Bill, I guess that you added a piece of glass to keep the neg from dropping thru the enlarged opening ?
Bill, I guess that you added a piece of glass to keep the neg from dropping thru the enlarged opening ?
Haa, yes that's from back when I wanted to do everything, even planing and rabbiting the wood for frames. No Aaron Brothers for me...Originally Posted by Harold_4074
But no glass in the carrier... Fractions keep the negative well supported. It's 1/64th inch all around*. Next time though, I'd make one left-hand cut instead of both left and right, since it was an unecessary cut. Took about two days and a dozen saw blades. A file is a better tool for the job.
*I think... I'll try to post the actual measurements in case anyone's interested.
No need to ruin a good negative carrier. Just go to a framing shop and have them cut two identical mat boards to your specifications. Place them together, put tape down one side for a hinge. Bingo. . . a negative carrier. I personally make my own with a straight-edge and razor blade.
Yeah... that matboard is wonderfully dimensionally-stable stuff isn't it? Goes well with an enlarger made of paper mache.
8-ply is pretty stiff stuff, though. I have lens boards made of a piece of 8-ply dry-mounted to a piece of black 4-ply...hole cut out with a coping saw. Not good in the rain, though -- might need to use a spray fixative or something on them! LOL!
"Landscapes exist in the material world yet soar in the realms of the spirit..." Tsung Ping, 5th Century China
Gosh. Where did you find crystals clear enough to makes the lenses out of back in the Pleistocene?
Don't let your lack of first-hand experience prevent you from being a reliable source of useful information. A little education combined with the willingness to experiment can solve many of the simplest problems. As for myself, I have no first-hand experience with "enlargers made of paper mache". But, I hope to hear more from you on that topic. It does sound interesting. And, I have no experience maintaining equipment for the purpose of show. Trust me, nobody on this planet gives a hoot what my negative carriers are made of. So, moving this along . . . Tell me about the stability of wooden negative carriers used with Elwood Enlargers and Kodak Enlarging cameras. Are they dimensionally unstable? Should I avoid them? Your expertise in the stability of negative carriers would be appreciated. Thank you Drew. Dann
I miss the Pleistocene, especially in the earlier days. Boiling down woolly mammoths to make gelatin for my carbon prints are fond memories. I was sorry to see them go extinct. Gelatin these days from cows and pigs just is just not the same thing. Kids have it so easy these days, but no better.
The Neanderthals were pretty good at finding clear crystals, they had quite the knack for it. I would trade carbon prints for them. I printed them fairly light to best match the ambient light levels in their caves. It was the Ammonium and Potassium dichromates that were harder to find/make. A little ammonia, some sulfuric acid and some chromite all had to be found. Not easy. The Neanderthals were no good at that sort of stuff. Crystals, mushrooms, and macrame were all they were good at...bloody hippies. No wonder they went extinct.
"Landscapes exist in the material world yet soar in the realms of the spirit..." Tsung Ping, 5th Century China
I use mat board negative carriers for 35mm and half-frame... But even though I use them... I would not vouch for their dimensional stability. I can't even assure you there is no impact on enlarger alignment. I always wonder if I am causing myself problems. So even I cringed a bit at the thought of a full-frame 4x5 negative carrier made of cardboard. That's got to be worse than what I'm doing.
My apologies to Drew. I took that way too far. I normally try to avoid making comments on posts that have little value to the PO's original inquiry. I'll have to chalk this one up to having a bad-hair-day.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks