Horizontal Mirror - horizontal projection with Devere 108

[M/A]

Hello everyone, I was wondering if anyone has experience with projecting horizontally to the wall with a vertical enlarger. I realise that ideally it would be best to use a horizontal enlarger but its not something I can afford atm.., hopefully in the future. Currently I am less interested to discuss alignment issues in this thread, and I am aware of the different way to resolve these issues once I am able to project correctly onto the wall.

I recently picked up a Devere 108 10x10 enlarger with spectacular 2000w light source with 8 light bulbs (which is currently being shipped and will arrive in the next month or so), and I am exploring the idea of using it in the studio for both vertical and horizontal projection to produce mural size prints (140 cm and above, regardless the media and paper size and projection on several sheets of paper).

I can see in the manual in the accessory list 2 items that are relevant; 1. Horizontal Mirror (Non Tilting Version) (Code 1021), & 2. Horizontal Mirror (Tilting Version) (Code 1014). I am sure these are very rare and hard to find but I was wondering if anyone has experience working with such technique?
Alternatively I may end up with the DIY version, so where should I start? I will probably need to weld some elements to attach under the lens an optical grade mirror in 45 degrees, and it will have to be suitable for different lens size? I suppose different lens and different distance from the wall will need different distance between lens and mirror? any info would be greatly appreciated. I will be printing mostly from 8x10 negatives but also 4x5 and medium format (the enlarger came with both 10x10 & 5x5 mixing boxes, so I will take advantage the large amount of light and energy).


Many thanks,
Matan




235855235856235857

[Bernard_L]

You might use the tiltable mirror from an overhead projector. These are obsolete, so you might save one from the dumpster; but maybe they are so obsolete that they have all been dumped already.

[ic-racer]

You should be able to do 40" prints vertically. I think the roll paper is 50", so only gaining ten inches by side-projection. If you are planning on splicing multiple 50" sheets, you could do something similar with 40" sheets on the baseboard, though you would need a shifting negative carrier to do that.

I did a mock up of a 50" horizontal projection of a single 8x10 negative, on the baseboard with five pieces of 20" paper. This would be twice as big if 40" paper had been used. It is the bottom print. The top two prints are totally different, done with a Rolleiflex multi-exposure panorama attachment on the camera.

235871

[M/A]

forgive me for the delay,
that is a very good idea I will look for a tiltable mirrir mechanism for projectors - looking online it seems that they very much still make them. -otherwise I could also follow my idea of getting optical grade mirror and find a way to fix it in the correct position in 45 degrees (the alignment I will figure out later). the only thing about the piece of kit I mentioned is that it hangs bellow the lens and more likely to be in the correct angle and distance from the lens, but I guess that may not matter much.. I will have to experiment and see what kind of results i'm getting

[M/A]

very interesting to see the mockup - that is a good idea to do that before going big. yes - I am looking into splicing of several sheets of 50'' paper, which cannot be done with a vertical enlarger. which enlarger are you using? whilst the neg carrier I have will shifts correctly for this purpose - away for the column - there are other physical limitation such as enlarger hight and so on.. so the only way is to project horizontally. I think up to 50'' to use the enlarger vertically is possible but beyond will require horizontal projection..
I guess I will keep investigating and working on it till I am able to get horizontal enlarger

[Tin Can]

Wonderfull news!

Thank you both

[ic-racer]

I don't have any trouble projecting horizontal with my Durst, however, I don't have any way to process 50" sheets of paper.
I'm always curious how people are processing the large prints. How will you be doing it; tray, trough, drum, machine??
239741

[ic-racer]

Just the other day I was re-watching Bob's video below on his large print processing setup. Maybe I misunderstood, but I got the impression he was only going up to 20x30 now. Since I have a 20x24 print washer, I thought I'd just not go any bigger than that.
I did find this example of the size comparison:

239742

https://youtu.be/AUfcU_lK7Us

[interneg]

I can see in the manual in the accessory list 2 items that are relevant; 1. Horizontal Mirror (Non Tilting Version) (Code 1021), & 2. Horizontal Mirror (Tilting Version) (Code 1014). I am sure these are very rare and hard to find but I was wondering if anyone has experience working with such technique?
Alternatively I may end up with the DIY version, so where should I start? I will probably need to weld some elements to attach under the lens an optical grade mirror in 45 degrees, and it will have to be suitable for different lens size? I suppose different lens and different distance from the wall will need different distance between lens and mirror? any info would be greatly appreciated. I will be printing mostly from 8x10 negatives but also 4x5 and medium format (the enlarger came with both 10x10 & 5x5 mixing boxes, so I will take advantage the large amount of light and energy).

I have a horizontal projection mirror (the last one that Odyssey/ De Vere had at that time) for my 504/5108 - it's a considerable chunk of metal & (thick) glass - with height adjustment etc for different lenses. It makes sense if you are doing prints bigger than the baseboard will allow on a more occasional & batched basis. De Vere's viewpoint seems to have been that for anything more than that, a horizontal enlarger would be a better bet - De Vere's control mechanisms and overall locked-down precision precluding swinging the head like the Dursts.

[M/A]

I have a horizontal projection mirror (the last one that Odyssey/ De Vere had at that time) for my 504/5108 - it's a considerable chunk of metal & (thick) glass - with height adjustment etc for different lenses. It makes sense if you are doing prints bigger than the baseboard will allow on a more occasional & batched basis. De Vere's viewpoint seems to have been that for anything more than that, a horizontal enlarger would be a better bet - De Vere's control mechanisms and overall locked-down precision precluding swinging the head like the Dursts.

Thank you! yes that is exactly what I am looking for and exactly the kind of problem I am trying to solve within the circumstances in which I am at.. I would imaging there would be a discrepancy in quality and sharpness but I would imagine it may not be very noticeable in the print size I am looking to experiment with. Did you notice a significant difference?
- I would be interested in experimenting with that - do you have any pictures and the size of the horizontal projection mirror? perhaps I could potentially build a similar one if it's not available.
Thank you

[M/A]

I don't have any trouble projecting horizontal with my Durst, however, I don't have any way to process 50" sheets of paper.
I'm always curious how people are processing the large prints. How will you be doing it; tray, trough, drum, machine??
239741

I am using troughs for 50" paper and process the paper buy rolling for about 7 min dev, then stop, fix, wash, wash aid and wash again the usual way. drying is another topic

[John Layton]

Here is my single-tray setup for 30x40's. Two-gallon tubs of chems on the left which pour into tray, then empty container goes to other side where its re-filled via a water sealed hatch, then gets slid back underneath tray after next chem is poured in. Print is gently squeegeed between steps to save maximum chems. Tray is rocked to agitate. Wet print is only handled once - rolled around a pool noodle and removed to hang-dry. I also have a larger tray for 40x60's...which takes larger (4-gallon) tubs of chems:
Processor Feed Side:
239787
Processor Dump Side:
239788

[xkaes]

There are lots of great, inexpensive, 90° angle, rotating, front-surface mirrors for 35mm lenses. Some names are Squintar, Angle-Scope, Mirro-Tach, from Spiratone, Aetna, and others. Unusally under $10. They are all the same, and have a Series VII thread on the back so they are adaptable to anything. That's what I use on my Besesler CB7. I just screw it into the from of my lens with step up ring(s).

239791

[M/A]

There are lots of great, inexpensive, 90° angle, rotating, front-surface mirrors for 35mm lenses. Some names are Squintar, Angle-Scope, Mirro-Tach, from Spiratone, Aetna, and others. Unusally under $10. They are all the same, and have a Series VII thread on the back so they are adaptable to anything. That's what I use on my Besesler CB7. I just screw it into the from of my lens with step up ring(s).

239791

Thank you I will look into it - but I think it won't cover larger enlarging lenses which I will be using to enlarge 4x5 & 8x10 negatives.. some of the lenses are simply too big. - also I would assume different print size and different focal length will require for the 45 degrees angled mirror to be in specific distance from the lens, so I would imaging more flexibility will be needed here, and to reduce the discrepancy in quality it may be a good idea to experiment with a newer more clear mirror since the innovation in optical grade glass and mirror today would be better than using older generation glass and mirrors - but I would need to figure out the mechanics and a way to precisely align the mirror with the lens, then I will need to deal with alignment of the enlarger with the wall, which is another topic

[xkaes]

You may be right about the filter thread on some lenses. The longest lens I have is 150mm, and the widest is 55mm -- which is a perfect match for the 90 degree adapter I have, since it's series VII. The adapters were designed for longer focal length lenses as the ads show, and alignment with the enlarger lens is not an issue because it screws right into the front of the lens. Aligning the enlarger to the wall is a separate concern, but with extra large prints I've found no problem at all thanks to DOF. I do stop down, and this can mean really long exposures, however. And I've never had a problem with the quality of the images. I have my doubt that results with a newer front-surface mirror would be noticeably different -- otherwise known as the null hypothesis. I think I paid about $10 for my like new Mirro-Tach, and maybe $3 for the Series VII adapter.

[nolindan]

... different print size and different focal length will require for the 45 degrees angled mirror to be in specific distance from the lens

Distance per se doesn't matter - the mirror only has to cover the 'cone' of light rays coming from the front of the lens. The closer the mirror is to the lens the smaller the mirror can be.

[M/A]

You may be right about the filter thread on some lenses. The longest lens I have is 150mm, and the widest is 55mm -- which is a perfect match for the 90 degree adapter I have, since it's series VII. The adapters were designed for longer focal length lenses as the ads show, and alignment with the enlarger lens is not an issue because it screws right into the front of the lens. Aligning the enlarger to the wall is a separate concern, but with extra large prints I've found no problem at all thanks to DOF. I do stop down, and this can mean really long exposures, however. And I've never had a problem with the quality of the images. I have my doubt that results with a newer front-surface mirror would be noticeably different -- otherwise known as the null hypothesis. I think I paid about $10 for my like new Mirro-Tach, and maybe $3 for the Series VII adapter.

excellent! so potentially that should work up to 150mm, if that is the case its worth having a go at it for sure. as for long exposures - my enlarger has 2000w of light so I am hoping it will work well together. do you have photos of your setup? how large did you make your prints?

thanks!

[M/A]

Distance per se doesn't matter - the mirror only has to cover the 'cone' of light rays coming from the front of the lens. The closer the mirror is to the lens the smaller the mirror can be.

true enough - but that together with the distance from the wall would effect print size?

[xkaes]

excellent! so potentially that should work up to 150mm, if that is the case its worth having a go at it for sure. as for long exposures - my enlarger has 2000w of light so I am hoping it will work well together. do you have photos of your setup? how large did you make your prints?

thanks!

The focal length is irrelevant. It's the width of the filter thread that matters. If your 360mm lens has a filter thread less that 60mm (2.5"), you shouldn't have a problem.

[xkaes]

true enough - but that together with the distance from the wall would effect print size?

Not really. The distance from the negative to the paper is the same if a mirror is in the middle, somewhere -- or not. It does not add or subtract any distance from the lens to the paper at all. No need to change exposure.

One thing I should mention is that these mirror "boxes" rotate, so you need to get it aimed at your easel -- right in the middle. You can do that with a scrap negative with a spot or hole placed right in the middle of the frame.

[ic-racer]

I did this once and needed like a 6" mirror. Of course even larger the farther the mirror is from the lens.

Also, you can see on this simple filter holder the size needed to avoid issue with such a large lens:239859

[Thodoris Tzalavras]

Something like this (https://www.ebay.com/itm/266106965473?hash=item3df5360de1:g:SWIAAOSwdjRj1poE&amdata=enc%3AAQAIAAAA4PYSz1lzK5y5kArwslq2C9eKUDkeirPFcCXIE6tVN%2BJB0%2FaV1WmNoVx4tfOcyQjq0I%2F5118LiHP1k3V1F4bonIIUpJHXulzJ6RQ5EScgvWqWQ9if9%2BrnbPMnL7htOCk4kfMvh9Xr8ITf45QJc%2Bxcn8UZ5flC7lK3j5UiSwZIypXiS6RhuHZp9aStOe1CAo98w%2B3u2lP8LFllq9QvPvgIXRV3nu27AUAK6xnsYbCCSkHEubH%2BFbEXP53rmT3tJhaK4ESS50SQYQoUz95wgmCVgjAkqHdjYHG3Z%2BDD1Lz0iPot%7Ctkp%3ABFBM6LqO6J5i) might work too.

