8 X 10 Enlarger: Horizontal use

[Natha Congdon]

I have a space in my house which is about to become a darkroom. 75% of what I d o is contact printing, but I would like to be able to enlarge 8 X 10 negs maybe 25% of the time. The space has only 7 foot ceilings, but at least 20 feet of st raight shot uninterrupted space, so I assume I am looking at horizontal use. Que stions:

1. Any reasons that mounting an enlarger horizontally is not likely to give good results, or is such a headache that I should give up on this idea?

2. Any companies/makes esp. suited for horizontal mounting?

3. At the print/easel end, how does one generally guarantee flatness, esp for l arger prints (I'd like to be able to go to 30 X 40)?

4. How does one deal with the issue of alignment when working horizontally? I assume the table with the enlarger needs to be fixed. Is the easel usually some how attached to the table with the enlarger, or do you just line things up reall y well with a zigaline or whatever at the outset?

5. Any references you'd suggest that speak to this specific issue?

6. Finally, any reasonable alternatives given space requirements and the fact th at all I shoot is 8 X 10? (easel on the floor? Seems like you'd hate yourself a fter about a week of crawling around on your knees!)

Thanks as always for the help!

Nathan

[Ken Burns]

Nathan:

Ansel Adams used an enlarger exactly like the one you have described. Take a look at his series of books: The Print, The Negative, and The Camera.

[neil poulsen]

Horizontal enlargers come up on EBay occassionally. A lot of labs are getting rid of their 8x10's in favor of digital. For example, the DeVere's horizontal 8x10's. (See http://www.Odyssey-Sales.com/)

At the same time, don't assume that you can't find a vertical enlarger that will serve, at least for B&W. For example, consider the Zone VI 8x10 w/the short 43" column and the Beseler conversion. (Don't know about the quality of the latter.) While my Zone VI is at normal height, I've constructed a free standing base for the enlarger that allows me to remove a 1' partition and lower the easel table that distance to 20" from the floor. At this 20" height, I could use a 10" enlarging lens, achieve a 3x enlargement, and still have my Zone VI head within 7' from the floor. What kind of enlargements do you want to make?

On the other hand, with the kind of horizontal space that you have available, perhaps horizontal is the best way to go.

[Wayne]

There are almost always Ansco Studio Cameras on ebay. I think these could be modified to make an excellent enlarger. You just have to find one at the right price. Some of the people selling those things have the mistaken impression they are worth a lot of money. Be patient and you'll find someone who just wants it hauled away. But be warned: I might beat you to it.

[M.]

Nathan, Omega makes/made a first-quality mirror which fits below the enlarger lens and projects the image 90 degrees onto the wall. This is by far the best technique short of having a dedicated horizontal enlarger.

[kthompson]

Nathan, my experience with this sort of thing has been limited to 4x5, so I'm not sure how much of this is applicable to you...but do you already have an enlarger, or are just shopping now? In our old darkroom, we made murals with sort of a "poor man's horizontal enlarger", an old Beseler MX tilted horizontally. We projected against a 4x8 plywood sheet that ran along a garage door track overhead. There was a sheet of gatorfoam attached to the plywood, and we would use thumbtacks to hold the mural paper in place. This was for murals though, a 30x40 really isn't that big. We now farm all the murals out, but we still make prints up to 20x24 in house. We have one enlarger set up on a drop table, if we need it. In a few extreme cases, we've had to redo this mural setup in our new darkroom. It was originally designed for murals, so it's really big. This has been a major pain to do, but we've projected the image against this false wall we have, and basically just measured it off & used levels to get it squared up. I think a laser alignment thing would be a huge plus...again I'm talking about big, big prints here. A 2 person job. Alot of enlargers will offer extensions for the focus knobs, etc. So this makes it easier. Another option (besides an old studio camera) might be to look for a used horizontal stat camera to work with. I'm not sure what you'd have to do to get a light source/carrier rigged up though.

[Michael S. Briggs]

Horizontal was a common configuration for large (8x10 and up) format enlargers. Durst and Devere made (still make?) such machines. These tend to be very high end and costly. With the increasing use of digital, you make get lucky and get one of these used at a good price.

I would guess that the negative carriers sandwich the negatives between glass and that the print is held in position by a vacumn easel. These enlargers usually have tracks to keep everything in alignment.

The equation for the separation between negative and print is d_tot = f * (m+1)^2 / m. For f=300 mm and m=4, you will need 1875 mm = 6.15 feet. Allowing room for the enlarger head, it won't fit vertically in 7 feet. The other possibility would be to use a wide-angle enlarger lens, e.g., if you could find a 240 mm lens that will cover 8x10, you would only need 4.9 feet between negative and print.

[Struan Gray]

I've played with Bill M's idea - it worked - but would recommend a prism over a first surface mirror. When new a prism is no better or worse than a mirror, but they're easier to keep optically perfect over time. Some process cameras used just such a prism to save space, so a little dumpster diving may get you what you want for no or little cost. Otherwise, a simple 45? prism will work, but you will have to invert the neg in the carrier to avoid a mirror-image print.

[Blake]

how much money do you have?

http://www.eseco-speedmaster.com/

[kthompson]

Hey, that's not a bad idea...according to my ESECO catalog here, the AF 1010 has a 20 ft. track.