Gerald Koch wrote: > The problem with enlarging meters of this type is that you must first > calibrate them for each paper.. This requires making a good print > for each paper you use.. Keep a record of the meter reading and paper > type. Then for each new negative you need to meter an area of equal > density to the calibration negative using your eye. Essentially you > only eliminate the first test strip and get in the right ball park > for exposure. Most people try this a few times and the meter gets > put away in a dusty drawer never to be used again. This is why most > ads say something to the effect "like new in original box." > I got a Beseler color analyzer that I use as an enlarging meter. I do not use it to print a new negative on a new piece of paper. But when I have a good print on an 8x10 inch piece of paper and want to make a print on 11x14 or something like that, I use it to get the exposure right at the different magnification. This assumes that the paper speeds of the paper are the same, but with the same paper, that is usually close enough for me for most images. It saves time and paper. But to put a new negative in and a different kind of paper, I would not bother. -- .~. Jean-David Beyer Registered Linux User 85642. /V\ PGP-Key:3EDBB65E 9A2FC99A Registered Machine 241939. /( )\ Shrewsbury, New Jersey http://counter.li.org ^^-^^ 13:40:01 up 25 days, 20:41, 3 users, load average: 4.59, 4.51, 4.30 ============================================================================================================= 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.