Precision bubble level

[faberryman]

None of this stuff is really precise. I've got the yaw correction of my biggest enlarger attached to a micrometer-driven forged silicon bronze heavy naval artillery aiming mount that would easily cost forty or fifty thousand dollars to make today. Not exactly a ballhead. I found it for free, of course. And I had access to borrow lasers corrected for the curvature of the earth if necessary. And I dealt with a company which had a device that would draw a contour map in millionths of an inch showing the dimensional changes in a solid granite block induced by you merely breathing on it. Hardly one of my humble modified Saunders vac easels. But it might be quite handy if you're spending a billion $ on an observatory. So "precision" is a relative term.

Knowing the proper tool for the job at hand is at least half the battle. You can make an exquisite print without using Commander McBragg's "micrometer-driven forged silicon bronze heavy naval artillery aiming mount" to align your enlarger.

[Jac@stafford.net]

Drew's back to form.

OMG, and is he. I would appreciate Mr. Fromm's famous quotes regarding overkill.
.

[Greg]

I use two of these circa 1960s pocket levels resting on the camera bed, one facing forward and the other left to right. Chamonix levels get me close, and then these levels take over. Reaction time of both bubbles almost instantaneous. Plus they work on all my view cameras.

Bought from Harbor Freight a pocket "Digital Angle Gauge". Very accurate and very easy to use with 100% instantaneous readings. BUT.... it takes batteries and you have to calibrate it to 0 degrees level every time you turn it on. Resides in the tool box.

[Drew Wiley]

You guys have never seen that enlarger. It's 14ft tall. The easel weighs several hundred pounds, and I can stand on it without deflecting it. The colorhead requires a block and tackle system to lift. So yes, a genuine piece of military surplus hardware saved me thousands of dollars in custom machining. The adjacent enlarger is a Durst L184 8X10 color unit, and it looks tiny by comparison.

[AtlantaTerry]

You guys have never seen that enlarger. It's 14ft tall. The easel weighs several hundred pounds, and I can stand on it without deflecting it. The colorhead requires a block and tackle system to lift. So yes, a genuine piece of military surplus hardware saved me thousands of dollars in custom machining. The adjacent enlarger is a Durst L184 8X10 color unit, and it looks tiny by comparison.

Drew,

Does your Durst enlarger use a large doughnut-shaped heavy metal lens holder? I once bought a lens from a closed Los Vegas photo lab and the lens came with a mount like that. You can have it for the cost of shipping.

If you are interested, I will measure and photograph it for you.

Lemme know.

Terry

[Pere Casals]

Hi all,
I am looking for a precision bubble level as I realised my bubble levels on my manfrotto 055 legs as well as Chamonix view Camera are not quite precise.
I was thinking at this:

https://www.amazon.it/gp/product/B07...RLGRKCZN&psc=1

or this:

https://www.amazon.it/gp/product/B00...PNWYJU7H&psc=1

Has anyone got experiences with either of those or suggest something else?
If it helps I require it for both 4x5 and 8x10.
I see the precision for these is 0,029 ° = 0,5 mm/m.

A precision bubble level usualy is 0.05mm/m machinist level, this can be found used for $200 . (Ralmike's Precision Machinist Level Cat. # 082-2-556)

Cheap levels say 0.5mm/m , but this has to be checked, if that works in practice like manufacturer says it is not clear to me.

A very flat 1m bar can be used to test the level, when leveled invert the tool right to left to see if it conserves the "reading", then place a 0.5mm plate at one end of the bar to see if that is detected.

To test level performance I placed a 6mm (M6 metric) bolt at the end of the flat bar, every complete tour is 1mm, so half tour should be detected.

I needed that because dry plate coating, where really good leveling is important. http://www.thelightfarm.com/ teaches how to obtain a good level for the coating table, beyond what a cheap level can reach.

Regards.

[Drew Wiley]

I sold levels to check levels, and squares to check squares. Might not matter if you're trimming down fence post, but it certainly did to every competent cabinet shop or mechanic. I even used a bar of precision flat stock with a depth micrometer set in it to check the film plane seating in all my view cameras, and guess what.... And yes, the resultant corrections did make a difference in big enlargements. Long ago I learned never to take things for granted. You test shutter speeds, don't you?

[Serge S]

Been reading this thread with interest.
I'm always trying to get my landscape horizon line level in the distance. I have a pretty good success (but could be better) using an inexpensive level I purchased at the hardware store.
I'm always anguishing over getting it perfect. Last time I processed my film I noticed the holders were not all that precise, so it appears that they are a variable I need to account for as well. I need to go back and see which ones: the older Riteways or Elites are off...pretty sure it's the Riteways.

I generally level my tripod with the tripods bubble level & then tweak the camera level with a level on the deardorff's base & check the vertical as well. Wonder if the camera is off a bit being it's old (1920's and wood).
Also when I look at the groundglass I tweak to make it level, but am not sure if I should. Plus I don"t have gridlines. I bet that would help!
Need to keep experimenting!

[Drew Wiley]

If your film sags or bows, the horizon line will likewise be warped a little, regardless of level. Nor does film typically lie in an exact position in the holder slots, nor the holder in the camera frame. If tolerances were too tight, there would be no margin of error for expansion/contraction stress. So you ultimately have to control the appearance of level in the darkroom. Film flatness requires some kind of precision holder (vac or adhesive).

[Pere Casals]

You test shutter speeds, don't you?

Of course. My newest shutter is 37 years old, and I've a limited asset of 4 Ektachrome frozen boxes, so it would be a sin not testing shutters.

I use a photocell and an USB oscilloscope for it.