[pure-silver] Re: help with finding an 4x5" enlarger

I agree, I cut them from thin black plastic.





Regards



Ralph W. Lambrecht

http://www.darkroomagic.com







On 2006-01-31 19:53, "Sandor Mathe" <sandorm@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> 
> I am lucky to have a Durst 138. I have the mixing chambers for 5x7" (13x8cm)
> and 6x9 cm.  I've never used the 6x9 chamber, though if I were to print 35mm
> with this enlarger I may try it.
> 
> I agree with Lloyd that the glass carrier for your largest negative is all you
> need.  You can make a mask from a sheet of waste film or black paper for all
> the smaller formats.
> 
> Sandor  
> 
> 
> 
> Gianni Rondinini <bugbarbeq@xxxxxxx>
> Sent by: pure-silver-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx 01/31/2006 12:48 PM
> Please respond to
> pure-silver 
> To 
> pure-silver@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> cc
> Subject 
> [pure-silver] Re: help with finding an 4x5" enlarger
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On Tue, 31 Jan 2006 12:09:22 -0500, you (Lloyd Erlick
> <lloyd@xxxxxxxxxxxx>) wrote:
> 
>> >I've been using an L1200 for a decade. I bought it brand new, and I went a
>> >little overboard on the trimmings. I bought all the little doodads that
> [...]
>> >work the price down. I think it's still possible to buy anti-Newton
>> >negative carrier glasses from Durst if a new one seems in order.
> 
> this is a very good suggestion. thanks lloyd.
> since you've used it longly with all the accessories, i trust in the
> fact longer/shorter exposures don't make that difference.
> 
> and i'd like to say once more, since i know some friends of a similar
> italian list are subscribed to this one, too, that i'm quite a newbie
> in darkroom, then i probably wouldn't able to notice any difference.
> 
> i fell a little bit ashamed saying this, but i have 2 different
> condensers for my agfa enlarger and can't find *any* difference
> between them. i know one is for 135 and one is for 120->6x9, but i
> can't figure out which.
> 
>> >But if I had to use condenser, I'd definitely see if the 4x5 condenser set
>> >did the trick for smaller formats. The added brightness just isn't worth
>> >the huge money.
> 
> ok, thank you once more.
> 
> regards,

Other related posts: