Laser alignment

[cyrus]

I am using a Versalab laser alignment tool and sort of love/hate it.
I love it for the ease of determining enlarger misalignment; and I hate it for the ease of determining enlarger misalignment and then spending hours trying to get perfect alignment.

On my Dust 1840, things are almost perfect. The baseboard and the negative stage align perfectly ... which is good because I have no idea how I'd change that except to fiddle with the baseboard. However, the alignment of the baseboard and the lens is off slightly. I don't know what to do about that to keep all three aligned, but at least the error is consistent.

Now we get to my Omega D5xl 4x5 enlarger with the color head. Things are a lot different there. I manage to just about perfectly align things one day, and the next day they're totally off because, as best as I can determine, enlarger alignment gremlins break into my darkroom and re-misalign things. Grrrrr!

[bob carnie]

Do you have the column stabalized with steady arms.
If not each time you raise and lower you will introduce problems.
I can hang off the supports we have for the 4x5's and this does help tremendously.


I am using a Versalab laser alignment tool and sort of love/hate it.
I love it for the ease of determining enlarger misalignment; and I hate it for the ease of determining enlarger misalignment and then spending hours trying to get perfect alignment.

On my Dust 1840, things are almost perfect. The baseboard and the negative stage align perfectly ... which is good because I have no idea how I'd change that except to fiddle with the baseboard. However, the alignment of the baseboard and the lens is off slightly. I don't know what to do about that to keep all three aligned, but at least the error is consistent.

Now we get to my Omega D5xl 4x5 enlarger with the color head. Things are a lot different there. I manage to just about perfectly align things one day, and the next day they're totally off because, as best as I can determine, enlarger alignment gremlins break into my darkroom and re-misalign things. Grrrrr!

[BetterSense]

Have you determined your error tolerance on your measurement? If you attempt to adjust anything based on measurements, without knowing what the tolerances on the measurement is, and on how tolerance there is in the actual quantity being measured, you are not doing justice to the measurement. This goes for anything not just enlarger alignment. The first thing you should do once you get the ability to quantify anything is to quantify the amount of error that is tolerable. If you don't, you just end up arbitrarily setting the tolerance equal to your human ability to read the instrument.

For example, you might be trying to get the laser aligned so well that you can't perceive any misalignment in the beam. But that's not 'perfect' either...it's just equal to your ability to perceive the error. I guarantee if you could 'zoom up' or use a finer laser beam, or shoot the beam across the room to get more angular resolution, you would see that when you can't perceive any misalignment, it's still misaligned to some extent. Where do you draw the line? It might well be that you only have to align the laser dot to within a 1cm radius of the laser aperture to achieve acceptable alignment.

[cyrus]

Have you determined your error tolerance on your measurement? If you attempt to adjust anything based on measurements, without knowing what the tolerances on the measurement is, and on how tolerance there is in the actual quantity being measured, you are not doing justice to the measurement. This goes for anything not just enlarger alignment. The first thing you should do once you get the ability to quantify anything is to quantify the amount of error that is tolerable. If you don't, you just end up arbitrarily setting the tolerance equal to your human ability to read the instrument.

For example, you might be trying to get the laser aligned so well that you can't perceive any misalignment in the beam. But that's not 'perfect' either...it's just equal to your ability to perceive the error. I guarantee if you could 'zoom up' or use a finer laser beam, or shoot the beam across the room to get more angular resolution, you would see that when you can't perceive any misalignment, it's still misaligned to some extent. Where do you draw the line? It might well be that you only have to align the laser dot to within a 1cm radius of the laser aperture to achieve acceptable alignment.

Well, as long as the laser aperture and the red dot aligns when the enlarger head is at its lowest position, and continue to align while the enlarger head moves up to its highest position, I figure its pretty much aligned as well as I can humanely make it. On the Durst, that's the case when aligning the baseboard with the negative, which is really a testament to how well this thing is made. On the Omega, well, not quite. The dot can move up to 1 cm from the aperture, depending on how the Red Sox are doing.

[cyrus]

Do you have the column stabalized with steady arms.
If not each time you raise and lower you will introduce problems.
I can hang off the supports we have for the 4x5's and this does help tremendously.

You mean connect the enlarger to the wall? It is on the baseboard only right now, which itself was a problem since the lens stage was misaligned with the baseboard, and apparently there is no way to correct that except to put a shim under the enlarger column where it connects to the baseboard and re-tighten the screws that connect the column to the baseboard.

Once I got that right, I then fiddled with the 4 scews on the negative stage to get the negative stage aligned which was no easy task for one guy with two hands.

But each time I lower the lamphouse, it goes slightly out of whack. I discovered that my neg holders aren't perfectly flat either. See, Versalab! I didn't need to know this!

[bob carnie]

Yes to the wall
Once you have the sucker aligned top to bottom , attach the braces, this will act as a stabalizer for the column and unless you do this you will be aligning almost everytime you change the head height.
Omega sells the proper braces not sure where you would get them but they are really worth the price and effort.
I only use glass carriers, I haven't used the glassless carriers in 20 years as they really suck.
I have a tech who checks my alignment on a regular basis, I am using three of these enlarger, the durst and Deveer are much more solid in this regard
This would be the weakest point of the omega system, but with braces and glass carriers, life is much better.





You mean connect the enlarger to the wall? It is on the baseboard only right now, which itself was a problem since the lens stage was misaligned with the baseboard, and apparently there is no way to correct that except to put a shim under the enlarger column where it connects to the baseboard and re-tighten the screws that connect the column to the baseboard.

Once I got that right, I then fiddled with the 4 scews on the negative stage to get the negative stage aligned which was no easy task for one guy with two hands.

But each time I lower the lamphouse, it goes slightly out of whack. I discovered that my neg holders aren't perfectly flat either. See, Versalab! I didn't need to know this!

[bob carnie]

I am using a Laser Align 11 made by focal point in Florida, I also buy my glass from him, he has a sale on glass right now so I bought 8 combos of reg and An glass for a really good price.
He is a great guy and has a lot of Omega parts.

[cyrus]

I am using a Laser Align 11 made by focal point in Florida, I also buy my glass from him, he has a sale on glass right now so I bought 8 combos of reg and An glass for a really good price.
He is a great guy and has a lot of Omega parts.

Thanks Ill look into buying glass neg carriers but first I'll try to put my L1200 together to see if that is more stable. Im assuming it would be but I've gotten lost in the Durst naming system and can't quite yet figure out which parts I'm missing.

Problem with glass neg is the endless dusting (I feel sorry for anyone with OCD using a glass neg carrier -- they'll end up wiping a hole in the glass!) I know the tiny bit of dust or a smudge won't necessarily have an effect on the print but just knowing it is there (and raking light shining off of the negative holder makes it so apparent) just annoys me. Again, a case of having too much info, and not enough tools to do something about it.

[cyrus]

Do you have a web address for Focal Point in Fla Bob?

[bob carnie]

Here you go.

mike@fpointinc.com

tell him I recomended you, maybe I will win a prize.

[Brian K]

I am using a Versalab laser alignment tool and sort of love/hate it.
I love it for the ease of determining enlarger misalignment; and I hate it for the ease of determining enlarger misalignment and then spending hours trying to get perfect alignment.

On my Dust 1840, things are almost perfect. The baseboard and the negative stage align perfectly ... which is good because I have no idea how I'd change that except to fiddle with the baseboard. However, the alignment of the baseboard and the lens is off slightly. I don't know what to do about that to keep all three aligned, but at least the error is consistent.

Now we get to my Omega D5xl 4x5 enlarger with the color head. Things are a lot different there. I manage to just about perfectly align things one day, and the next day they're totally off because, as best as I can determine, enlarger alignment gremlins break into my darkroom and re-misalign things. Grrrrr!

Durst Pro has a lens mount system called the Prola, it allows you to fine tune the alignment of your lens.

[BetterSense]

The dot can move up to 1 cm from the aperture, depending on how the Red Sox are doing.

Is that with the laser bouncing off the negative or bouncing off the lens?

According to my calculations with the simple format for depth of focus, depth of focus for a 4x5 neg using f/8 127mm lens is about 2mm. If the enlarger head is 24 inches above the baseboard, a laser deflection of 1cm from the aperture corresponds to a shift of .8mm at he extreme edge of the neg. So assuming a lens that is square with the baseboard, you should be within depth of focus at f/8 with a 1cm deflection, assuming your negative stage is 24 inches off the baseboard. If you align with the head higher, you are doing even better. Every stop below f/8 you use buys you another Sqrt(2) of margin.

[cyrus]

Is that with the laser bouncing off the negative or bouncing off the lens?

According to my calculations with the simple format for depth of focus, depth of focus for a 4x5 neg using f/8 127mm lens is about 2mm. If the enlarger head is 24 inches above the baseboard, a laser deflection of 1cm from the aperture corresponds to a shift of .8mm at he extreme edge of the neg. So assuming a lens that is square with the baseboard, you should be within depth of focus at f/8 with a 1cm deflection, assuming your negative stage is 24 inches off the baseboard. If you align with the head higher, you are doing even better. Every stop below f/8 you use buys you another Sqrt(2) of margin.