[M/A]

Something like this (https://www.ebay.com/itm/266106965473?hash=item3df5360de1:g:SWIAAOSwdjRj1poE&amdata=enc%3AAQAIAAAA4PYSz1lzK5y5kArwslq2C9eKUDkeirPFcCXIE6tVN%2BJB0%2FaV1WmNoVx4tfOcyQjq0I%2F5118LiHP1k3V1F4bonIIUpJHXulzJ6RQ5EScgvWqWQ9if9%2BrnbPMnL7htOCk4kfMvh9Xr8ITf45QJc%2Bxcn8UZ5flC7lK3j5UiSwZIypXiS6RhuHZp9aStOe1CAo98w%2B3u2lP8LFllq9QvPvgIXRV3nu27AUAK6xnsYbCCSkHEubH%2BFbEXP53rmT3tJhaK4ESS50SQYQoUz95wgmCVgjAkqHdjYHG3Z%2BDD1Lz0iPot%7Ctkp%3ABFBM6LqO6J5i) might work too.

thanks, - the difficulty would be to place the mirror precisely in 45 degrees under the lens, I think its not that straight forward as a slight deviation will create distortions and get part of the image out of focus, that is why its not so simple..

I am leaning to find a solution for mounting the mirror structure to the filter thread in the lens with a filter ring adapter - because that may ensure the alignment, but I was just wondering if there is a solution that already exist and doesn't require fabrication. I am also looking in astronomy and telescope supplies website - because they have 45 degrees adapters with mirrors and prisms.

the filter thread of the largest lens (& the main one I will be using) is 90mm for Rodagon-G 300mm but I would also be interested in using it later with different lenses for 4x5 as well.

[xkaes]

That's precisely what the Squintar, Angle-Scope, Mirro-Tach, from Spiratone, Aetna, and others do. The mirror is fixed at 45 degrees -- and screws into the filter thread of the lens. You can't get more accurate and simple than that

https://www.ebay.com/sch/i.html?_from=R40&_trksid=p2334524.m570.l1313&_nkw=Squintar%2C+Angle-Scope%2C+Mirro-Tach&_sacat=3323&LH_TitleDesc=0&rt=nc&Focus%2520Type=Auto&_odkw=%2275-200mm+f4.5%22&_osacat=3323&_dcat=3323&_sop=15&LH_PrefLoc=2

[M/A]

That's precisely what the Squintar, Angle-Scope, Mirro-Tach, from Spiratone, Aetna, and others do. The mirror is fixed at 45 degrees -- and screws into the filter thread of the lens. You can't get more accurate and simple than that

https://www.ebay.com/sch/i.html?_from=R40&_trksid=p2334524.m570.l1313&_nkw=Squintar%2C+Angle-Scope%2C+Mirro-Tach&_sacat=3323&LH_TitleDesc=0&rt=nc&Focus%2520Type=Auto&_odkw=%2275-200mm+f4.5%22&_osacat=3323&_dcat=3323&_sop=15&LH_PrefLoc=2

again - that would have been ideal - however the lens thread connection needs to be at least 90mm (which is slightly larger than 3.5")

[Thodoris Tzalavras]

(I was looking for something else when I stumbled upon the item I liked to.)

Thought that since it's a mirror fixed at 45 degrees inside a rectangular box, that it might be a relatively easy fix to attach it directly to your lensboard with some sort of a DIY spacer.

By the way, I've looked for 90-to-72mm step-up/down sets with no luck (for a different application).
Almost all sets max out at 82mm…

If you do find a source for 90mm adapter rings, please post a link here.

[M/A]

(I was looking for something else when I stumbled upon the item I liked to.)

Thought that since it's a mirror fixed at 45 degrees inside a rectangular box, that it might be a relatively easy fix to attach it directly to your lensboard with some sort of a DIY spacer.

By the way, I've looked for 90-to-72mm step-up/down sets with no luck (for a different application).
Almost all sets max out at 82mm…

If you do find a source for 90mm adapter rings, please post a link here.

thanks! maybe if I find a way to attach to a "lensboard"-like panel with a filter ring in the correct diameter that would do the trick, possibly welding the ring onto a board, and the board to a box - but that means basically fabricating it all from scratch, which may prove not very simple since it needs to be done very accurately..
I guess that would be my last resort if I don't find another solution. I'm hoping to start experimenting with this in the coming July / August

[xkaes]

again - that would have been ideal - however the lens thread connection needs to be at least 90mm (which is slightly larger than 3.5")

What enlarging lens do you have that has a 3.5" filter thread? I've never heard of such a beast in enlarging. The Rodenstock 480mm isn't even that wide. If you are talking about a 90mm lens, its filter thread is a lot smaller than 90mm -- probably around 43mm (Computar 90mm) or 46mm (Fujinon 90mm). 55mm at the MAX!!!

