Sharpness Puzzle...

[SAShruby]

I'm having a consistent problem. I steadily get unsharp negatives. This example is 1200 DPI raw scan of 1/2 square inch area. It's an equivalent of 2x2 square inch on 16x20 enlargement. Image is overall soft, looks like I'm out of focus.

This was taken by Arca Swiss 4x5 camera on Ries tripod, lens Fujinon WS 210mm @ F45, exposure 1/15 sec. No filter. Focused with Schneider 4x loupe.

Processed in Xtol 1:1, trays, semistand development for 20 minutes, first and last minute agitation by rocking tray. Negative came out with an excellent density.

I tested my ground glass, it's spot on. The focused point was the sharpest point on the negative but if enlarged, same soft edges.

Could be this caused by my method how I develop the negative?
Is Fujinon lenses so underperforming?
Or what else?

[Los]

i saw similar results at f45 with a 135mm. your image looks in focus with reduced acutance. i would think your high contrast image (sunny day exterior) should have rendered a very sharp negative. development and/or diffraction could be affecting your acutance. do you get the same "softness" at wider stops?

[Fred Braakman]

Hi Peter,
I had similar problems in the not too distant past, and I found that if I secured the top of my enlarger so that it can not move or shake, I ended up getting sharper images. I bolted extensions from the wall behind the enlarger, and secured them with some bolts to the top of the enlarger assembly.

Fred

[SAShruby]

i saw similar results at f45 with a 135mm. your image looks in focus with reduced acutance. i would think your high contrast image (sunny day exterior) should have rendered a very sharp negative. development and/or diffraction could be affecting your acutance. do you get the same "softness" at wider stops?

Yes, I have same problem with wider apertures and with other lenses as well such as 300 Fujinon WS, 360 Fujinon WS Nikkor 450M.

Before enlarging, I was doing contact printing. I saw those soft edges since. I assumed it's caused primarily by the contact frame glass difraction. Obviously not.

[SAShruby]

Hi Peter,
I had similar problems in the not too distant past, and I found that if I secured the top of my enlarger so that it can not move or shake, I ended up getting sharper images. I bolted extensions from the wall behind the enlarger, and secured them with some bolts to the top of the enlarger assembly.

Fred

My enlarger is bolted to wall as well. I woudn't say this is my problem. The softnes is a consistent problem, not a occasional occurence. Unfortunately. Thanks for the tip though.

I find the softnes on negative. I think I need to resolve this one first.

[Daniel_Buck]

I might be off base here, but have you seen sharper results? or have you always had the softness? If you have always had it, it may be your scanner. Maybe the scanner is not focused properly, and your film needs to be raised or lowered on the glass just a tad bit? Anyone local to you have a sharp negative you could borrow to run a test? Or someone who has a scanner who can scan your negative, as a cross check to double check your findings.

[SAShruby]

I might be off base here, but have you seen sharper results? or have you always had the softness? If you have always had it, it may be your scanner. Maybe the scanner is not focused properly, and your film needs to be raised or lowered on the glass just a tad bit? Anyone local to you have a sharp negative you could borrow to run a test? Or someone who has a scanner who can scan your negative, as a cross check to double check your findings.

This is a scan from the 16x20 print - 2 square inches. Printed 300DPI just to have comparable results to negative scan. Even I look with my loupe, I see the same softness. I saw it in my contacts as well.

Scanner I use is Epson4990. I tested scanner to scan ruler. This is 1200 DPI scan of Ruler.

Daniel, thanks for the suggestion.

[sog1927]

Just to clarify: if you examine the negative directly with a loupe (taking the scanner completely out of the equation), does the negative still look unsharp (I think this is what you mean, but I'm not absolutely sure)?

Steve

This is a scan from the 16x20 print - 2 square inches. Printed 300DPI just to have comparable results to negative scan. Even I look with my loupe, I see the same softness. I saw it in my contacts as well.

Scanner I use is Epson4990. I tested scanner to scan ruler. This is 1200 DPI scan of Ruler.

Daniel, thanks for the suggestion.

[Donald Miller]

I try to never expose any 4X5 below F 32...more normally F22 for reasons of defraction. Additionally 16X20 is the upper limit of a print that I am satisfied with on that size negative...more usually 11X14.

[SAShruby]

Just to clarify: if you examine the negative directly with a loupe (taking the scanner completely out of the equation), does the negative still look unsharp (I think this is what you mean, but I'm not absolutely sure)?

Steve

Let me check. The trick with the negative is that it looks sharp. But, I have only 4x loupe so I cannot see more details. The other thing is that negative always looks more sharper that inverted positive image. But I can see edge softnes.

So to answer your question, I must say, negative is not sharp as I'd like to. I can't enlarge it more than 11x14 with acceptable quality. My 16x20 enlargement is clearly fuzzy when I look closely. From couple feet looks sharp but it's not acceptable to me.