THe red dot is about 1 cm from the laser aperture when bouncing off the negative stage. When bounced off the lens, I get it perfectly on-the-dot, having shimmed the column and carefully changed the tightness of the column screws.

So you're saying that's good enough and I shouldn't worry about getting it on-the-dot?
Would it make a difference if I was using a 150mm lens?

[cyrus]

Durst Pro has a lens mount system called the Prola, it allows you to fine tune the alignment of your lens.

Of course it does, because "Prola" is ever so much more descriptive than, oh I don't know, "adjustable lens mount"???? AAARGH DURST! :mad:

Actually I think I'll just shim the lensboard with something to make it align with the baseboard. THEN LIFE WILL BE PERFECT.

[Len Middleton]

cyrus,

If your lens is mounted on the lensboard using a flange (rather than retain ring), you could shim the flange directly allowing it to be repeatable, assuming that it installs in the same position each time. You can get shim stock from an industrial supply house (e.g. McMaster Carr) and cut it to fit around the flange.

I think that would be a better solution than shimming the lensboard itself.

Hope that helps,

Len

[aduncanson]

I mount the enlarging lenses for my 8x10 Elwood (with its roughly 6x8 lens boards) onto "mezzanine boards" (in some cases simply a Beseler 4x4 lens board with holes drilled in its corners) held off the native Elwood board by a thick compliant gasket and adjustable via 3 (or 4) machine screws with nuts tightened or loosened with a handy nut driver.

[tgtaylor]

I don't have the enlarger that you have but a Beseler 45MXT instead. But I have the Versalab laser alignment tool and here's how I align the Beseler:

1. I make sure that the table that the enlarger is sitting on - in my case it is the Beseler table which I bought used off this forum - is aligned adjusting the leg heights as necessary.

2. Next I align the baseboard by placing a torpedo level on all four sides and criss-crossed in the center. If the bubbles are all centered in each of the six positions, then I move on to the next step.

3. Make sure the enlargers head is well seated and balanced. I have the 45S color head use the torpedo level and recheck if I bumped the head which occasionally happens.

4. Next place the easel you will be using on the baseboard and check the alignment at each of the 6 locations mentioned above. (Until fairly recently my main easel was an 11x14 Saunders V track which I purchased used and is slightly off balance as it had been dropped by the previous owner. It was necessary to place small pieces of mount board underneath at various locations to get everything plumb. The problem with that was the tendency to nudge the easel during printing which threw the balance out of whack. I solved that problem by replacing that easel with a 16x20 Saunders Universal which I also bought used and is perfectly balanced. In addition the easel butts-up against the Beseler columns and doesn't move during a printing session.)

5. With the negative stage raised to 24 inches above the baseboard, check the L/R, and front-to-back alignment of the negative stage with the laser tool sitting on the easel per the instructions for your enlarger. Since I use a glass negative carrier I bounce the laser off the glass carrier and tighten the alignment screws with the laser in the bulls eye.

6. Last, and easiest for me, with the lens that I will be using to print with installed I align the lens stage by bouncing the laser off of one of the glass slides that came with the laser for that purpose. Since my enlarging lens are mounted on Bes-Align adjustable lens-boards, adjusting the lens stage until the laser is in the bulls-eye is a simple matter of slightly turning the three adjusting screws on the board.

That's all there is to it!

Thomas

[Larry Gebhardt]

THe red dot is about 1 cm from the laser aperture when bouncing off the negative stage. When bounced off the lens, I get it perfectly on-the-dot, having shimmed the column and carefully changed the tightness of the column screws.

So you're saying that's good enough and I shouldn't worry about getting it on-the-dot?
Would it make a difference if I was using a 150mm lens?

I use a pair of D5XLs and I don't find they shift around much, even without the wall brace. If you the lens stage is now level you should be able to get the negative stage also level fairly easily. The big problem I had with the negative stage is getting it level and perfectly flat. It always seems as if one corner is higher or lower than the other three. This will lead to appearances that things are shifting.

Also make sure you laser alignment tool is still level. Just spin it on the baseboard and make sure the reflected dot doesn't rotate around the center.

[tgtaylor]

While I do not have an Omega or Durst, it doesn't make sense to me to align the lens stage before aligning the negative stage, and 1cm=10mm, is too far off the mark IMO.

There is no reason why you can't hit the bulls-eye unless there is some damage to the chassis preventing you from aligning the negative stage and your equiptment doesn't allow you the precision necessary for the lens stage.

In any event, follow my steps in the order they were presented and you won't go wrong: table, baseboard, easel then head/light source, negative stage, and then the lens stage.

Piece of cake with the laser ;)

Thomas

[gary mulder]

On a durst 1840 the lens stage moves by 2 bars that run supported by small ball bearings in 4 sets. The position of these bearings can be adjusted. That's the way to remove the misalignment between neg-stage and lens-stage.

