Anyone have experience printing on a regular basis with a point light source enl arger?
Anyone have experience printing on a regular basis with a point light source enl arger?
It is more enjoyable to jump naked into a bed of cactus. It is great, however, if you like dust spots, contrast and other stuff which makes you throw prints away.
Regards,
I have not, and cannot see any advantages that a point source enlarger would provide. Parrallel light rays are what you want going through your negative/transparency, a point source of light is the worst place to start!
Hi Steve,
What do you want to know about point light source? I use DeVere 203 with point light source (similar to what Odyssey- Sales offer with DV504 model). Point lamp 48 watt/6volt from DV504, Rodenstock 120mm condenser set. I use it for 70% of my final prints with my 35mm system (Canon F1N 24/1.4L, 50/1.2L, 85/1.2L). MF and LF negatives have less grain dimension if you consider final print. This is good idea in respect of 35mm because you have additional micro-resolution (micro-contrast) interest inside of your final print.
This technique has it own philosophy. And point of view about dust, contrast, etc is quite stupid approach. I don't understand people to be serious in photography and fault to keep negatives absolutely clean.
The main reason is to include resolution of film grain to you final print as visual technique only. Main idea is to have control over silver grain form and dimension in your final print. This to be subject of calculation and test. Contrast is not a big problem; it possible to compensated this with film dev. tech. and VC filters to have virtually very close image quality to any diffused light source.
This is absolutely great technique as any other to be professionally used.
pls email or ask any tech. questions here
regards, Valery Axenov (bene_usa@waw.pdi.net)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks