Enlarger Recommendations

[clubgrit]

I don't have the luxury of space for a dedicated darkroom, only a small bathroom. Can anyone recommend a good reasonably sized (and priced) enlarger ? I see a lot on eBay, but still not aware of which brands are good - Beseler, Omega, Durst (probably out, saw a giant one at almost $24K on eBay !), Rodenstock lenses, etc.

Thanks ...

[fastshot]

Besides the 3 brands you mentioned, there are also Kaiser, Meopta, Leica, etc. If you're thinking of just trying out, buy any of the used German or Japanese machines. In fact buy everything used if available. The only really important items are the enlarger lens and a reliable power supply for the lamp. Play around with this for maybe 1 year. After that if you still want to continue with the dark/wet room, you will know exactly what top end stuff you like to get. Alternatively, for phase 2, you may want to get a good film scanner and go digital b/w printing.

IMHO, at the rate ink jets printers are improving, I think it is far easier to get good b/w prints going the digital route. The traditional b/w print is great if you have a very good negative and has good darkroom skills printing on fibre paper and a good glazing machine.

[student]

Originally Posted by fastshot Besides the 3 brands you mentioned, there are also Kaiser, Meopta, Leica, etc. If you're thinking of just trying out, buy any of the used German or Japanese machines. In fact buy everything used if available. The only really important items are the enlarger lens and a reliable power supply for the lamp. Play around with this for maybe 1 year. After that if you still want to continue with the dark/wet room, you will know exactly what top end stuff you like to get. Alternatively, for phase 2, you may want to get a good film scanner and go digital b/w printing. IMHO, at the rate ink jets printers are improving, I think it is far easier to get good b/w prints going the digital route. The traditional b/w print is great if you have a very good negative and has good darkroom skills printing on fibre paper and a good glazing machine.

I am afraid that I cannot agree with some of your comments.

There are a lot of things to look out for in an enlarger. The lens is only one of the things, and is replaceable. Power supply is plentiful in Singapore. If you are talking about the timer switch for thelight source, again most of the time, it is an electrical issue, and can be easily dealt with.

What is very important in an enlarger is the alignment. The poorer quality used ones may not be able to stand up to aging. And one will have to be careful to check this. Negative placement etc all have to be looked into.

Leica do not make enlarger any more. The Leica V35 is excellent, together with the superb Focomat lens. This is expensive. I sold mine a few years ago.

If you have kept up with this subforum, you will also notice that the TS is doing medium format photography. And the V35 is a 35 mm enlarger. Leica medium format enlarger are very very old.

Digital B&W is very good. And I wil suggest to many to look to this route if they do not have what is takes to do traditional B&W.

However, irrespective of the quality of digital B&W, it will always be different from traditional B&W, because they are totally different medium.

[jtb]

Originally Posted by clubgrit I don't have the luxury of space for a dedicated darkroom, only a small bathroom. Can anyone recommend a good reasonably sized (and priced) enlarger ? I see a lot on eBay, but still not aware of which brands are good - Beseler, Omega, Durst (probably out, saw a giant one at almost $24K on eBay !), Rodenstock lenses, etc. Thanks ...

Durst is not bad as I have been using a few models of theirs bought from Ruby.

[clubgrit]

Yes, Durst seems to have been king ... but now,

http://www.photografica.dk/news/defa...gory=39&id=454

Originally Posted by jtb Durst is not bad as I have been using a few models of theirs bought from Ruby.

[clubgrit]

Well, fastshot, I am a digital user converted to film. "Unfortunately", I see what friends see in film-based prints, whether color or B&W. I see more life and soul, even with those left at the mercy of the labs, but that's just me and others will see differently. Or maybe I just like the character of my chosen film camera, since I also somehow like the digital output (but still not close enough to give up the film part) when it is used with its digital back (sample digital photos at http://www.hasselbladinfo.com/discus...s/4/26201.html)

They are different mediums, as student pointed out, I just prefer the print from the old medium better. I won't debate on digital versus film, digital has its own magic.

As for scanners, I already tried it with a high-end scanner, I see more value in just using the DSLR to shoot if I have to scan the film anyway even with a high-end scanner for printing later, unless I need an image to blow up huge. Other use is for digital archiving.

But all these are today, digital quality or post-processing software will improve later in the future.

