More Saltzman

[Tin Can]

Got this today. It's an 8X10 Saltzman negative stretcher, AKA glassless film carrier for any big Saltzman. THere were 3 sizes and complications.

14.5" X 25" long. Good condition with all parts, but does need a CLA, meaning disassembly and cleaning.

I already use the smaller 5X7 Saltsman stretcher and like it.

Now I realize that there is a consensus on this forum that insists glass 2 piece film carriers are the only way to go.

I disagree.

I only recently became aware that nearly every enlarger company made 'stretchers'.

At some time there was a market.

If you were the other bidder, contact me. We seem to be chasing the same objects. I got it for $2.50 over your bid.

https://farm2.staticflickr.com/1819/30208471988_021eabaae2_c.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/N2qjgW)Saltzman Stretcher (https://flic.kr/p/N2qjgW) by TIN CAN COLLEGE (https://www.flickr.com/photos/tincancollege/), on Flickr

[Luis-F-S]

Interesting accessory, thanks for sharing. So Randy, when do we get to see a photo of the beast?

[Tin Can]

Interesting accessory, thanks for sharing. So Randy, when do we get to see a photo of the beast?

It's a long-term project.

I am very busy.

[ic-racer]

I have never used one but it is hard to imagine any disadvantage. I suspect if there are any you will find out and let us know.
On this one I don't see any spring tension. Do you just pull it taught and tighten down the thumbscrews at each end?

[Tin Can]

The 8 black things on the right are springs each pulling an individual metal clamp. I was really hoping the springs were intact, they are fine, just tarnished.

Both sides have little levers on the ends to open and close the clamps.

The 2 sides are fully adjustable for narrower film. 4X10 is accommodated as is 5x7. A very dexterous person could conceivably clamp multiple 35mm strips. Not this guy.

I also have 2 of the really simple Calumet 8X10 spring carriers that use a different method.

Of course, I use a 4x5 Negaflat too.

Rebate lovers don't love these gadgets!

I have the same size Saltzman in double glass also.

[Tin Can]

Glennview has his own design.

[Pere Casals]

I was thinking in making one for my diy enlarger project, this is the first I see, thanks for sharing this image.

[LabRat]

It's name your poison with any style carrier... Glass less does not have glass, but heat/IR CAN pop the neg, glass holds it flat but there's the newton's ring thing, harder to keep clean and more glass in the optical path, or stretch carriers that can possibly have a slight ripple if the emulsion is unequally hard or dry/damp and modern bases are different than the past...

Having different types to fit different conditions/situations is a good thing...

Steve K

[Peter De Smidt]

I'm with Steve on this one. It should also be noted that not all glassless carriers work as well as others. The Saltzman is a beast and probably does a fine job. A friend who uses a Saltzman 8x10 for big prints made his own stretcher carrier. For him it was a waste of time, and he went back to glass.

[Tin Can]

Exactly Steve.

The Calumet is sensitive to wind and air displacement. I load it on a table then slip it off the table sideways then insert it delicately into the head slot that is already close to final focus.

My V-XL 8X10 came a DIY double AN glass 8X10 neg carrier. It does work well. However, I have yet to print with it.

[Drew Wiley]

That's a neat waffle iron, Randy.

[Jac@stafford.net]

Can it be rotated in the head?

BTW - My Saltzman 8x10 is available, free. It is disassembled, ready to go. Requires truck, three strong men to move.

[Tin Can]

Not the last one, but the one in pic below does. 280 degrees rotation with the handle knob.

Notice they are 2 distinct castings.

https://farm2.staticflickr.com/1792/29158775247_431b8683eb_c.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/LqEm1g)IMG-1338 (https://flic.kr/p/LqEm1g) by TIN CAN COLLEGE (https://www.flickr.com/photos/tincancollege/), on Flickr


Can it be rotated in the head?

BTW - My Saltzman 8x10 is available, free. It is disassembled, ready to go. Requires truck, three strong men to move.

[Tin Can]

And more.

This has a 10X12" opening.

Must be Saltzman as it very heavy. 1/4" plate aluminum on 1/2" phenolic.

I can shoot 10X12 with a 11X14 glass plate holder using a 10X12" insert. I doubt I will...

https://farm2.staticflickr.com/1819/42287864470_795b4bcd4c_c.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/27qQmPy)IMG-1340 (https://flic.kr/p/27qQmPy) by TIN CAN COLLEGE (https://www.flickr.com/photos/tincancollege/), on Flickr

It came with the Saltzman.

[Jac@stafford.net]

Not the last one, but the one in pic below does. 280 degrees rotation with the handle knob.

IMG-1338 (https://flic.kr/p/LqEm1g) by TIN CAN COLLEGE (https://www.flickr.com/photos/tincancollege/), on Flickr

I have that one with new AN glass.

