Add group to favorites
Back to post list
Send new message to group Search:
Post Subject:
AN (Anti-Newton) glass question
AN (Anti-Newton) glass question
The Focomat IIa uses AN glass for the top glass, and plain for the lower.
Is this a universal principle? IOW, can I presume the same for any two-glass
carrier?
The Focomat IIa uses AN glass for the top glass, and plain for the lower.
Is this a universal principle? IOW, can I presume the same for any two-glass
carrier?
Re: AN (Anti-Newton) glass question
In article <13tr3556kpoj2e8@news.supernews . com >, <jjs> wrote:
> The Focomat IIa uses AN glass for the top glass, and plain for the lower.
>
> Is this a universal principle? IOW, can I presume the same for any two-glass
> carrier?
The Matte surface of the AN glass has to be above the negative.
--
Reality is a picture perfected and never looking back.
In article <13tr3556kpoj2e8@news.supernews . com >, <jjs> wrote:
> The Focomat IIa uses AN glass for the top glass, and plain for the lower.
>
> Is this a universal principle? IOW, can I presume the same for any two-glass
> carrier?
The Matte surface of the AN glass has to be above the negative.
--
Reality is a picture perfected and never looking back.
Re: AN (Anti-Newton) glass question
<jjs> wrote in message news:13tr3556kpoj2e8@news.supernews . com ...
> The Focomat IIa uses AN glass for the top glass, and plain for the lower.
>
> Is this a universal principle? IOW, can I presume the same for any
> two-glass carrier?
>
>
What I have heard is that the Anit-Newton glass is against the smooth base
side of the negative, and you can use plain glass against the rougher
emulsion side of the negative. I don't know if this is a fact or not; I use
glassless neg carriers.
<jjs> wrote in message news:13tr3556kpoj2e8@news.supernews . com ...
> The Focomat IIa uses AN glass for the top glass, and plain for the lower.
>
> Is this a universal principle? IOW, can I presume the same for any
> two-glass carrier?
>
>
What I have heard is that the Anit-Newton glass is against the smooth base
side of the negative, and you can use plain glass against the rougher
emulsion side of the negative. I don't know if this is a fact or not; I use
glassless neg carriers.
Re: AN (Anti-Newton) glass question
Ken Hart wrote:
> <jjs> wrote in message news:13tr3556kpoj2e8@news.supernews . com ...
>> The Focomat IIa uses AN glass for the top glass, and plain for the lower.
>>
>> Is this a universal principle? IOW, can I presume the same for any
>> two-glass carrier?
>>
>>
>
> What I have heard is that the Anit-Newton glass is against the smooth base
> side of the negative, and you can use plain glass against the rougher
> emulsion side of the negative. I don't know if this is a fact or not; I use
> glassless neg carriers.
>
>
It is more likely that the texture of the ANR glass cannot be in the
emulsion focal plane without showing up (as well as the emulsion not
(usually) being as glossy as the base.
gr
Ken Hart wrote:
> <jjs> wrote in message news:13tr3556kpoj2e8@news.supernews . com ...
>> The Focomat IIa uses AN glass for the top glass, and plain for the lower.
>>
>> Is this a universal principle? IOW, can I presume the same for any
>> two-glass carrier?
>>
>>
>
> What I have heard is that the Anit-Newton glass is against the smooth base
> side of the negative, and you can use plain glass against the rougher
> emulsion side of the negative. I don't know if this is a fact or not; I use
> glassless neg carriers.
>
>
It is more likely that the texture of the ANR glass cannot be in the
emulsion focal plane without showing up (as well as the emulsion not
(usually) being as glossy as the base.
gr
Re: AN (Anti-Newton) glass question
On Mar 16, 5:09 pm, <jjs> wrote:
> The Focomat IIa uses AN glass for the top glass, and plain for the lower.
>
> Is this a universal principle? IOW, can I presume the same for any two-gla=
ss
> carrier?
Yes, as long as it is an anti-newton negative carrier. Plain glass
carriers will have plain glass on both sides. This would be the time
you would get the "newton rings" on your print around the highlights.
Right?