So that leaves the enlarger, as printing several 5s and 8s prints from the labs is truly expensive (I print a lot, and am a sucker for large prints). And of course, it would be better to have total control, and I will blame only myself for any screw-ups. I also think I will find it more fulfilling.

[canturn]

So far, the enlarger that is really nice to use is the De Vere 504 with the Ilford Multispeed 500C. Had it for a while until my kid came along and darkroom had to go. The design is really great, think student had a 203 before.

The only prob is, the parts are hard to find and astronomically priced even for 2nd hand ones on ebay - for example, the diffusion chamber itself would cost like USD$120.00, the negative carrier for xpan was like USD$250.00.

I used to shoot weddings with tri-x film and have them handprinted on fibre based paper for the couple. Unfortunately, request for these kind of prints is really few nowadays, though I still shoot some b&w film for wedings, I'm outsourcing the printing to other folks.

[student]

Originally Posted by canturn So far, the enlarger that is really nice to use is the De Vere 504 with the Ilford Multispeed 500C. Had it for a while until my kid came along and darkroom had to go. The design is really great, think student had a 203 before. The only prob is, the parts are hard to find and astronomically priced even for 2nd hand ones on ebay - for example, the diffusion chamber itself would cost like USD$120.00, the negative carrier for xpan was like USD$250.00. I used to shoot weddings with tri-x film and have them handprinted on fibre based paper for the couple. Unfortunately, request for these kind of prints is really few nowadays, though I still shoot some b&w film for wedings, I'm outsourcing the printing to other folks.

I will not hesitate to recommend the 504 (up to 4x5" negative) or 203 (up to 6x7 cm negative). These are wonderful enlargers. As far as I am aware, the old ones are being refurbished and new ones are being made in China. I will not worry about the parts.

However, I do not think I will recommend the Durst or the DeVere fot clubgrit because these are heavy enlargers, even the smaller medium format ones. And I am not sure within the constraints of a more or less temporary set up, such heavy duty ones are suitable. But I am also unable to advise others because I do not know enough on other enlargers.

Be careful about purchasing from eBay, because most use the 110V. And using a transsformer might be a slight hassle.

There are enlargers around Singapore. Spread the words around, and I am sure you will get offers in not the too distant future.

[canturn]

Originally Posted by student I will not hesitate to recommend the 504 (up to 4x5" negative) or 203 (up to 6x7 cm negative). These are wonderful enlargers. As far as I am aware, the old ones are being refurbished and new ones are being made in China. I will not worry about the parts.

The 504 that I bought over was about 20 years old, it's rock sturdy and built like a mount for launching missles. If you really want to get a smaller enlarger, the other way is to wall mount it, which means it is more permanent and you need to do it really well to make sure everything's properly aligned when you mount

Not sure about the 203, but the best thing about the De Vere is the 2 knobs for focusing and raising the housing unit is placed below, comfortable at waist level.

Hmm, parts wise, I know Ruby photo no longer carries De Vere except for the anti-newton glass that cost like $350.00.

[student]

Originally Posted by canturn Not sure about the 203, but the best thing about the De Vere is the 2 knobs for focusing and raising the housing unit is placed below, comfortable at waist level.

Same thing.

Those knobs are wonderful!

[jtb]

Originally Posted by clubgrit Well, fastshot, I am a digital user converted to film. "Unfortunately", I see what friends see in film-based prints, whether color or B&W. I see more life and soul, even with those left at the mercy of the labs, but that's just me and others will see differently. Or maybe I just like the character of my chosen film camera, since I also somehow like the digital output (but still not close enough to give up the film part) when it is used with its digital back (sample digital photos at http://www.hasselbladinfo.com/discus...s/4/26201.html) They are different mediums, as student pointed out, I just prefer the print from the old medium better. I won't debate on digital versus film, digital has its own magic. As for scanners, I already tried it with a high-end scanner, I see more value in just using the DSLR to shoot if I have to scan the film anyway even with a high-end scanner for printing later, unless I need an image to blow up huge. Other use is for digital archiving. But all these are today, digital quality or post-processing software will improve later in the future. So that leaves the enlarger, as printing several 5s and 8s prints from the labs is truly expensive (I print a lot, and am a sucker for large prints). And of course, it would be better to have total control, and I will blame only myself for any screw-ups. I also think I will find it more fulfilling.

