortunate enough to have a truly precise large format enlarger. I've had an Beseler MX, an Omega D2, looked at a Beseler 57 once, and 45VXL, fiddled with a number of Omega D5's and 6's, and attempted to buy a handfull Durst L1000's and L1200's, and have found all of them wanting in some way or another. Beselers are built with the precision of a VW Bug (not the new ones, mind you, though they aren't much better), Omegas are perhaps a better-conceived and more complete system, though with the exception of the lens-stage alignment system on the 5500, they too are lacking in design finess and a complete range of adjustments standard across models. Tabletop LF Dursts are very finely made, but their rarity due to a number of factors has made them lucky finds at affordable prices, and they really only shine as precision instruments when all the bits and pieces are present and accounted for. Tracking Durst parts down is an art in itself and not unlike collecting vintage wristwatches.

If I were to invest in a large-format enlarger system at this point, I would probably set out to buy an Omega D5/6 chassis, one of the new LED heads, a wall-brace kit, and make a valiant attempt to retrofit a D5500's lens stage to it. If ultimate precision were the goal, I'd probably opt for the condenser LED head over the VC model, and then spend a long afternoon with my engineer's level and a Versalab alignment laser.

In theory, and if one had enough time and energy and cash resources to devote to the system, the probable ideal would most likely be a Durst L1200 Vari-Point. Unfortunately, they are impossibly rare, and even when found, the bulbs have been out of production for years and years.

For the small format crowd, the Leitz V35 is an absolutely unparalleled piece of equipment. My only wishes are that the negative carrier had 2 pieces of glass instead of just one, and that the markings for setting the column height relative to the baseboard were not so chunky. Beyond that, hook up a Heiland Splitgrade and the new Heiland LED light source, and you've got probably the best small format enlarging system ever conceived.

Until somebody comes up with something with that kind of build quality and well-thought engineering, I'll be sticking to contact prints.

Sigh...
 

I think I remember seeing these, thanks for mentioning it!

Captain_joe6 said:
Beyond that, hook up a Heiland Splitgrade and the new Heiland LED light source, and you've got probably the best small format enlarging system ever conceived.
Click to expand...

I recently priced this system out through RH Designs and in 4x5 it was around $2,400 US before shipping. In some ways, I have the money but I would rather do like you said and get a chassis and then build a custom enlarger in terms of adjustment from the ground up, then decide what size LED source to get which could end up being 5x7 for coverage.

If there is no heat involved like there is not with the LED light sources, you can work with hybrid materials like carbon fiber and aluminum. Personally, I think this would be a blast to do and highly rewarding in the resulting product.
 
While we are complaining about enlargers being imprecise, can we also complain about them leaking light? I boggles my mind why enlarger manufacturers just unanimously decided that it was ok for enlargers to leak light all over the place...in a darkroom.
 
RidingWaves said:
That's it! The Delta One Bes Align. I didn't know you could still find those new!
Click to expand...

Can you bore it out to 50mm or are you stuck at 39?
 
Michael R 1974 said:
Can we also complain about view camera alignment/precision? Might as well start with that, no? I seem to remember a certain PKM-25 calling me out on that...
Click to expand...

If enlargers had half the adjustments of my lowly 45N-2 I would have never even started this thread..
 
What annoys me about MY enlarger (D2 and DII) is that I spend time aligning it just right, then move the caridge up and down, and measure again, it's OFF AGAIN! Extend the bellows and collapse, repeat, and measure, it's OFF AGAIN. Remove the neg carrier out and put it in again.... you guessed it, it's OFF AGAIN!

My prints are much better than before the alignment but it keeping PRECISE alignment, it's not possible.
 
I am surprised no one has mentioned DeVere enlargers.

They have very precise and intuitively obvious adjustments for the negative , Lens Stage and Baseboard.

The only thing missing is a Helical Focus capability a la Focomat,

I was very disappointed with the Omega B22 and B66 as it had no lens stage adjustment what so ever.

Emerson in Kanata Ontario
 
Omega D5 Enlarger Alignment


Very true.

I have an Omega D5XL. It's wall-mounted and cross-braced with a set of DIY custom heavy-duty threaded rods and individually adjustable turnbuckles. Using these turnbuckles I can control front-to-back tilt of the overall unit and rotation around the vertical axis at the base mounting plate to a coarse degree. But for fine adjustments you must use the controls mentioned by Mike.

I ran across this Omega D5 alignment page on the Zig-Align website that might be worth posting for future APUG search references.

It describes a brief procedure for aligning the lens stage of this enlarger using both the eccentric rods and set screws (front-to-back tilt) and the adjustable brake track (side-to-side position). First the lens stage is adjusted. Then the negative stage is independently adjusted using its side-mount bolts. A diagram is included.

