[Leica] X-rite densitometer for Leica darkroom ;-)

[firkin at ncable.net.au (Alastair Firkin)]

On Sunday, Jun 20, 2004, at 11:39 Australia/Melbourne, Dan Post wrote:

> Alistair-
> Quite all right, old chap! I didn't realize you were flush enough for a
> Heiland Split-grade! (The last time I looked at their price, I nearly
> dropped my Lagavullin on my Wellies, and that's fair dinkum!)

Too much money, and not enough spare time is my problem ;-)

> I do use an old Agfa press densitomer to check reflection density, and 
> use
> it with the step tablets to fine tune my system, and I am sure you 
> will not
> be frustrated further, though I am surprised that it (The Heiland 
> system)
> gives you spotty or inconsistent results with one of your enlargers(Is 
> it a
> diffusion enlarger?)- I was under the impression that it was easily
> programmed for just about any paper/developer/filter combination if the
> already installed program came up short.

It works like a dream with the Leica Focomat V35, where it supplies its 
own filters etc, but on the Ilford Multigrade head 500, it just does 
not seem to be quite as "smooth". I think part of the problem is that 
when you analyse smaller enlargements, some of the detail is too small 
for the measurement aperture: I sometimes magnify the neg analyse and 
then go back to my smaller version. I did a manual programme of the 
system and its better, but does not seem to be quite as good as with 
the V35, thus the desire to be more accurate with a densitometer.

>
> As for the supposed crudity of the analyzer method, don't sell your 
> Jobo
> short. I used to use an X-810 to do density and color checks in a lab, 
> and
> the 18% usually was rendered with a reflection density of .68-.72 - The
> human eye can only discern a change of about .03 (unless the samples 
> are
> right next to each other!) and I found the Beseler quite adequate 
> enough, so
> I am sure a newer model like the Jobo should be at least as accurate 
> if not
> moreso. I used to check test strips at work, then re-check them at 
> home, and
> was amazed that the reading of the $900 X-rite was not very much 
> different
> than the density I read with the enlarger and the analyzer! It is the 
> same
> principal- known light source through an unknown density, measure with 
> a
> light sensitive photomultiplier in a bridge circuit, with a calibrated
> meter- the X-rite was digital, the analyzer was analog. Film densities 
> were
> perhaps + or - .02 reading with the analyzer , and the old Agfa 
> densitometer
> was about the same.
> I don't know about you, but it seems 'good enough for government work' 
> as we
> used to say.
>
> Granted it is not a fancy, or as fast as the Heiland system, but it 
> works
> for me!

I may be hoping for too much sometimes, but if you don't dream, you 
don't get anywhere. I have started trying unsharp masks: another 
nightmare for me ;-)

>
> I use a ACP200 for processing the paper to obviate several other 
> variables,
> and that helps immensely! I only wish I could run fibre based paper 
> through
> it!

I have a Jobo ATL3 and it is fantastic, but I do wonder if it is 
"warping" my fibre based paper. I do not have the room for trays, but I 
have considered a NOVA system for the fibre: in the meantime I'll keep 
using RC paper ;-)

>
> Well, so much for my rambling- Good luck on your venture. I am sure 
> you can
> master it, standing on your head.... :o)
>
> G'day from up here,

and cheers and here's luck for downunder ;-)

Alastair