Maybe I need some new books! Maybe even a new enlarger. I'm
still using the 6x9 Omega B-7 (condenser) enlarger I bought back
in the early sixties, with an almost-as-old 50/4.5 Leitz Focotar
for the 35mm stuff. Seems to work okay, but it could be that I
need to modernize now that we're beginning a new century. But
would that be the curmudgeony thing to do? :-)
Walt
__________________________________________________________________
"Men never do evil so completely and cheerfully as when they do it
from religious conviction." -- Blaise Pascal, theologian
---------- Original Message ----------------------------------
From: AG Schnozz <agschnozz@xxxxxxxxx>
Reply-To: olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Date: Thu, 13 Nov 2003 15:13:11 -0800 (PST)
>Whacky Walt Wrote:
>>Actually, it's exactly the opposite. Condenser enlargers are
>>generally sharper and contrastier. Diffusion enlargers
>>minimize the effects of dust and scratches on the negative.
>
>Bzzt. Try again.
>
>Sharpness isn't determined by light source, but the quality of
>the lens and the careful alignment of film, lens and paper.
>(along with a good grain magnifier...)
>
--SNIP--
< This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List >
< For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >
< Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html >
|