Draco
On Mar 16, 5:09 pm, <jjs> wrote:
> The Focomat IIa uses AN glass for the top glass, and plain for the lower.
>
> Is this a universal principle? IOW, can I presume the same for any two-gla=
ss
> carrier?
Yes, as long as it is an anti-newton negative carrier. Plain glass
carriers will have plain glass on both sides. This would be the time
you would get the "newton rings" on your print around the highlights.
Right?
Draco
Re: AN (Anti-Newton) glass question
On 3/19/2008 12:54 PM Draco spake thus:
> On Mar 16, 5:09 pm, <jjs> wrote:
>
>> The Focomat IIa uses AN glass for the top glass, and plain for the lower.
>>
>> Is this a universal principle? IOW, can I presume the same for any two-glass
>> carrier?
>
> Yes, as long as it is an anti-newton negative carrier.
Your reply is a tautology. If the carrier has anti-Newton glass in it,
then it's an anti-Newton negative carrier.
> Plain glass carriers will have plain glass on both sides. This would
> be the time you would get the "newton rings" on your print around the
> highlights.
I think the OP knows this.
On 3/19/2008 12:54 PM Draco spake thus:
> On Mar 16, 5:09 pm, <jjs> wrote:
>
>> The Focomat IIa uses AN glass for the top glass, and plain for the lower.
>>
>> Is this a universal principle? IOW, can I presume the same for any two-glass
>> carrier?
>
> Yes, as long as it is an anti-newton negative carrier.
Your reply is a tautology. If the carrier has anti-Newton glass in it,
then it's an anti-Newton negative carrier.
> Plain glass carriers will have plain glass on both sides. This would
> be the time you would get the "newton rings" on your print around the
> highlights.
I think the OP knows this.
Re: AN (Anti-Newton) glass question
"Draco" <JPDFDA@hotmail . com > wrote in message
news:55d4a795-b00e-45a3-b78c-ff28e63fa80f@u69g2000hse.googlegroups . com ...
On Mar 16, 5:09 pm, <jjs> wrote:
> The Focomat IIa uses AN glass for the top glass, and plain
> for the lower.
>
> Is this a universal principle? IOW, can I presume the same
> for any two-glass
> carrier?
Yes, as long as it is an anti-newton negative carrier. Plain
glass
carriers will have plain glass on both sides. This would be
the time
you would get the "newton rings" on your print around the
highlights.
Right?
Draco
Newton's rings are an interference pattern where two
beams of light can interfer. The usual cause is reflection
between two reflective surfaces that are very closely
spaced. In the case of an enlarger using a glass sandwich
negative holder the two surfaces are the support side of the
film and the glass next to it. By making the glass slightly
rough the reflection is broken up and the rings are not
formed. Newton's rings can be formed on the emulsion side
too but the emulsion is usually rough enough, or the amount
of reflection from the gelatin low enough, so that rings are
not produced there.
Newton's rings appear as somewhat uneven dark and light
concentric rings all over the image. They follow
approximately any lack of flatness in the two surfaces
involved.
Newton's rings are often used to measure the degree of
conformance of two closely spaced surfaces where one of them
is transparent as when testing the figure of a lens against
a standard.
I think the effect you are referring to is halation.
This is also caused by reflection, usually in film, where
bright areas are reflected back into the emulsion by the
support. All modern film has either a light absorptive
coating on the back or in a layer under the emulsion (the
usual method for color film) to eliminate halation. Halation
was a very serious problem with early glass plates where it
formed quite noticeable halows around bright objects and
reduced the contrast of more extended bright objects. Glass
plates were also coated with anti-reflective layers on the
back. It is usual for the anti-halation layer to be removed
mechanically (as in the Remjet used for Kodachrome and some
motion picture stocks) or for the dyes it contains to be
made colorless by the sulfite in the developer or fixing
bath.
--
---
Richard Knoppow
Los Angeles, CA, USA
dickburk@ix . net com . com
"Draco" <JPDFDA@hotmail . com > wrote in message
news:55d4a795-b00e-45a3-b78c-ff28e63fa80f@u69g2000hse.googlegroups . com ...
On Mar 16, 5:09 pm, <jjs> wrote:
> The Focomat IIa uses AN glass for the top glass, and plain
> for the lower.
