I've decided to migrate from using a condenser enlarger to a diffused light source, and I'd like some advice on the options I'm considering.

(1) Some background: I do B&W documentary and personal work -- street photography, environmental portraiture, a little urban landscape - busy and immediate rather than majestic and inspiring -- some large format, but most MF and 35mm. Sharp, snappy and grainy are good. I print up to 11x14 (bigger would be nice for exhibition), and I've pretty much only ever used VC papers, which I understand and like and seem to be able to get easily without the manufacturers changing or withdrawing brands every three months. For the last year, I've been using an old Omega D-3 (I think -- the model number is nowhere visible) that has three autofocus strips for 50/105/150 lenses. I'm underwhelmed with its rigidity, and can't even print with split contrast, because opening the filter drawer and replacing filters makes the chassis wobble mid-exposure. The focusing knob has an annoying rebound. With effort & care, though, I have produced and exhibited excellent prints using this enlarger. I don't want to be using it for another five years, but I don't need to replace it immediately.

(2) What's broken and needs fixing? I'm tired of burning and burning and burning in skies that I can see on the contacts but not on straight prints -- only to discover halos and auras around contours where I burned for too long or not long enough. I'd like not to have to choose between texture in the light and dark areas. And, although grain is good, high-contrast dust and scratches (and, sorry to say, the occasional drying marks) are not. I want to make printing and spotting rather easier and predictable.

(3) My options as I see them:

(a) A local, reputable used equipment store is selling a Durst Ce-1000 with a 450 dichroic head for $1200. It's the sturdiest, smoothest operating 4x5 enlarger I've ever seen. Bit like holding a Leica. Timer and voltage regulator included, several lens rings of the right size, full complement of negative carriers, etc. There are diffusers for 4x5, 6x9, 6x6 and 35, the 6x9 and an extra 4x5 being home made out of cardboard with OK-looking opal glass. This seems vaguely fishy to me, but there's a seven-day money-back option.

Pro:

- No question about quality of manufacture (but can't be sure about this unit). Just feels right. - Makes color work possible eventually (minor benefit for me, but nice)

Con: - Spare parts, accessories (e.g. other neg carriers) not as easily available cheap & used, and my reading of the online information on Durst suggests a Byzantine internally incompatible product line.

Query: - I'm concerned about losing sharpness and contrast in going to a color head. - And also negative popping and edge-to-edge coverage.

(b) Calumet stocks the Zone-VI VC cold light head for $950. Allegedly the Omega D model fits any D-enlarger, but the rep. I spoke to thought that it couldn't subsequently be converted or have an attachment fitted that would make it work for a Besseler (should I decide to junk the enlarger in a few years for a 45MX). Seems there are no hidden extra costs, because this price includes the closed-loop regulator and therefore doesn't require a compensating timer.

Pro: - New. Good reputation. - Cheaper

Maybe: - Not convinced that adapter will be same height as Omega fixed condenser, which would screw up focusing. I sense this is paranoia, but $1k is $1k.

Con: - forget color. - (if true) Stuck with Omega D-series forever. (The Aristo VC head for Besseler has a removable $40 Omega converter, but it's $100 dearer to start with).

(c) It seems easy to get Aristo one-light cold-light heads for around $100 used. Even new, it and the Z6 are about $200. So, I could test the water with one of the Omega D-series models, before making an expensive commitment to a VC or dichroic head.

Pro: - Cheap, but see hidden costs below.

Maybe: - Could need regulator/probe/compensating timer to allow for fluctuations. These run to $200-400. Recent postings suggest that the fluctuation problem is overestimated.

Con: - False economy? (Think of all that VC paper going to waste and the multiple sets of graded I'd need to buy). - Have to learn new way of working with papers & maybe split hard/soft development. VC devt. is impractical because VC filters would be below the lens, would need a CC filter right above negative to warm the light's color. Alternatively, it would be too tedious to keep changing the heads, and one day I'd drop one.

So there you have it. This is a means to an end, so I'm much more interested in the experience working artists have with these heads for different kinds of images than I am about what someone once read in a posting about Fred Picker's densitometer. I'd like to minimize the changes to the way I work, maximize my future options, and minimize the expense. Since I can't do all three, I'd appreciate any comments you have about my analysis of my options and what I might be failing to consider.

-- Colin Potts (pottscol@mindspring.com), January 15, 1998

Answers

Wow, what alot of information you covered. First a suggestion about dealing with burned out skies, you might try masked flashing the sky which would greatly reduce the burn time needed allowing for a little more consistancy. I too have 2 Omega D enlargers in my darkroom, I agree that they have many downfalls but with the proper precautions they can be very usefull tools. One of my enlargers has the dichoic head and I was able to pick it up used for just a couple of hundred dollars. I have used both coldlight heads and the dichroic head for VC printing and the dichroic head wins hands down. For me, I could not get bright glowing prints that I was used to with a coldlight head and graded paper using a coldlight head and VC paper. Using a yellow correction filter is a waste of time and just prolongs your exposure. I must admit that I have no experience with the newer coldlight heads that are corrected for VC paper. I outfitted my dichroic head with a Zone VI compensating enlarging timer and now have almost a constant exposure VC enlarger. I can go from a grade 0 to grade 4 and be within 20% of the correct exposure. As for negative popping, most people beleive that a coldlight head is the only answer but the negative stage of a dichroic head is usually cooler because it doesn't have a builtin lamp warmer also uniformity of light is improved with a dichroic head. I know that have not answer all of your questions but this is my opinion on the subject of coldlight vs dichroic.

-- Jeff White (zonie_max@aol.com), January 17, 1998.

You do have a lot of decisions to make. I would recommend against a standard cold light head and vc filters. My experience is the exposure times get real long. I believe the blue light from the standard vc head is the problem. It works, just not as well as a vc head and graded papers. I have a Zone VI VC head on a 45MXII. I have had it for about 6 months and it works great. But, it has a couple of things you should be aware of. I have found that with any cold light and VC paper, it is easier to get hard contrast than soft contrast. This is true with the filters or the VC head. If most of what you do has higher contrast you will be very happy with the cold light and VC set up. If you tend to a softer contrast, it may take some adjustment in your negative exposure and development. Also, the regulator works great, but, the tubes have to warm up to activate it. This means that you have to "burn in " the lamps until a red light comes on the front of the VC head. If you are using both the tubes at the max setting, this takes up to a minute of time. You stand there with the enlarger on until the light comes on and then put the paper in the easel and make the print. I dont find this a problem as it gives me time to practice my burning and dodging sequence while I wait. As far as the soft and hard controls, they are easy to use and after some initial printing to establish contrast grades and the time differences between them for exposure, it has been a very nice piece of equiptment. Not having ever used a dichro heed for b&w vc I don't have any real input on thier merit. I can suggest that most of the people that I have talked to, and read, do speak highly of the dichro system. Maybe a used dichro head would be the most economic route to take for you. It would get you printing faster than any other solution, and would allow you to do color down the road if you decide to try it. Good luck!

-- MTHOMPSON (MTHOMPSON@CLINTON.NET), January 17, 1998.