Herbet opined:
I always thought condensors would give more contrasty,
granier and therefore apparently sharper images.
So did I. And the condenser prints do seem grainier. The relative contrast is
impossible to judge because of the differences in light color and the use of variable
contrast paper. I think that what appears to be sharper imaging with the cold head is
due to better tonality. One of the subjects was the fuzzy flower heads of Maiden Hair
grass. I examined the minute hairs of the flower heads on both prints with an 8X loop
and could find no obvious or apparent difference in sharpness. And while overall
contrast seems about the same, the distribution is different. The whites are brighter
on the cold head print, but the greys spread out more gradually. I found some areas on
the stems in the condenser print where the shift from light grey to almost black was
quite abrupt. Viewed at arm's length, the cold head print still looks sharper. I think
the brilliance of the whites may have a lot to do with this.
Herbet asked:
Was your B22 properly aligned? Did you use the same lens?
Yes, the alignment is dead on. I just reset everything a couple of weeks ago. And of
course I'm using the same lower head with both the condensers and the cold head, so
the alignment doesn't change. I did use the same lens both times: a 50/2.8 Nikkor. I
printed one of the cold head prints at f11, one at f8. I think I printed both of the
condenser prints at f8.
Of course this wasn't a controlled experiment, just an observation. But I found it
interesting and wanted to share it.
Paul
--- PAUL STENQUIST <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I printed my first three negs with the zone vi cold
> head last night. Two
> of them were negatives I had printed before using
> condensers in the same
> enlarger (Omega B22). I used the same paper, Ilford
> Multigrade IV RC
> glossy. Of course with the cold head I had to print
> with gel filters
> under the lens rather than in the filter drawer
> above the condensers. I
> found that both negs, which previously printed best
> with a 2 1/2 filter
> now printed with similar contrast using a 1 1/2
> filter. But I'm very
> pleased with the results. Given the same contrast
> range, there appears
> to be more detail in the highlights and more subtle
> variation in the
> midtones. Overall the look is richer. And while I
> was afraid that this
> more diffuse light source might result in less
> sharpness, the apparent
> sharpness seems better. I wanted to try the
> Multigrade IV, which I have
> been using with the condensers for about a year,
> before moving on to a
> graded paper. But I'm so pleased with the results,
> it may very well
> prove to be my final choice in both fiber and RC
> varieties. (I tried
> ordering some graded paper from B&H. While they list
> a fair amount of
> it, they have very little in stock, at least in 11 x
> 14.)
> Paul
> -
> This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List.
> To unsubscribe,
> go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions.
> Don't forget to
> visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at
> http://pug.komkon.org .
>
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get email at your own domain with Yahoo! Mail.
http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/
-
This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe,
go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to
visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
-
This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe,
go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to
visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