>
> Is this a universal principle? IOW, can I presume the same
> for any two-glass
> carrier?
Yes, as long as it is an anti-newton negative carrier. Plain
glass
carriers will have plain glass on both sides. This would be
the time
you would get the "newton rings" on your print around the
highlights.
Right?
Draco
Newton's rings are an interference pattern where two
beams of light can interfer. The usual cause is reflection
between two reflective surfaces that are very closely
spaced. In the case of an enlarger using a glass sandwich
negative holder the two surfaces are the support side of the
film and the glass next to it. By making the glass slightly
rough the reflection is broken up and the rings are not
formed. Newton's rings can be formed on the emulsion side
too but the emulsion is usually rough enough, or the amount
of reflection from the gelatin low enough, so that rings are
not produced there.
Newton's rings appear as somewhat uneven dark and light
concentric rings all over the image. They follow
approximately any lack of flatness in the two surfaces
involved.
Newton's rings are often used to measure the degree of
conformance of two closely spaced surfaces where one of them
is transparent as when testing the figure of a lens against
a standard.
I think the effect you are referring to is halation.
This is also caused by reflection, usually in film, where
bright areas are reflected back into the emulsion by the
support. All modern film has either a light absorptive
coating on the back or in a layer under the emulsion (the
usual method for color film) to eliminate halation. Halation
was a very serious problem with early glass plates where it
formed quite noticeable halows around bright objects and
reduced the contrast of more extended bright objects. Glass
plates were also coated with anti-reflective layers on the
back. It is usual for the anti-halation layer to be removed
mechanically (as in the Remjet used for Kodachrome and some
motion picture stocks) or for the dyes it contains to be
made colorless by the sulfite in the developer or fixing
bath.
--
---
Richard Knoppow
Los Angeles, CA, USA
dickburk@ix . net com . com
Re: AN (Anti-Newton) glass question
> Yes, as long as it is an anti-newton negative carrier.
I'm glad that was brought up. Quite frankly, I just presumed the negative
carrier in question would need anti-newton glass. I will describe it and
perhaps someone can enlighten me. The glass is for the Saltzman 8x10
enlarger. The carrier works with two plates of glass (exactly 8x10") to
sandwich the negative. There is nothing whatsoever to separate the glasses,
except the negative. One removes the lower glass, does what he can to remove
dust, replaces the glass, and swings four tension clips over the edges of
the glass.
Requires AN glass, no?
Thank you all!
> Yes, as long as it is an anti-newton negative carrier.
I'm glad that was brought up. Quite frankly, I just presumed the negative
carrier in question would need anti-newton glass. I will describe it and
perhaps someone can enlighten me. The glass is for the Saltzman 8x10
enlarger. The carrier works with two plates of glass (exactly 8x10") to
sandwich the negative. There is nothing whatsoever to separate the glasses,
except the negative. One removes the lower glass, does what he can to remove
dust, replaces the glass, and swings four tension clips over the edges of
the glass.
Requires AN glass, no?
Thank you all!
Re: AN (Anti-Newton) glass question
In article <13u3gs3qnrtup2a@news.supernews . com >, <jjs> wrote:
> > Yes, as long as it is an anti-newton negative carrier.
>
> I'm glad that was brought up. Quite frankly, I just presumed the negative
> carrier in question would need anti-newton glass. I will describe it and
> perhaps someone can enlighten me. The glass is for the Saltzman 8x10
> enlarger. The carrier works with two plates of glass (exactly 8x10") to
> sandwich the negative. There is nothing whatsoever to separate the glasses,
> except the negative. One removes the lower glass, does what he can to remove
> dust, replaces the glass, and swings four tension clips over the edges of
> the glass.
>
> Requires AN glass, no?
>
> Thank you all!
Ok for you, I just pulled my Omega 10x10 carrier out of the enlarger
and it has two sheets of standard optical glass but not AN. To my
knowledge AN appears with a Matte surface unlike standard optical grade
glass. It (AN) will look less than perfectly clear. Imop & Perhaps
Richard K. can corroborate AN is only needed with a Condenser housing, I
have an Omega diffused Halogen one of three known to exist.
--
Reality is a picture perfected and never looking back.
In article <13u3gs3qnrtup2a@news.supernews . com >, <jjs> wrote:
> > Yes, as long as it is an anti-newton negative carrier.
>
> I'm glad that was brought up. Quite frankly, I just presumed the negative
> carrier in question would need anti-newton glass. I will describe it and
> perhaps someone can enlighten me. The glass is for the Saltzman 8x10
> enlarger. The carrier works with two plates of glass (exactly 8x10") to
> sandwich the negative. There is nothing whatsoever to separate the glasses,
> except the negative. One removes the lower glass, does what he can to remove
> dust, replaces the glass, and swings four tension clips over the edges of
> the glass.
>
> Requires AN glass, no?
>
> Thank you all!
Ok for you, I just pulled my Omega 10x10 carrier out of the enlarger
and it has two sheets of standard optical glass but not AN. To my
knowledge AN appears with a Matte surface unlike standard optical grade
glass. It (AN) will look less than perfectly clear. Imop & Perhaps
Richard K. can corroborate AN is only needed with a Condenser housing, I
have an Omega diffused Halogen one of three known to exist.
--
Reality is a picture perfected and never looking back.
Re: AN (Anti-Newton) glass question
"____" <internetphobic@deletedmail . com > wrote in message
news:internetphobic-293A06.22372719032008@newsgroups . com cast . net ...
> In article <13u3gs3qnrtup2a@news.supernews . com >, <jjs>
> wrote:
>
>> > Yes, as long as it is an anti-newton negative carrier.
>>
>> I'm glad that was brought up. Quite frankly, I just
>> presumed the negative
>> carrier in question would need anti-newton glass. I will
>> describe it and
>> perhaps someone can enlighten me. The glass is for the
>> Saltzman 8x10
>> enlarger. The carrier works with two plates of glass
>> (exactly 8x10") to
>> sandwich the negative. There is nothing whatsoever to
>> separate the glasses,
>> except the negative. One removes the lower glass, does
>> what he can to remove
>> dust, replaces the glass, and swings four tension clips
>> over the edges of
>> the glass.
>>
>> Requires AN glass, no?
>>
>> Thank you all!
>
> Ok for you, I just pulled my Omega 10x10 carrier out of
> the enlarger
> and it has two sheets of standard optical glass but not
> AN. To my
> knowledge AN appears with a Matte surface unlike standard
> optical grade
> glass. It (AN) will look less than perfectly clear. Imop &
> Perhaps
> Richard K. can corroborate AN is only needed with a
> Condenser housing, I
> have an Omega diffused Halogen one of three known to
> exist.
>
Newton's rings are most obvious where the light source
is collimated which is at least partially the sase when a
condenser source is used. A diffusion source will not
usually display the rings.
Most condenser enlarger lamphouses are somewhere between
diffuse and a true specular source which requires a point
source as well as a means of collimation. The typical
enlarging lamp is a fairly large and quite diffuse source
(for instance an opal lamp) so the resulting light is
partially diffuse and partly collimated.
Saltzman also made a glassless negative carrier that
held the negative flat by spring tension by means of clips
on the carrier.
---
Richard Knoppow
Los Angeles, CA, USA
dickburk@ix . net com . com
"____" <internetphobic@deletedmail . com > wrote in message
news:internetphobic-293A06.22372719032008@newsgroups . com cast . net ...
> In article <13u3gs3qnrtup2a@news.supernews . com >, <jjs>
> wrote:
>
>> > Yes, as long as it is an anti-newton negative carrier.
>>
>> I'm glad that was brought up. Quite frankly, I just
>> presumed the negative
>> carrier in question would need anti-newton glass. I will
>> describe it and
>> perhaps someone can enlighten me. The glass is for the
>> Saltzman 8x10
>> enlarger. The carrier works with two plates of glass
>> (exactly 8x10") to
>> sandwich the negative. There is nothing whatsoever to
>> separate the glasses,
>> except the negative. One removes the lower glass, does
>> what he can to remove
>> dust, replaces the glass, and swings four tension clips
>> over the edges of
>> the glass.
>>
>> Requires AN glass, no?
>>
>> Thank you all!
>
> Ok for you, I just pulled my Omega 10x10 carrier out of
> the enlarger
> and it has two sheets of standard optical glass but not
> AN. To my
> knowledge AN appears with a Matte surface unlike standard
> optical grade
> glass. It (AN) will look less than perfectly clear. Imop &
> Perhaps
> Richard K. can corroborate AN is only needed with a
> Condenser housing, I
> have an Omega diffused Halogen one of three known to
> exist.
>
Newton's rings are most obvious where the light source
is collimated which is at least partially the sase when a
condenser source is used. A diffusion source will not
usually display the rings.
Most condenser enlarger lamphouses are somewhere between
diffuse and a true specular source which requires a point
source as well as a means of collimation. The typical
enlarging lamp is a fairly large and quite diffuse source
(for instance an opal lamp) so the resulting light is
partially diffuse and partly collimated.
Saltzman also made a glassless negative carrier that
held the negative flat by spring tension by means of clips
on the carrier.
---
Richard Knoppow
Los Angeles, CA, USA
dickburk@ix . net com . com
Re: AN (Anti-Newton) glass question
"Richard Knoppow" <dickburk@ix . net com . com > wrote in message
news:13u4onb995vkgc8@corp.supernews . com ...
> Newton's rings are most obvious where the light source
> is collimated which is at least partially the sase when a
> condenser source is used. A diffusion source will not
> usually display the rings.
You just saved me $90. I owe you. Truly.
The lamp housing, which was originally dual condensers, is missing, and we
plan to replace it with a diffusion source. So plain optical glass it shall
be.
"Richard Knoppow" <dickburk@ix . net com . com > wrote in message
news:13u4onb995vkgc8@corp.supernews . com ...
> Newton's rings are most obvious where the light source
> is collimated which is at least partially the sase when a
> condenser source is used. A diffusion source will not
> usually display the rings.
You just saved me $90. I owe you. Truly.
The lamp housing, which was originally dual condensers, is missing, and we
plan to replace it with a diffusion source. So plain optical glass it shall
be.
Re: AN (Anti-Newton) glass question
In article <internetphobic-293A06.22372719032008@newsgroups . com cast . net >,
____ <internetphobic@deletedmail . com > wrote:
>
>Ok for you, I just pulled my Omega 10x10 carrier out of the enlarger
>and it has two sheets of standard optical glass but not AN. To my
>knowledge AN appears with a Matte surface unlike standard optical grade
>glass. It (AN) will look less than perfectly clear. Imop & Perhaps
>Richard K. can corroborate AN is only needed with a Condenser housing, I
>have an Omega diffused Halogen one of three known to exist.
No. Under some conditions -- atmospheric and of the negative -- you'll
see Newton rings with this glass carrier. I know because I have one.
To make one of my negatives printable I had to replace the top glass in
my 10x10 Omega carrier with AN glass and the bottom glass with a piece
of anti-reflective coated glass from a frame shop. With that done, the
problem was considerably lessened, though not eliminated entirely.
The best solution is a tension carrier like the pin-register carriers
Fotar used to make for their enlargers -- actually the only 8x10"
tension carriers I've ever seen. In 4x5" the Beseler Negaflat, of
course, was fairly common.
--
Thor Lancelot Simon tls@rek.tjls . com
"The inconsistency is startling, though admittedly, if consistency is to
be abandoned or transcended, there is no problem." - Noam Chomsky
In article <internetphobic-293A06.22372719032008@newsgroups . com cast . net >,
____ <internetphobic@deletedmail . com > wrote:
>
>Ok for you, I just pulled my Omega 10x10 carrier out of the enlarger
>and it has two sheets of standard optical glass but not AN. To my
>knowledge AN appears with a Matte surface unlike standard optical grade
>glass. It (AN) will look less than perfectly clear. Imop & Perhaps
>Richard K. can corroborate AN is only needed with a Condenser housing, I
>have an Omega diffused Halogen one of three known to exist.
No. Under some conditions -- atmospheric and of the negative -- you'll
see Newton rings with this glass carrier. I know because I have one.
