BESELR 810, ARISTO VCL & NIKKOR 210

[Paolo]

I hope I am not pestering everyone with my questions but I am really lost now!!!!
I have just started my trials with my brand new 8x10 enlarging equipment.
After reading a lot on this arugument and while saving a lot of money I finally got everything I thought I neeeded to start enlarging my beloved 8x10 negatives:

BESELER VXL810
ARISTO VCL8100
EL NIKKOR 210MM

While doing my trials to understand how to adjust the contrast (see my other questions), I have realized that there is a HUGE light fall off at the edges of the negative.

I also changed the 210mm el nikkor with a 240mm rodagon, but the fall off becaome even more evident.....

After years of satisfaction with my Laborator 1200 and CLS500, I really think I threw my money away.-
Can anyone tell me how and if I can correct this?
or....
anyone needs a brand new 8x10 enlarger and lot of extras?......

[Andrew O'Neill]

How far away is the light source from the negative? I had the same problem but with their VCL4x5 until I sat the unit right on top of the glass negative tray. No fall off. Also, I was using 150mm Nikkor which is the normal focal length for this format. So your problem may be focal length, distance of light source from negative (I think it may be this one), or combination of both. Dont' give up. You have an awesome exposure system! I envy you.

[Paolo]

Hi Andrew,
the negative is right under the light source. I will try to put it even nearer now.
According to most, the 210mm el nikkor should cover 8x10.
Surely should the 240 Rodagon, but still the fall off measures approx 1 and 1/2 stops!!!!!

[Eric Woodbury]

I have a modified Beseler 45M with the 810 head and have used both the VCL and the V54 grid with a Nikkor 210mm. No problems. As pointed out, the negative needs to be immediately below the light source and if you are using the Beseler 45M enlarger, you need to have the upper bellows fully compressed. Different enlargers I don't know. Maybe that is the problem. Should work perfectly. I know many people using this combo.

[Andrew O'Neill]

If possible, get the light source directly on top of the negative. I'll bet that that will solve the problem. Also, stopping down 2 to 3 stops helps even things out. Let me know if you are successful.

[resummerfield]

Hi Paolo--How did you determine the light falloff? Was it by examining the density of a print on hard paper (without a neg in the carrier, but with the 8x10 neg area defined), or by holding a light meter under the lens with no neg? Or?

[Paolo]

Thank you everyone. It is almost 0.30 am here in Italy so I 'd better clean up everything and keep on doing my trials again tomorrow.
I also still have to solve the "contrast" problem.....
Going back to the fall off, it could well be that I did not assemble the 8x10 kit properly as I realized that the upper bellows could not be fully compressed (thank you Eric W.!!!).
I have just finished re assembling the enlarger now. My next trial will be with the negative carrier IMMEDIATELY below the light source.

Eric S., I first saw the fall off doing a few "full frame" prints. It was quite eveident. I then mesured it with a meter under the lens with NO negative....

[Will Strain]

As Andrew mentioned, sometimes stopping the lense down a bit can help with the edge coverage. (As true in camera as it is on the enlarger). I certainly wouldn't test it wide open... I usually print with it stopped down pretty far anyway, to allow longer times for more dodging and burning.