[M/A]

What enlarging lens do you have that has a 3.5" filter thread? I've never heard of such a beast in enlarging. The Rodenstock 480mm isn't even that wide. If you are talking about a 90mm lens, its filter thread is a lot smaller than 90mm -- probably around 43mm (Computar 90mm) or 46mm (Fujinon 90mm). 55mm at the MAX!!!

Rodenstock Rodagon-G 300mm, which is designed for mural size enlargements (you are welcome to check the pdf online). However, in general terms - for enlargement from 8x10 negatives it's not very unusual with this size and diameters. I've been working with large-format equipment for over 20 years.

[xkaes]

That's a hunk-a-glass!!!

[M/A]

That's a hunk-a-glass!!!

well to cover 8x10 with minimal distortion and top grade quality that would make sense. I wish it was simpler

[xkaes]

My 50mm G has a diminutive 40.5mm thread.

[interneg]

Here's the actual DV HPM for the 504/507/5108 on its own & on a 504 - with a 180 Rodagon attached for scale - there's a 1/2" glass slab of a mirror under that protective plate if you want an idea of the dimensions etc. I'd question why anyone wants a Rodagon-G for 8x10 unless you're doing 8x & up & on multiple strips of paper/ Duratrans/ Fujitrans.

Argue amongst yourselves...

[Dan Dozer]

I posted this on another thread as well. The whole descriptions that I'm reading here about a mirror project device seems kind of complicated. Have you thought about just using your 8 x 10 camera as a horizontal enlarger using the cold light head on your enlarger? I did this with my Kodak 2D camera and it works great

[ic-racer]

Assuming the baseboard is aligned to your lens and negative, a simple solution would be to obtain a rather large (front surface) mirror and prop it on the baseboard at 45 degrees. You can fine tune the angle by checking focus at the top and bottom of the projected image. You would need a rather large mirror that extends almost to the edge of the baseboard, otherwise the projected image will be blocked by the baseboard.

An advantage of the large mirror is the precision to which it will need to be aligned would be measured in millimeters rather than the micrometers required to align a mirror close to the lens.

[ic-racer]

90mm is the same front diameter as the 'Non-G' Rodagon 300mm. The front of a commonly used 360mm enlarging lens is 110mm in diameter.

[interneg]

The whole descriptions that I'm reading here about a mirror project device seems kind of complicated.

I don't think you have grasped how big the De Vere 108s is - it can do 40x60" direct to the baseboard. The only reason to need the HPM for it is if you're going bigger than that on an occasional basis (more regularly than that, and you'd be better off finding one of the several horizontal De Vere enlargers) - and while you could tip the smaller De Vere's over on their back & muddle around the controls etc (and stop the head tipping backwards etc), they are the diametric opposite of the jerry rigged bits of bent tin that some on this thread seem to be assuming they are.

[M/A]

Here's the actual DV HPM for the 504/507/5108 on its own & on a 504 - with a 180 Rodagon attached for scale - there's a 1/2" glass slab of a mirror under that protective plate if you want an idea of the dimensions etc. I'd question why anyone wants a Rodagon-G for 8x10 unless you're doing 8x & up & on multiple strips of paper/ Duratrans/ Fujitrans.

Argue amongst yourselves...

thank you very much! that is very useful. Do you think it is possible to use it with 8x10 lenses? that would depend on the width of the mirror and maximum distance from the lens.
If I can't get a hold of such item - I will try to find a way to fabricate it by myself - I am already thinking - maybe if I use the front mechanism of a view camera and place a large mirror instead of a lens panel - then connect it to the lens panel of the enlarger to clip from above like in your picture - that could be interesting - and less limiting in size maybe.

Have you used the mirror attachment regularly? can you say anything about the experience using it? do you think the mirror influence the quality of print?

As you may see in my original post - yes - I am working towards being able to also print mural size black and white prints with several sheets of paper and with splicing, which is why Rodagon-G becomes useful (I got one recently in great condition for a very reasonable price). I do wonder how it will preform with a mirror (in terms of focusing - essentially I am making a "small print" projected on the mirror which is enlarged again by the mirror onto the wall). I will test that by using a "regular" 300 mm lens and Rodagon-G 300 which I have, but that will only happen sometime this summer.
I also think that already around 40"x50" you will see the difference between using Rodagon-G and a regular / APO lens. Another advantage for Rodagon-G is that the best aperture to work on is only 2 stops down from maximum- wide open, which will also help with shorter exposure time for large size prints.
I have made a lot of 50''/70'' prints in the past in black and white and colour in the darkroom by myself - so it is not a new territory for me. However - wall projection, mirror, splicing by myself, and working mural size by myself - that will be - uumm - refreshing.. I anticipate long nights in the studio, so that might not be very fun at the beginning (but also that would not be new for me).

