[pure-silver] Re: Contrast paper developer
- From: İbrahim Pamuk <ibrahim.pamuk@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: <pure-silver@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 15 Aug 2007 17:36:45 +0300
Hi,
Your are right about my enlargers. I will as soon as possible try to print on
both enlargers to see the difference. One thing is that my old one was Meopta
of nearly 30 years. I thought that Durst will be better without trying so I
have to re-mount very thing. I did have a Nikon on previous one as a lens, I
have taken it to Durst against its Comparon. That might be another test and see
case for the lens. Meopta did not even have a filter drawer, but one way or
another I was able to print. I know understand that color head is not a must
for B&W where I thought should be needed.
Again thanks for the comments. I appreciate very much.
Ibrahim Pamuk
-----Original Message-----
From: pure-silver-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:pure-silver-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Claudio Bonavolta
Sent: Wednesday, August 15, 2007 1:23 PM
To: pure-silver@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [pure-silver] Re: Contrast paper developer
----- Message d'origine -----
De: İbrahim Pamuk <ibrahim.pamuk@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 15 Aug 2007 11:54:01 +0300
Sujet: [pure-silver] Re: Contrast paper developer
À: <pure-silver@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>Hi,
>
>After getting the idea of faded dichroïc filters, I have checked with below
>lens filters. It seems that the below lens filters are more dense based on
>grade 4.5 and 5 but I have seen little effect when printed seperately. So
>being dense or darker means fading or actually they may allow about same
>wavelength? Any comments?
>
>Regards
>
>
>Ibrahim Pamuk
Faded filters are visually less dense but the filters for use below the lens
are usually tinted in the mass while those usually in color/multigrade heads
are dichroïc (i.e. a very thin deposit on the filter's surface reflects the
undesired wavelengths).
Due to this technological difference, comparing them visually is not evident,
you should print with both to see their respective effects.
If you don't have a sensible difference, then your enlargers' filters are not
faded (or both are !) and the problem is elsewhere.
Try to print the same negative on your condenser enlarger *without* filters. If
it prints on the soft side then your normal development time is probably to
short and this is more evident when using a diffused light.
If it prints normal or on the hard side, then I don't know, as 2-3 grades
difference between a diffused and condensed light seems to much.
Just one more question, I suppose your condenser enlarger uses a tungsten bulb
and your diffused enlarger a halogen bulb, am I right ?
Good luck,
Claudio Bonavolta
http://www.bonavolta.ch
====================================To unsubscribe from this list, go to
www.freelists.org and logon to your account (the same e-mail address and
password you set-up when you subscribed,) and unsubscribe from there.
============================================================================================================To
unsubscribe from this list, go to www.freelists.org and logon to your account
(the same e-mail address and password you set-up when you subscribed,) and
unsubscribe from there.
Other related posts:
