enlarger question

Hi all,

we have a couple of very bad enlargers in our university society
darkroom. i am looking to buy new gear now. what would you say is more
important lenses or enlarger? how does the enlarger matter? is it not
just a bit of metal that passes light through the negative onto the lens?

Many thanks,
Gunnar

Gunnar

Depending on the size of the enlarger but contact classis-enlargers.com
.. He sells rebuilt Omega D2s. Rebuilt to better than Omega ever built
them. They will last forever.

Lenses are biggies.

Bob AZ

Gunnar Mallon spake thus:

Hi all,

we have a couple of very bad enlargers in our university society
darkroom. i am looking to buy new gear now. what would you say is more
important lenses or enlarger? how does the enlarger matter? is it not
just a bit of metal that passes light through the negative onto the lens?

I'll take a crack at this and say the lens is most important.

As you suspect, the enlarger is basically just several hunks o'metal
that support the lens, negative, lamp, condenser, etc., and hold them in
alignment. Nothing rocket-science about it: basically, the elements in
the optical path (light, condenser, film and lens) need to be in a
straight line with the components aligned perpendicularly to the light path.

So what a guy would want is a solidly-constructed unit which can be
accurately aligned. Most enlargers that are above the El Cheapo class
fulfill these basic requirements. And of course, with the Great Takeover
of Digital Photography, enlargers are much cheaper and easier to acquire.


--
The only reason corrupt Republicans rule the roost in Washington
is because the corrupt Democrats can't muster any viable opposition.

Only thing I would disagree with is a Democracy gets corrupt when the peopel
get lazy and selfish.

"David Nebenzahl" wrote in message
.com...
Gunnar Mallon spake thus:

Hi all,

we have a couple of very bad enlargers in our university society
darkroom. i am looking to buy new gear now. what would you say is more
important lenses or enlarger? how does the enlarger matter? is it not
just a bit of metal that passes light through the negative onto the lens?

I'll take a crack at this and say the lens is most important.

As you suspect, the enlarger is basically just several hunks o'metal that
support the lens, negative, lamp, condenser, etc., and hold them in
alignment. Nothing rocket-science about it: basically, the elements in the
optical path (light, condenser, film and lens) need to be in a straight
line with the components aligned perpendicularly to the light path.

So what a guy would want is a solidly-constructed unit which can be
accurately aligned. Most enlargers that are above the El Cheapo class
fulfill these basic requirements. And of course, with the Great Takeover
of Digital Photography, enlargers are much cheaper and easier to acquire.


--
The only reason corrupt Republicans rule the roost in Washington
is because the corrupt Democrats can't muster any viable opposition.

Creeker spake thus [regarding sig]:

Only thing I would disagree with is a Democracy gets corrupt when the peopel
get lazy and selfish.

No disagreement from this quarter.


--
The only reason corrupt Republicans rule the roost in Washington
is because the corrupt Democrats can't muster any viable opposition.

Creeker wrote:
Only thing I would disagree with is a Democracy gets corrupt when the peopel
get lazy and selfish.

Could someone point me to a Democratic government ? I don't remember
ever seeing one.

JD

John spake thus:

Creeker wrote:

Only thing I would disagree with is a Democracy gets corrupt when the
peopel get lazy and selfish.

Could someone point me to a Democratic government ? I don't remember
ever seeing one.

Do you mean democratic or Democratic?


--
The only reason corrupt Republicans rule the roost in Washington
is because the corrupt Democrats can't muster any viable opposition.

David Nebenzahl wrote:
John spake thus:

Creeker wrote:

Only thing I would disagree with is a Democracy gets corrupt when the
peopel get lazy and selfish.

Could someone point me to a Democratic government ? I don't remember
ever seeing one.

Do you mean democratic or Democratic?

I'd be happy to have both ! Someone in office again with some fiscal
responsibility would be a good start.

Note that to the best of my knowledge the last truly democratic
government existed in Athens.

JD

Democracies and Republics come in many variants.
They're hard to make distinct.
There is no true "democracy", but the modern proletariat definition has
been claimed: USSR, PROC.
The US is supposed to be a constitutional republic.
But that was before the Left's rise to corruption.

Collin

Cheesehead wrote:

Democracies and Republics come in many variants.
They're hard to make distinct.
There is no true "democracy", but the modern proletariat definition has
been claimed: USSR, PROC.
The US is supposed to be a constitutional republic.
But that was before the Left's rise to corruption.


The Left's? You should pay more attention to the
current scandals and inditement of the corrupt
Right. Unless like dubya you don't read the news
papers.

Even Gingrich is saying they need to clean
up their corruption...