[Jim Jones]

Both the head and lens stage on my ancient DeJUR Versatile Professional 4x5 enlarger can intentionally and easily be tilted for perspective control. This means they can easily get out of alignment. A sheet of clear film lightly abraded with medium and fine grades of sandpaper in the negative carrier provides an inexpensive, quick, and accurate tool for checking alignment. When the image of the fine abrasions are sharply focused in the four corners of the image on the easel, the most important requirement of enlarger alignment is satisfied. Unlike some more elaborate techniques, this also works when perspective control is applied. A quick comparisons of the diminsions of the image on the baseboard with a ruler determines if the perspective control adjustments are zeroed. Of course the negative carrier should be checked at least one time for flatness and an accurate aperture. Since the main objective of enlarger alignment is to make the image sharp from corner to corner, this simple technique does that without a need for levels and lasers. Such devices do not check the all-important sharpness of the image.

[ic-racer]

On a durst 1840 the lens stage moves by 2 bars that run supported by small ball bearings in 4 sets. The position of these bearings can be adjusted. That's the way to remove the misalignment between neg-stage and lens-stage.

Yes, and then the baseboard is 4-point adjustable to bring it all together.

[Larry Gebhardt]

While I do not have an Omega or Durst, it doesn't make sense to me to align the lens stage before aligning the negative stage, and 1cm=10mm, is too far off the mark IMO.

There is no reason why you can't hit the bulls-eye unless there is some damage to the chassis preventing you from aligning the negative stage and your equiptment doesn't allow you the precision necessary for the lens stage.

In any event, follow my steps in the order they were presented and you won't go wrong: table, baseboard, easel then head/light source, negative stage, and then the lens stage.

Piece of cake with the laser ;)

Thomas

Actually with the Omega line you need to adjust the lens stage first because it moves the whole carriage which will also move the negative stage.

I have scanned and posted the adjustment instructions here (file was too large to upload to this site): http://dl.dropbox.com/u/2175281/Omega%20Adjustment%20And%20Alignment.pdf

They use a level, but you can just as easily use a laser to check parallel.

Also, for the original poster you can see that there is a way to level the lens stage without shimming the column. I made same mistake and undid my shims once I got these instructions with my second enlarger.

[tgtaylor]

Glad I have the Beseler!

The whole alignment procedure takes me about 5 minutes max to complete. The hardest part on the Beseler is the LR and front to back alignment and only because you need two hands with a wrench in each hand to tighten the alignment bolts while keeping the red dot in the bulls-eye. But it only takes a minute or two to complete.

Thomas

[Len Middleton]

Thomas,

It is one of those compromises made in the design stage.

Should it be made easy to adjust, but in its design may require more frequent adjustment?

Or should it be made more robust and require fewer adjustments, but in its design harder to adjust?

The ideal of course is robust with adjustments required infrequently, but nonetheless easy to adjust... :D

Or sorry, forgot the other compromise that often prevents the ideal scenario, affordable!!!! :eek:

I think I will stick with the Durst, as they are now affordable, given the demise of many commercial labs...:(

The Beseler will do the job and I know as I had one, but the Durst, well the Beseler MX45 left to make room for the Durst L184...

My thoughts,

Len

[cyrus]

Yes, and then the baseboard is 4-point adjustable to bring it all together.

Sadly not mine. The chasis is a L184, the lamphouse is a CLS 1840. In any case I managed to get everything aligned now. FINALLY

[cyrus]

Actually with the Omega line you need to adjust the lens stage first because it moves the whole carriage which will also move the negative stage.

I have scanned and posted the adjustment instructions here (file was too large to upload to this site): http://dl.dropbox.com/u/2175281/Omega%20Adjustment%20And%20Alignment.pdf

They use a level, but you can just as easily use a laser to check parallel.

Also, for the original poster you can see that there is a way to level the lens stage without shimming the column. I made same mistake and undid my shims once I got these instructions with my second enlarger.

Thank you - I wish there was a central repository of documents like this

[Larry Gebhardt]

Thank you - I wish there was a central repository of documents like this

I've been having the same thought recently. Maybe we can set one up here, or over at APUG.

[Len Middleton]

Alignment instructions for the Durst L184 are on the Durst USA web site, including a mention of the PROLA adjustable alignment lensboard.

[ic-racer]

Thank you - I wish there was a central repository of documents like this

I also agree. I have perhaps 100 pdfs of enlarger manuals. I had offered many to butkus.org but he writes he is not interested in hosting darkroom pdfs.

[gary mulder]

http://manuelsphoto.free.fr/