[Corran]

Now I realize that there is a consensus on this forum that insists glass 2 piece film carriers are the only way to go.

I disagree.

Cool item. I just wanted to pipe in that there definitely isn't a 'consensus.' I think glass holders suck. My Beseler Negaflat is the only thing I will print 4x5 with. I am sure your Saltzman is even better. I think a couple vocal forum members have constantly stated that a glass carrier is the only possible way to make quality enlargers but that's just not true. Keep on keepin' on.

If I found an 8x10 stretcher I would (eventually) build the 8x10 enlarger around it.

[LabRat]

Cool item. I just wanted to pipe in that there definitely isn't a 'consensus.' I think glass holders suck. My Beseler Negaflat is the only thing I will print 4x5 with. I am sure your Saltzman is even better. I think a couple vocal forum members have constantly stated that a glass carrier is the only possible way to make quality enlargers but that's just not true. Keep on keepin' on.

If I found an 8x10 stretcher I would (eventually) build the 8x10 enlarger around it.

My woe with glass carriers happens on very damp nights... The negs absorb the excess humidity, they can buckle a little under the glass as the heat/IR will start to dry them but the edges of the film start drying and can produce tensions creating micro waves, and even with AR glass, there can be tiny specks of micro Newton's rings from the partial contact with some film bases and sheet or roll formats, and if very, very damp, I have seen film get sticky and hold/squeeze dust onto the film that is hard to remove... I switch to glassless then and let the neg cook for a long time before exposing paper...

But if you get into the right groove with glass (and have a good carrier + procedure), it is fine, but very dry conditions can also make life weird and hard too, so different types of carriers around help...

If only life was easy...

Steve K

[Tin Can]

Cool item. I just wanted to pipe in that there definitely isn't a 'consensus.' I think glass holders suck. My Beseler Negaflat is the only thing I will print 4x5 with. I am sure your Saltzman is even better. I think a couple vocal forum members have constantly stated that a glass carrier is the only possible way to make quality enlargers but that's just not true. Keep on keepin' on.

If I found an 8x10 stretcher I would (eventually) build the 8x10 enlarger around it.

I also use a 4X5 Neg-A-Flat. Found this interesting thread from before we signed up here.

http://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/showthread.php?16487-Anyone-have-the-Beseler-Nega-flat-carrier&p=147283&viewfull=1#post147283

[Corran]

Thanks Randy. Will have to try that tape thing in the last post. I do occasionally get scratches when I load it with the negative way up on one side. I think it rides up on the metal pieces and they grab the emulsion.

[Bernice Loui]

Different take on the negative carrier with a Durst 138.

Back in the day when the Durst 138 was properly set up. It had a 200 watt halogen light source with a IR filter in front of the halogen light source. This with the cooling fan effectively stopped most of the IR and related heat from reaching the negative carrier or film to be projected. After the IR filter was a filter drawer where variable contrast filters or other filters can go if needed. The light path continued on to a mirror then the condenser holder for two condensers then on to the negative-film carrier, then on to the lens for the image to be projected. This is a long light path between light source to negative-film carrier.

Most often used negative-film carrier was the 5x7 glass with AN glass on the top side of the carrier and AR coated glass on the bottom side. There was never any issue of film popping, film not being flat or damaged film or problems with Newton rings. The prime problem was keeping the whole carrier and film assembly dust free and clean. Stopping the IR at the light source effective stops negative-flm popping due to heat. Placing the variable contrast filter in the light path stops the problem of projected image degradation due to having the filter in the projected image path.

Any given negative-film could be worked on for hours with complete projected image stability and predictable image projection. This allows focusing on printing the image rather than struggling with projected image problems.

Being one of those who will print the film holder borders as part of the image framing. This means the entire film area must be kept in good condition.

Durst does make glassless negative-film holders, they work OK, but cannot keep the negative-film as flat and stable as the glass carriers. On smaller film formats, the strips of film can be line-up in the 5x7 glass carrier then projected as a "enlarged" contact print.


Bernice

[Tin Can]

Reality is that many 10X10 enlarger chassis became available in the last 2 decades without heads, condensers or neg carriers.

I believe those essential parts were snapped up by active users leaving newbies, like me to rescue the chassis and DIY the rest.

I still remember my father building me a Dark Closet when I was 7, so I could develop Minox, but he denied me an enlarger as just foolishness. Even if I worked and paid for it myself. That was 1958 and i didn't process my own film again until 1998. Minox Contact prints are useless to a person that didn't get glasses until later that year.

Rosebud is my enlarger collection.

Now I have my hobby. :)

[Corran]

The unfortunate reality is that even a simple Beseler enlarger and head, new, costs north of $3k. It's hard enough for us younger folks to get into silver printing. I can't imagine what a new Durst or Saltzman (high-end) enlarger would cost these days. Digging through old scraps and picking up bits and pieces to make a complete system is hard, if not impossible for many. I could've walked right past your carrier there in an antique store and been none the wiser.

