Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1996/05/18

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

To: leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us
Subject: Re: Condenser light vs. cold light?
From: Eric Welch <ewelch@gp.magick.net>
Date: Sat, 18 May 1996 20:33:13 -0700

At 09:12 PM 5/18/96 -0400, you wrote:

>Really not an issue.  We're not comparing tungsten (et al) diffusion light
>sources with condensors, we're comparing cold lights with condensors, a very
>different matter.  Acutance IS certainly affected and is at issue with these
>smaller negatives when enlarged to many diameters with either type of
>diffusion.  Cold lights add another problem that tungsten diffusion sources
>don't - printing with VC filters is VERY difficult since with most papers,
>the light source alone starts you out at between a 3 or 4 equivalent grade.

It's true that there is a problem with VC papers, though I think Zone VI has
fixed that probelm. But there is no difference between cold light and other
true diffusion sources as far as tonal scale. The difference comes with
adding condensers into the light source, with no diffusion. You are right,
there is some difference in acutance, but with a Leica enlarger, and film
through a Leica, I've yet to see any loss of sharpness. IC, IIC or V35. The
main differnce is that film developed for condenser light, used in a V35
means you'll be using 3 1/2 and higher filter settings with the VC head to
get normal prints.

==========================
Eric Welch
Grants Pass Daily Courier