To make one of my negatives printable I had to replace the top glass in
my 10x10 Omega carrier with AN glass and the bottom glass with a piece
of anti-reflective coated glass from a frame shop. With that done, the
problem was considerably lessened, though not eliminated entirely.
The best solution is a tension carrier like the pin-register carriers
Fotar used to make for their enlargers -- actually the only 8x10"
tension carriers I've ever seen. In 4x5" the Beseler Negaflat, of
course, was fairly common.
--
Thor Lancelot Simon tls@rek.tjls . com
"The inconsistency is startling, though admittedly, if consistency is to
be abandoned or transcended, there is no problem." - Noam Chomsky
Re: AN (Anti-Newton) glass question
In article <fru40n$ece$1@reader2.panix . com >,
tls@panix . com (Thor Lancelot Simon) wrote:
> In article <internetphobic-293A06.22372719032008@newsgroups . com cast . net >,
> ____ <internetphobic@deletedmail . com > wrote:
> >
> >Ok for you, I just pulled my Omega 10x10 carrier out of the enlarger
> >and it has two sheets of standard optical glass but not AN. To my
> >knowledge AN appears with a Matte surface unlike standard optical grade
> >glass. It (AN) will look less than perfectly clear. Imop & Perhaps
> >Richard K. can corroborate AN is only needed with a Condenser housing, I
> >have an Omega diffused Halogen one of three known to exist.
>
> No. Under some conditions -- atmospheric and of the negative -- you'll
> see Newton rings with this glass carrier. I know because I have one.
>
> To make one of my negatives printable I had to replace the top glass in
> my 10x10 Omega carrier with AN glass and the bottom glass with a piece
> of anti-reflective coated glass from a frame shop. With that done, the
> problem was considerably lessened, though not eliminated entirely.
>
> The best solution is a tension carrier like the pin-register carriers
> Fotar used to make for their enlargers -- actually the only 8x10"
> tension carriers I've ever seen. In 4x5" the Beseler Negaflat, of
> course, was fairly common.
Is your 10 x10 the dichroic lamp house or a condenser? The Dichroic is a
1,000 watt quartz halogen source. My diffused halogen is half that.
--
Reality is a picture perfected and never looking back.
In article <fru40n$ece$1@reader2.panix . com >,
tls@panix . com (Thor Lancelot Simon) wrote:
> In article <internetphobic-293A06.22372719032008@newsgroups . com cast . net >,
> ____ <internetphobic@deletedmail . com > wrote:
> >
> >Ok for you, I just pulled my Omega 10x10 carrier out of the enlarger
> >and it has two sheets of standard optical glass but not AN. To my
> >knowledge AN appears with a Matte surface unlike standard optical grade
> >glass. It (AN) will look less than perfectly clear. Imop & Perhaps
> >Richard K. can corroborate AN is only needed with a Condenser housing, I
> >have an Omega diffused Halogen one of three known to exist.
>
> No. Under some conditions -- atmospheric and of the negative -- you'll
> see Newton rings with this glass carrier. I know because I have one.
>
> To make one of my negatives printable I had to replace the top glass in
> my 10x10 Omega carrier with AN glass and the bottom glass with a piece
> of anti-reflective coated glass from a frame shop. With that done, the
> problem was considerably lessened, though not eliminated entirely.
>
> The best solution is a tension carrier like the pin-register carriers
> Fotar used to make for their enlargers -- actually the only 8x10"
> tension carriers I've ever seen. In 4x5" the Beseler Negaflat, of
> course, was fairly common.
Is your 10 x10 the dichroic lamp house or a condenser? The Dichroic is a
1,000 watt quartz halogen source. My diffused halogen is half that.
--
Reality is a picture perfected and never looking back.
Re: AN (Anti-Newton) glass question
In article <internetphobic-D5E159.19240320032008@newsgroups . com cast . net >,
____ <internetphobic@deletedmail . com > wrote:
>
>Is your 10 x10 the dichroic lamp house or a condenser? The Dichroic is a
>1,000 watt quartz halogen source. My diffused halogen is half that.