According to the above guide, alignment of an Omega D2 "is not the same in detail, but it is similar in general."

Ken
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I'm glad this thread has some sensibility going on in it and some legs to boot. I just think that enlargers, being not more than heavy duty heat resistant view cameras pointed downward have room for improvement. Until I get a proper darkroom space, I have to make do with my "Volkswagen" 45MX and my Versalab and maybe some home made tricks.

I think lightweight LED VC light sources can open up a lot of new possibilities in designing slick hybrid enlargers from the ground up. I look forward to messing with it when I have the room and cash...

If you were to design an mulit-format enlarger for black and white multigrade printing from the ground up and had a decent budget, what would you do?
 
Well I'd probably use the already existing Bessler 45 series neg holders, lots of them around and they work well and can be modified. I like the Bes-align idea of three screws to align things, I'd make the neg stage and lens stage have it so I could dial in both those relative to the paper stage.
 
Precision pro enlargers have certainly been made! They just cost fifty or even a hundred times more
at the time than the typical Beseler or Omega. Today's aluminum extrusions and CNC-cut plate stock
are no match for old-school machined die-castings and solid alloys. You'll never see that kind of
quality again; nor will many labs be interested in spending 75K or more on a new enlarger! I could
easily spend 50K on a state-of-the-art colorhead alone - and that's just the cost of the materials and components (but I obviously never will). For now I'd just like more time to enjoy the enlargers
I already have built!
 
A possible solution would be to utilize a helical focusing mount combined with threaded lens cones to ensure that the lens and film stages are always in perfect alignment. From there, just add X- and Y-axis adjustments to the entire head assembly so that it could be aligned to the baseboard. Slap on a VC LED hybrid light source and mount the whole head to a strong column with geared height adjustment, brace it to the wall, and call it a day. Ideal construction would be a lightweight head and a rigid column attached to an MDF or ABS baseboard (for dimensional stability and precision of machining) to reduce pendulum vibration as much as possible.

Or can't someone please just make a new Graflarger back with LED's?
 
Sounds like ya wanna build a doghouse there, using scraps behind some Home Depot, Capn Joe, not anything precise. Warp-free those things definitely are not. Even heavy Garolite phenolic will warp
if not properly countertensioned. What Durst did in the old days was really clever and fancy: they
made the baseboard out of matched lumber-core strips, clad them front and back with formica, then
dadoed in a precision bronze strip diagonal in the backside to counter-pull any temp-induced warp
on the upper, replete with precise little adjustment pins to reset the tension - and that didn't work
either !! The "baseboard" on my 8x10 color enlarger was salvaged off a 22-ft long process camera.
It's a machined steel vac easel with a full set of registration pins. I added an adjustable masking frame. It won't warp. In fact, I can stand on the thing. But it weighs about 400 lbs.
 
Drew,

Nothing so particularly crude as a dog house, and certainly not a part on the thing from

Now that I think of it, the plate bases used on hand lithography press beds might be of the right sort of design, as they have to absolutely flat, perfectly smooth, and free from warp after repeated exposure to extremely high pressures. At my alma matter (which I still do some technical consulting for), we'd have them custom ordered to spec, made from some sort of fiber-reinforced resinous plastic. Similar idea to Garolite, but with a much more visible reinforcement weave. Dense as hell, and they get the job done. Only time they get retired is when some idiot comes along and thinks they know how to lift and maneuver that sort of load, then it inevitably hits the floor and chips. They've started replacing them with aluminum, so that when (not if!) they get dropped, the dents can just be filed away.

Agreed, creating a flat plane that is completely free of warping is a very difficult task. Perhaps a different solution would be to make the baseboard from some nice wood laminate, and couple it to a vacuum easel with some sort of leveling mount. At that point, any deviation from perfect flatness should be inconsequential in terms of the optical system.

Speaking of lithography, another potential base material could be stone. Couple the column to a metal leveling base like the Durst L1000s and then put a slab of stone on top of that. Weighs the whole thing down, good dimensional stability, easy to come by. Might have a winner.
 
Stone it is! My next baseboard for my Leica Ic which has suffered termite damage will be granite I think.
 
Cap'n Joe: before this current era of composites, there was a product called Benelex which weighed
a ton and had to be machined with diamond. It ate carbide alive, but was dimensionally stable, and
was ridiculously impact resistant, but not resistant to strong solvents. I still have a film punch made
on it. What I did for my enlarger column is take a highly stable kind of strand structural beam material, with phenolic glue throughout, squared it off on our 600V 22" table saw here, pickled the
whole thing with penetrating epoxy, then fully laminated it with black formica and extruded edging.
I did this both for sheer support (I live just a few blocks from the infamous Hayward fault), as well
as for precision. I can fine focus a neg up to say 30X40, leave it in there all winter, come back,
and the focus will still be perfect.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register