[Bernice Loui]

Guilty as charged. The first Durst 138 happened during the mid-1990's when optical printing of film was common. Back then a good used Durst 138 with a single negative carrier and modest set of condensers cost $1500 plus shipping. Good deal back then.

In time as the print process became digital a huge number of excellent enlargers got pushed out to the curb by Foto labs that were closing. Few of these excellent enlargers found a home with an Foto enthusiast. Today it appears most have been scrapped or canalized for various bits.

During the enlarger dumping era, ended up with a spare 138 head, a full set of 138 enlargers and storage cabinet, several negative carriers and a LOT more. I'm so fond of the Durst 138, they will burry me with it. Moved to a new place recently and the plan is to build a darkroom from scratch. All the bits are in storage including the Durst 138, Arkay sink, temperature regulating water control panel with filtration and more.

Seems optical printing in a darkroom these days has become a mostly oddity in the world of digital printed images. Yet, there is a special quality a GOOD optically printed silver gelatin print that is special...



Bernice





Reality is that many 10X10 enlarger chassis became available in the last 2 decades without heads, condensers or neg carriers.

I believe those essential parts were snapped up by active users leaving newbies, like me to rescue the chassis and DIY the rest.

I still remember my father building me a Dark Closet when I was 7, so I could develop Minox, but he denied me an enlarger as just foolishness. Even if I worked and paid for it myself. That was 1958 and i didn't process my own film again until 1998. Minox Contact prints are useless to a person that didn't get glasses until later that year.

Rosebud is my enlarger collection.

Now I have my hobby. :)

[Neal Chaves]

I always used glass carriers for 8X10 until I bought my Beseler 45VXL810 enlarger which came with the unique Beseler 8X10 glassless carrier. It uses the property of metal expansion to stretch the negative as the aluminum carrier warms up in the head. Like Randy, I use the Negaflat for 4X5.

[Jac@stafford.net]

The unfortunate reality is that even a simple Beseler enlarger and head, new, costs north of $3k. It's hard enough for us younger folks to get into silver printing. I can't imagine what a new Durst or Saltzman (high-end) enlarger would cost these days.

One particular Saltzman, mine, would cost you nothing but gas money.

[Tin Can]

One particular Saltzman, mine, would cost you nothing but gas money.

That's a 2000 miles round trip. 32 hours drive.

[Jac@stafford.net]

That's a 2000 miles round trip. 32 hours drive.


Ach, a weekend road trip in our old days.

[Peter De Smidt]

+ the burly helpers + having a place to put it. Seriously, someone go get Jac's enlarger!

[Tin Can]

+ the burly helpers + having a place to put it. Seriously, someone go get Jac's enlarger!

Peter knows moving a Saltzman. He was the Force and Strength in moving the one I got. Thanks again Peter!

Which is the smallest of the 8X10 Saltzman. The main tube is heavy all by itself, later I removed the 140 Lbs of lead inside it, so I could see why it was so heavy. The tube is still heavy empty. There are much bigger and heavier Saltzman.

I know some of us have seen the video of moving a bigger Saltzman in one piece, in and out of a box truck. Insane.

I believe they should be fully disassembled before moving.

[Corran]

Jac, I may yet take you up on that. I have to have a space planned for it. I have heard you guys talk about headroom issues. My basement is about 8ft plus two more in the unfinished subfloor area. Also, I don't think it'll fit in my Camry :).

[Luis-F-S]

That's a 2000 miles round trip. 32 hours drive.

What I drove to get my DeVere 5108 and it wasn't free!

[pierre506]

How to lift the Saltzman 8x10 enlarger and insert a stable table under it in darkroom?
There's no large space.

[Tin Can]

Pierre, I think the best way to stand one up is to first take it apart.

A Saltzman in one piece is very heavy.

Which one do you have?

Is it the one that was shipped in a large box in one piece?

I will search for pictures in 6 hours.

[pierre506]

Pierre, I think the best way to stand one up is to first take it apart.

A Saltzman in one piece is very heavy.

Which one do you have?

Is it the one that was shipped in a large box in one piece?

I will search for pictures in 6 hours.

It's in my darkroom now. 194554
Yes, the one was shipped in a large box.

[pierre506]

194555
in the large box before

[Tin Can]

You got it.

Good work!

[pierre506]

You got it.

Good work!

Need to change the bellows, too
194557

[Tin Can]

Not a problem, but copy the fold sizing.

What lamp head is going on it?

Almost anything fits!


Need to change the bellows, too
194557

[pierre506]

Not a problem, but copy the fold sizing.

What lamp head is going on it?

