Glass or glassless carrier for medium format?

[jose angel]

Hi all,

I wonder about buying a couple of glassless carriers for medium format; my enlarger is a dichroic 4x5" Saunders (diffusion). I currently use glassless for 35mm film, only (on another enlarger).

There are many threads saying that glass is essential, others that it isn`t. I understand that curved negatives need glass but, what about perfectly flat negatives? I think heat is not an issue with my enlarger & way of working.

I`d say my 4x5" sheets doesn`t need glass, they came out perfectly flat. Glass carriers are a pain to clean, and proned to have dust on prints.

I have the chance of buying the ones I need, but they are expensive... What would you do? Are glassless carriers worth it? (6x6, 6x7) Thanks.

[Richard Wasserman]

For 120 and 35mm I split the difference and use a 1/2 glass carrier—glass on the top only. 2 less surfaces to clean and the negatives are held flat. For 4x5 I use a full glass carrier. If you practice reasonable darkroom hygiene I find that dust is usually not a big issue and it's not too hard to keep glass carriers clean.

[bob carnie]

Glass Carriers for me

top AN bottom regular

[Jon Shiu]

yes, glass is worth it for 35mm, 6x6 and 6x7, but suggest just getting 6x9 glass carrier and masking off. Not difficult to clean, not any more dust issues than glassless.

Jon

[jose angel]

Yes, I regularly use a 4x5" full glass (anti Newton) with homemade cardboard masks when needed... the thing is that I have found (not so spare parts these days) the glassless (new) ones for my enlarger.

I`m just pleased thinking to avoid the masking pain... just to brush and blow over the negative... Glassless ones are easy and fast to use! But I don`t want to buy them and throw after the first use... 6x7 negatives are big and soft... that`s my fear.

[jose angel]

I can certainly live with my good glass ones... but the chance is here... maybe I should skip it.

[Dennis]

If you use a 4x5 glass carrier you can cut the mask out of unprocessed 4x5 film. I use glassless 120 film carriers but I tape the edges of my film down. To my eyes I see no benefit to glass. In my grain focuser my 6x6 or 6x7 negs are sharp corner to corner and with a cold light head and the tape the focus stays put.
Dennis

[BetterSense]

I rarely enlarge past 8x10, so DOF on the enlarger is less of an issue. I've never used glass, and lost the urge to switch to glass since I got a cold light head. On my condenser head, though, glass was nearly mandatory. The only way I could make prints without glass was to run the light for several minutes to let the negative equillibrate, then use a piece of card as a shutter.

[Kodachrome25]

I rarely print under 11x14 and use a 6x7 anti-newton glass carrier with masks for up to 6x6. I have had no problems with the small to medium format use and in my dry climate, film curls often. The other reason I use them is because I don't care for how much regular glasses carriers crop into the frame. When you file out a glasses carrier, it has less base material to hold in place, hence the glass carriers.

Now my 4x5 anti newton glass carriers, both the regular one and the oversized one I prefer that does not once again, crop out too much of the image area, I am getting newton rings and I have about had it with the format at this point, it's been a *lot* more trouble than it has been worth. The problem with the latter is that I really have no interest in printing less than 16x20 with 4x5, 20x24 will be typical so this newton ring thing with two anti-newton glass carries is becoming a coffin nail. And yes, the an glass is on top, regular on the bottom, good quality glass from Focal Point, with a cold light head...

Made a nice 20x24 print last night of image I could very well sell...oh, except it has newton rings...:-(

[Bob Salomon]

"There are many threads saying that glass is essential, others that it isn`t. I understand that curved negatives need glass but, what about perfectly flat negatives? I think heat is not an issue with my enlarger & way of working."

There are two reasons for using glass. The first is so the film is flat. Film naturally curls towards the emulsion side.
The second is to keep it on the same plane and eliminate "popping" of the film during the exposure.

[ic-racer]

My experience is that 6x6 to 6x9 are probably the most prone to negative popping of all the roll-film formats. I used to let them pop with the lenscap on then make the exposure. This is not so convenient if you have complex dodging and burning. Also, with lamps and power supplies being more scarce I have abandoned that (as of the last few months) so now I can say I use glass for just about every format

[gary mulder]

Do your self a favour, get a tension carrier. Yes 6 x 6 and 6 x 9 are the worst of all.

[jose angel]

Thanks. I think I´ll skip them...