It's the dichro. Someone had put some funny low-wattage, long-life
bulbs in there, though -- when one finally blew and I had to replace
them all, it ran so much hotter it melted off some black contact paper
which had been used to shim the assembly for light tightness!
My Chromega 10x10 head is actually on a Durst Laborator 138 which was
one of several adapted for use printing highway signs by a company in
Toronto. It came with motorized raise/lower and focus and a 50" coiled
between the motor control box and the remote control -- it's hard to
imagine what it must have been like to use in that configuration. The
company sold them off on eBay as they wore out and converted to
Lightjet units, I believe. I got one of the earlier ones, so I probably
overpaid, but it's worked well for me for about 10 years now though it
has some loose bits and other quirks I would think would have made it
annoying for daily commercial use.
--
Thor Lancelot Simon tls@rek.tjls . com
"The inconsistency is startling, though admittedly, if consistency is to
be abandoned or transcended, there is no problem." - Noam Chomsky
In article <internetphobic-D5E159.19240320032008@newsgroups . com cast . net >,
____ <internetphobic@deletedmail . com > wrote:
>
>Is your 10 x10 the dichroic lamp house or a condenser? The Dichroic is a
>1,000 watt quartz halogen source. My diffused halogen is half that.
It's the dichro. Someone had put some funny low-wattage, long-life
bulbs in there, though -- when one finally blew and I had to replace
them all, it ran so much hotter it melted off some black contact paper
which had been used to shim the assembly for light tightness!
My Chromega 10x10 head is actually on a Durst Laborator 138 which was
one of several adapted for use printing highway signs by a company in
Toronto. It came with motorized raise/lower and focus and a 50" coiled
between the motor control box and the remote control -- it's hard to
imagine what it must have been like to use in that configuration. The
company sold them off on eBay as they wore out and converted to
Lightjet units, I believe. I got one of the earlier ones, so I probably
overpaid, but it's worked well for me for about 10 years now though it
has some loose bits and other quirks I would think would have made it
annoying for daily commercial use.
--
Thor Lancelot Simon tls@rek.tjls . com
"The inconsistency is startling, though admittedly, if consistency is to
be abandoned or transcended, there is no problem." - Noam Chomsky
Re: AN (Anti-Newton) glass question
<jjs> wrote in message
news:13u3gs3qnrtup2a@news.supernews . com ...
>> Yes, as long as it is an anti-newton negative carrier.
>
> I'm glad that was brought up. Quite frankly, I just
> presumed the negative carrier in question would need
> anti-newton glass. I will describe it and perhaps someone
> can enlighten me. The glass is for the Saltzman 8x10
> enlarger. The carrier works with two plates of glass
> (exactly 8x10") to sandwich the negative. There is
> nothing whatsoever to separate the glasses, except the
> negative. One removes the lower glass, does what he can to
> remove dust, replaces the glass, and swings four tension
> clips over the edges of the glass.
>
> Requires AN glass, no?
>
> Thank you all!
>
Do you get Newton's rings? If so AN glass will
eliminate them, if not then don't bother.
BTW, I suspect glass with anti-reflection coating on it
similar to a lens would accomplish the same purpose.
--
---
Richard Knoppow
Los Angeles, CA, USA
dickburk@ix . net com . com
<jjs> wrote in message
news:13u3gs3qnrtup2a@news.supernews . com ...
>> Yes, as long as it is an anti-newton negative carrier.
>
> I'm glad that was brought up. Quite frankly, I just
> presumed the negative carrier in question would need
> anti-newton glass. I will describe it and perhaps someone
> can enlighten me. The glass is for the Saltzman 8x10
> enlarger. The carrier works with two plates of glass
> (exactly 8x10") to sandwich the negative. There is
> nothing whatsoever to separate the glasses, except the
> negative. One removes the lower glass, does what he can to
> remove dust, replaces the glass, and swings four tension
> clips over the edges of the glass.
>
> Requires AN glass, no?
>
> Thank you all!
>
Do you get Newton's rings? If so AN glass will
eliminate them, if not then don't bother.
BTW, I suspect glass with anti-reflection coating on it
similar to a lens would accomplish the same purpose.
--
---
Richard Knoppow
Los Angeles, CA, USA
dickburk@ix . net com . com
