Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2006/02/06

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

Subject: [Leica] Recommendations for an enlarger
From: lmc at interlink.es (Luis Miguel Castañeda)
Date: Mon Feb 6 11:49:29 2006
References: <1999da819a10cc.19a10cc1999da8@shaw.ca> <6.2.3.4.2.20060206093048.04124d00@mail.rhtc.net> <6.2.1.2.2.20060206132627.026a15a0@pop.med.cornell.edu> <4cfa589b0602061122ocbc1c82re9449c254dc41d5e@mail.gmail.com>

On 06/02/2006, at 20:22, Adam Bridge wrote:

> Going up to 16 x 20 does sound important - it's what I'm printing on
> my Epson at this point.

Personally I do not enlarge 35mm beyond 16x12, specially if there  
will be any medium format enlargement around, the difference might be  
too obvious, but this is only my personal preferences.

Refurbishing an enlarger isn't hard unless it's seriously damaged,  
but with the prices way down probably you will end spending more  
money on a  decent easel for that size than in anything else.

I do use a RH designs f-stop timer, the analyzer, and it's a gem.  
It's not automatic, you should know what you want of your print.
Quite handy, easy to use, and fast. The densitometer function is  
awesome. A truly must.




Saludos
-----------------------------------------
http://imaginarymagnitude.net/blog/



In reply to: Message from gregj.lorenzo at shaw.ca (GREG LORENZO) ([Leica] Recommendations for an enlarger)
Message from images at InfoAve.Net (Tina Manley) ([Leica] Recommendations for an enlarger)
Message from chs2018 at med.cornell.edu (Chris Saganich) ([Leica] Recommendations for an enlarger)
Message from abridge at gmail.com (Adam Bridge) ([Leica] Recommendations for an enlarger)