I do realise that working above 40" - it will be more useful to get a horizontal enlarger but I am unable to do that atm - perhaps in the future. The Devere I have was received for free and had it shipped from Jerusalem to London at a great price and its in my studio now. Therefore I would like to experiment with the mirror and see if that system can work for me - that way I can also work with one enlarger instead of 2, and put the Devere 108 on a track just like a horizontal enlarger. then most of the time I can make prints up to 40'' (btw I think I can get away with 50"x60" actually), but also use it horizontally for some of my projects. The reason why I am interested in making such large silver gelatines is for another discussion..

[M/A]

Assuming the baseboard is aligned to your lens and negative, a simple solution would be to obtain a rather large (front surface) mirror and prop it on the baseboard at 45 degrees. You can fine tune the angle by checking focus at the top and bottom of the projected image. You would need a rather large mirror that extends almost to the edge of the baseboard, otherwise the projected image will be blocked by the baseboard.

An advantage of the large mirror is the precision to which it will need to be aligned would be measured in millimeters rather than the micrometers required to align a mirror close to the lens.

also interesting point - but there are advantages and disadvantages for both - larger mirror may also mean many more specs of dust to deal with, and working in the dark arounf a very large piece of glass..

I do however think of something in the middle between the two options - they still make high grade optical mirrors for professional laser projectors (for scientific reasons, light-laser shows and regular projectors) in larger sizes - around 40-50 cm - I could get one with a stand that I can play with the angle and put it on the tabletop of the enlarge - and that would be fairly cheap - as you say the table may be in the way but I will have to test the physical limitations and see what I'm getting. I guess if you extend the distance of the mechanism and arm of the mirror it will move further away from the table (therefore the table is not in the way) and still aligned with neg-lens-table-(& wall).

right now I am leaning to try connect the mirror mechanism (whatever it is I will have to fabricate) from the lens panel since it makes a lot of sense for it to be in the lens area butboth options may work.

[M/A]

I posted this on another thread as well. The whole descriptions that I'm reading here about a mirror project device seems kind of complicated. Have you thought about just using your 8 x 10 camera as a horizontal enlarger using the cold light head on your enlarger? I did this with my Kodak 2D camera and it works great

I must say - that is very impressive you manages to do that. I have seen many people trying and failing in doing that so really well done. I do have one of those Kodak 2D from the 1920is and it still works, I use it as a second 8x10 camera.

this is less relevant for me as it wont work for large prints but I can see why you would prefer to do that for your setup.

[interneg]

thank you very much! that is very useful. Do you think it is possible to use it with 8x10 lenses? that would depend on the width of the mirror and maximum distance from the lens.
If I can't get a hold of such item - I will try to find a way to fabricate it by myself - I am already thinking - maybe if I use the front mechanism of a view camera and place a large mirror instead of a lens panel - then connect it to the lens panel of the enlarger to clip from above like in your picture - that could be interesting - and less limiting in size maybe.

Have you used the mirror attachment regularly? can you say anything about the experience using it? do you think the mirror influence the quality of print?.

Yes, it works absolutely fine with the 240/300 Rodagons (that's the reason it's so big & has the runners - to allow for adjustment for different focal lengths) - you can't very easily get anything bigger than a regular 300 Rodagon on a 5108 - anything bigger needs a machine that takes the larger lens boards like the 108s etc.

The optics of the mirror aren't a problem, it's all the other steps you need to take to ensure good alignment (& low/ no vibration) between enlarger and wall that are important - and which are more time consuming than a well set up horizontal enlarger on rails. You are also going to need to print with the neg upside down, relative to how you would normally place it (emulsion to emulsion). De Vere didn't do things by half measures - and the HPM exists because the operational interface (and general precision) of the De Vere mechanism didn't allow the head to be swung round 90 degrees like a Durst (for example). It was not a cheap solution, but much cheaper than buying two enlargers if you only occasionally print to sizes requiring wall projection (especially in the cost category that the 108s existed in).