Durst M670BW, Meopta & Modular 70 Vario were some good and rugged enlargers.

[ratboy]

Originally Posted by jtb Durst M670BW, Meopta & Modular 70 Vario were some good and rugged enlargers.

Yeep... i used a Meopta Magnifax 4 before
can handle film up to 6x9 cm
not so heavy that you can't move it w/out dismantling

you can prob find used ones for a few hundred S$

For same amount
you can prob find durst L1000 used too
can handle film size to 4x5 inch
more rugged build and more adjustablity
but real heavy, must dismantle to pieces to shift
unless you are body builder

[iggy]

Many of the enlargers mentioned earlier would be alright, though some would be not sturdy enough for my personal liking.

Think the first thing you'd need to define is how large you'd be printing. Work out the space you need in your "small" darkroom for all the trays and washing.

You may not have a lot of space in a bathroom do do both exposure and processing. You may consider doing the dry stuff - exposing, burning, dodging, etc. in another room. Then transporting the exposed print to the wet area (bathroom) in a black bag, the kind that holds unexposed photographic paper.

Bear in mind that wherever you put your enlarger, it's got to be absolutely sturdy and vibration free.

Anyways, after you determine the size of your prints and the space needed, you can work out what size an enlarger you'll need. Next, determine what type of paper you'll be printing on - standard or multigrade, this will define what type of head (lightsource) you'll need.

Just bear in mind that an enlarger is made out of four fundamental components:
• Chasis
• Lightsource
• Regulated power supply
• Baseboard

For great prints, nothing beats a good lens - a Rodenstock or a Schneider. Also get a good timer.

But I cannot stress more at this time, the most IMPORTANT thing that you should consider first is ventilation. If you can't ventilate the bathroom properly, I'd strongly suggest not going ahead with this.

[ratboy]

not that i advocate a unventilated darkroom
but short sessions in air con unvented darkroom did not seem to have caused me any
permernant demage : )
( doing b&w only, no C41 or E6 or other exotic process )
YMMV

another alternative is to drum process your prints
so after exposing on paper
the wet process is done in drums made for paper processing,
and can be done in lighted areas outdoors or any where you select
you lose the tray convenience etc etc
but better then no darkroom work....

[iggy]

Originally Posted by ratboy not that i advocate a unventilated darkroom but short sessions in air con unvented darkroom did not seem to have caused me any permernant demage : ) ( doing b&w only, no C41 or E6 or other exotic process ) YMMV another alternative is to drum process your prints so after exposing on paper the wet process is done in drums made for paper processing, and can be done in lighted areas outdoors or any where you select you lose the tray convenience etc etc but better then no darkroom work....

I did consider it, but I doubt Clubgrit's going to have an air conditioned bathroom though - which is why I stressed the importance.

Drums are alright, though not ideal (perhaps I'm a traditionalist). They're more expensive and don't give you that extra amount of control at developer stage. They're also more expensive. They're definitely less messy, though.

[canturn]

Originally Posted by iggy I did consider it, but I doubt Clubgrit's going to have an air conditioned bathroom though - which is why I stressed the importance. Drums are alright, though not ideal (perhaps I'm a traditionalist). They're more expensive and don't give you that extra amount of control at developer stage. They're also more expensive. They're definitely less messy, though.

U can try the Nova vertical print processors, saves A LOT of space...printing 12x16 with those, takes up very little space compared to 3 + 1 tray. And best part is, after a print session, just cover the top and you can re-use the chemicals later and less of the liquid will evaporate because of smaller surface.

[iggy]

Originally Posted by canturn U can try the Nova vertical print processors, saves A LOT of space...printing 12x16 with those, takes up very little space compared to 3 + 1 tray. And best part is, after a print session, just cover the top and you can re-use the chemicals later and less of the liquid will evaporate because of smaller surface.

Good call Canturn! That's probably a decent solution is Clubgrit has enough $$ for the set up.

If you do go for it, Clubgrit, make sure you get the Fiber version, btw.

[clubgrit]

Thanks, all

Those Nova products are very interesting indeed. Just saw their website, and it seems they've done their homework. Will look into it further ...

[iggy]

Originally Posted by clubgrit Thanks, all Those Nova products are very interesting indeed. Just saw their website, and it seems they've done their homework. Will look into it further ...

Good luck with the set up, btw. Oh yah, you might want to consider filtering your water for film processing.