Almost anything fits!
194558

[Jac@stafford.net]

Need to change the bellows, too
194557

Wow! I have a spare bellows for a Saltzman. It will never be used. I tried hauling my Saltzman using pulleys over the roof beams and the creaking and groaning of the roof scared me. I quit.

[pierre506]

Wow! I have a spare bellows for a Saltzman. It will never be used. I tried hauling my Saltzman using pulleys over the roof beams and the creaking and groaning of the roof scared me. I quit.

The bellows had been ruined because of the crating.

[Tin Can]

You have it all.

The rotating glass film carrier is nice, good for fine adjustment.

There is also an 8X10 glass-less carrier that uses spring tension. It does not rotate.

Do you have the Saltzman catalog? It shows all options

It was posted on this forum by Jac.

[pierre506]

You have it all.

The rotating glass film carrier is nice, good for fine adjustment.

There is also an 8X10 glass-less carrier that uses spring tension. It does not rotate.

Do you have the Saltzman catalog? It shows all options

It was posted on this forum by Jac.

It also has a extension tube with a universal iris clamp(max to 70mm).
Is there a detailed instruction? I need it.
I found there's a bulb (light) near the lens board. I don't know its usage.

[Tin Can]

I do not know of any instruction manual.

Most things can be figured out.

The lamp by the lens board may be for seeing the lens aperture in a 'dark room'



It also has a extension tube with a universal iris clamp(max to 70mm).
Is there a detailed instruction? I need it.
I found there's a bulb (light) near the lens board. I don't know its usage.

[pierre506]

I do not know of any instruction manual.

Most things can be figured out.

The lamp by the lens board may be for seeing the lens aperture in a 'dark room'

That's same as my guess.

[pierre506]

194562
for setting the aperture

[Amedeus]

How to lift the Saltzman 8x10 enlarger and insert a stable table under it in darkroom?
There's no large space.

Did your Saltzman come with the adjustable table or was that lost in history ?

One of mine has an 4' x 8' glass table installed at about 24" high off the floor on a custom steel stand. Table is fixed (of course ... )

Cheers,

[Luis-F-S]

Post photos plz

[Jac@stafford.net]

Did your Saltzman come with the adjustable table or was that lost in history ?

One of mine has an 4' x 8' glass table installed at about 24" high off the floor on a custom steel stand. Table is fixed (of course ... )

Cheers,

Mine has a stand with about a dozen bubble levels and leveling legs. 24" high seems right.

[Jac@stafford.net]

Here is my Saltzman platform.

194648

The silver colored part is made level by adjustment screws to the stand below (yellow).

The printing platform (~32" x40") goes on top of this. Alignment is a simple bottom-up procedure and of course the negative platform has adjustments. It is all typical of government hyper-specification.

Here is a 180º view of the opposite end.

194661

The platform and the rest of the parts languish in storage. I have nowhere to install it.

[Tin Can]

Jac, My base is just like yours. 3 pieces with top baseboard.

But the bottom sub base was shortened as deduced from welds.

Putting the base board height about 20".

These can fit in 8' ceilings if a modern LED head it used.

[Jac@stafford.net]

Jac, My base is just like yours. 3 pieces with top baseboard.

One more picture of the underside of the frame. A marvelous thing about this Saltzman is that all the parts (shafts, tubes, universal knuckles, gears, chain and fasteners) are American standard so replacing parts required only a two-mile drive to our farming supply store.

194689

Remember - a fastener over-tightened is already half broken. :)

[LFPete]

I finally figured out what this part is (that came with a random pile of parts from my newly acquired Durst 184). It's a glassless negative carrier!

Have any of you seen something like this? Who made it? I will have to fabricate a carrier for it so that I can insert it into my Durst Laraneg or Condit 10 x 10 negative carriers.

197687
197688

[Tin Can]

I don't know, but it sure looks factory made

I believe at one time all major enlarger producers made a glassless carrier for larger sheet film

However some here really don't like them...

I like them!

[LFPete]

Cool, someone on the FB group "The Darkroom" told me they were made by HK. But I have been unable to find any pics of HK negative carriers or these negative carriers. Anyway, for the moment they are all I have! Neither my Laraneg nor my Condit has glass.




I don't know, but it sure looks factory made

I believe at one time all major enlarger producers made a glassless carrier for larger sheet film

However some here really don't like them...

I like them!

[William Whitaker]

That thing looks more like a prop that escaped from a Joel Peter Witkin set! :rolleyes:




https://farm2.staticflickr.com/1819/30208471988_021eabaae2_c.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/N2qjgW)Saltzman Stretcher (https://flic.kr/p/N2qjgW) by TIN CAN COLLEGE (https://www.flickr.com/photos/tincancollege/), on Flickr

[John Layton]

Just slightly...menacing. Better watch those appendages!