Beseler 45MCRX & Aristo light

[Carlos]

Hello everyone,

I just received the 45mcrx enlarger. Top condender was broken. It does not have cooling glass.
I am planning to replace the light source with the Aristo. They recomended the D2-HI high intensity version. I only do B&W.
My question is,
Do I need the condensers (glass pieces original to the enlarger)? and
Where/Type of filters for VC papers go?
Lens, I think a 135 & 150?

I look all over this forum/internet and got some information but the 2 top questions are still missing.
Regards,

[Eric Wagner]

You won't need the condensers as the Aristo unit will replace the entire condenser housing. You will need to order a "Beseler collar" with the Aristo unit. This enlarger was designed to accept VC filters in a small drawer just above the lens. The filter frames were 2 3/8" square and I don't think they are available in that size anymore. You can either make your own or buy a kit to use filters under the lens.

[Robert A. Zeichner]

The Aristo cold light sources eliminate the need for condensers. You will want to adjust the top half of the bellows assembly to its most compressed mode, bringing the light source as close to the negative as possible. At least that's the way it works on my 45MXII. If you haven't already purchased the head, you might want to consider the VCL-4500 variable contrast dual grid cold light from Aristo. This will eliminate the need for filters and provide a very accurate and repeatable way to achieve many steps of contrast between 0 and 5. I've been using this for years and have grown to love it, so much so that I recently purchased a VCL5x7 for my newly acquired Durst 138.

[Brian Ellis]

I second Robert's recommendation of the Aristo VCL head. I used mine for about 10 years and absolutely loved it (I stopped using it only because I now print digitally). It's far more convenient than filters, allows greater flexibility in contrast, and because it was so easy to use I was much more inclined to use different contrasts in different parts of the print than I would have been if I had to fiddle around with filters every time I wanted to burn areas at different contrasts (the ability to do that is the principal advantage of using VC papers). The cost new is substantial (about $1,000) compared to filters and I don't look at the darkroom section of ebay so I don't know how often they come up used but think of it as a once-in-a-liftime purchase and something from which you will reap benefits every time you step into the darkroom.

[Carlos]

Thank you very much for your responses. Again I love this forum.
Regards,

[Richard Schlesinger]

Check out Ctein's book Post Exposure. He answers all your questions, particularly the difference between condenser and cold light sources. He lays out his methodology so you can replicate his research. I am currently using an Aristo with filters underneath the lens and can not find any difference with filters above the lens.

[Harold_4074]

Carlos--

You didn't actually ask this, but I would offer the observation that you may not really want the high-intensity version of the Aristo. I went for the high-intensity V54 (I think it was) lamp on the assumption that shorter exposure times would reduce the problem of vibration (since my darkroom has a fairly flimsy wood floor).

What I found was that unless I was enlarging 4x5 to 11x14 or more (which I rarely do) the exposure times are almost too short to be practical. Stopping the lens down to f/22 or beyond is not the best strategy for sharpness, and even at that I usually have exposures (8x10 full-frame) in the 7--10 second range. Dodging and burning are pretty iffy, and a half-second change in time sometimes makes a noticeable difference. I'm seriously considering a neutral density filter between the light source and negative to make printing easier with the lens closer to critical aperture. I could well have saved a bit of money and bought the standard lamp, instead of the high-intensity one, in the first place.

[Carlos]

Harold, thanks for the heads up. Aristo mentioned the high intensity. Yeah, anyhing that cuts time is fine. However, according to the times that you are telling me ... dodging may be imposible (meaning very difficult.)

I'll check out Ctein's book Post Exposure (Is Ctein the author?)

Well so far this is what I understand,
Aristo head does not need the original condensor glass (upper & lower) that are in the original enlarger.
"Regular intensity" for the Aristo head (will save some $)
If I am not understanding please let me know.

I rarely do 11x14, but suppose that if I do then will a 150mm better that 135mm (assuming I can drop the table, etc?)

[Harold_4074]

Carlos--

It has been about thirty years since I used a Beseler 45 series, but I don't recall having any problem enlarging to 11x14 with a 150mm lens. I can tell you that with an Omega D2, there is no problem. ( I normally use the 150 mm lens for making 8x10s from 2-1/4x2-1/4 negatives; this magnification would make a 16x20 from a 4x5 negative.)

Incidentally, the Aristo cold light head that I have changes in output by about 300% as it warms up from a cold start. The factory procedure is to let it warm up before using (for 30 minutes or so?) and then cycle it at a more or less uniform duty cycle during printing so that the exposures remain constant. I tried this, and quickly gave up. I found it impossible to gauge when the output was "constant enough" that a test strip would actually let me make a good print. The answer to this is one of the compensating timers (I have the Metrolux, with all of its own quirks) that uses a sensor to adjust the rate of the clock to cancel out variations in the cold light output. The Aristo head also seems to require more adjustment of exposure time with changes in contrast filter than Kodak data predicts, but this may just be an impression on my part.

It takes some doing to get all of this working well together, but I think that you will ultimately be very pleased with the setup.

Good luck!