Calumet is advetising in their current catalogue this really neat-looking 4x5 negative carrier that is suppose to slightly pull and make perfectly flat 4x5 negs. It is adjustable in size to accomodate slight larger Polaroid negatives. Sounds like a good alternative to the annoying Newton rings I have been getting with my glass carrier despite use of ant-Newton top glass.

Does Anyone have experience with this negtaive carrier? If so, do you know if will work on an Omega 4x5 Prolab enlarger (ie, D5 negative stage compatible?) Thanks for any info. Andre

-- Andre Noble (andrenoble@yahoo.com), October 02, 2001

Answers

Andre my post may seem a little crazy but bear with me. Are you using film with a "shiney" emulsion like T-Max or Delta if so this could be the problem re.Newton rings. I use Delta and was still getting N.rings despite the use of anti-Newton ring top plate. I solved the problem by using another anti-N. ring as the bottom plate as well. However there is the risk of the pattern of the etch being projected, it depends on the type of etched glass. I use a DeVere enlarger and I've had no problems here. It certainly solved a headache.

It may be worth a go, at worse you'll have a spare anti-N.ring glass.

Good luck,

-- Trevor Crone (trevor.crone@uk.dreamcast.com), October 02, 2001.

From your description, it sounds simlar to a Beseler Negaflat.

I've used the Negaflats and like them quite a bit. I don't know whether the Calumet carrier will fit an Omega.

They could probably tell you. I've been pleased with my interactions with their customer service.

Dave

-- Dave Willis (willisd@medicine.wustl.edu), October 02, 2001.

Trevor, I will probably end up doing that as soon as B&H has the anti newton glass for omega d5 carriers back in stock.

Dave, I walked into Calumet here in Los Angeles today, and the darkroom guy didn't have the Zone VI "Out Straight" 4x5 Negative Carrier in stock to look at or an answer to this question one way or the other.

Anyone out there using this who could chime in? Thanks. Andre

-- Andre Noble (andrenoble@usa.net), October 02, 2001.

THe Negaflat by Besseler is actually different. Similar idea, and Besseler made a thorough and serious holder. IMHO I might invest in a used one of those first, assuming I could find a used one.

Despite Fred's, or maybe Calumets, clucking about how unique and amazing it is, I have one made for a 5 X 7 Elwood that has got to be 40 years old and have seen other versions for 8 X 10. I think I paud all of $10.00 for mine

-- Sean yates (coalandice@yahoo.com), October 02, 2001.

Sean, Fred NEVER said it was unique. He stated clearly when it came out that it was based on an example of an older one given him by someone. Get your facts straight.

It is based on rubber traction, not puncturing the negative like the Beseler one does. Seems like a better idea than the Beseler to me.

-- Alec (alecj@bellsouth.net), October 02, 2001.

Little touchy there Alec? Allow me to quote Mr. Picker, or whomever wrote using his name:

"He sent not only the suggestion, he sent the part itself! It's a marvelous negative carrier. It had obviously been a custom one-off, probably made in a machine shop, possibly in the 30's. It was for an 8 X 10 enlarger and it did something no carrier we had ever seen or heard of could do; it could stretch out the negative absolutely flat without ruining it."

Regardless of how the Zone VI incarnation works, or how well it works, my point is that the one sent by Mr. Houlihan is far from unique. If you visit great stores like the sadly defunct "Darkroom Aids" in Chicago often enough, you begin to realize that there really is very little that is new, under the sun.

-- Sean yates (coalandice@yahoo.com), October 03, 2001.

Old editions of Jacobson's 'Enlarging' have a diagram of just such a carrier. Clearly showing, in a profile cutaway drawing, how a compressed rubber rib pushes outward on the sides of the negative to tension it.
I really don't know what all the fuss is about for 5x4 though. Normal thickness 5x4 is fairly rigid stuff, and any glassless negative carrier that clamps down on the neg all round the edges does a perfectly good job of holding the film flat.
I haven't worked in any commercial darkroom that uses glass carriers, they're just more trouble than they're worth.

-- Pete Andrews (p.l.andrews@bham.ac.uk), October 03, 2001.

O.K. Mr. Andrews, you may be right afterall. I'll try your's (and Trevor's idea too). And out of one of those, a solution should be found. Thanks for bringing it up.

I use very long exposures, particularly for burning in (the flashed diffuse opal glass I use for diffusion necessitates long exposures, even with the 250 watt tungsten bulbs I'm using) I worry about possible negative shift.

Anyways, very sensible idea, worth a shot. Andre

-- Andre Noble (andrenoble@yahoo.com), October 03, 2001.

So you admit you were wrong, Sean? BTW, I note Calumet didn't use the language you stated either. So, calling an error of yours is now "touchy"? Just the facts, Sean. Just the facts please.

-- Alec (alecj@bellsouth.net), October 03, 2001.

Ahha! A 250W bulb coupled with long exposures puts a bit of a different complexion on things Andre. The negative may well 'pop' under those circumstances.
Ever considered that a cold-cathode head might be a good investment?

-- Pete Andrews (p.l.andrews@bham.ac.uk), October 03, 2001.

So you admit you were wrong, Sean?

Re-read the quote Alec: "It had obviously been a custom one-off, probably made in a machine shop, possibly in the 30's."

I quoted directly from the opening letter in the Zone VI catalog for '95 - '96. Whether Fred or an employee of Calumet wrote it I don't know, but it is signed "Fred Picker"

Pointing out an error is not "touchy", but the tone of your reactions indicates you are. I have quoted the article directly. How is that not factual?

-- Sean yates (coalandice@yahoo.com), October 03, 2001.

So petty, master sean. Quite beneath you. Have a good day. Hope I contributed to it!

-- Alec (alecj@bellsouth.net), October 03, 2001.

BTW, I have the Beseler 4X5 Negaflat. It does not put little holes in the negative. It has two clamps on opposite sides of the negative and the user gently applies tension on the negative via a lever. The amount of tension applied is up to the user. IMHO the best carrier for 4X5 negatives. Negatives are easy to clean when held in the carrier and even easier to remove dust particles.

-- wdnagel (wdnagel@home.com), October 03, 2001.

Andre: In a noble effort to get this back on topic, may I suggest you post your question to Harry Taylor's site:

http://classic-enlargers.com/omega_toc.htm

He knows more about Omega enlargers than all the rest of us put together! Good source for all Omega users.

-- Alec (alecj@bellsouth.net), October 03, 2001.

Alec,

How is it that I qualify as petty when you accuse me of lying and threaten me that you "will be watching" me?

-- Sean yates (coalandice@yahoo.com), October 03, 2001.

Mr. Andrews, yes that's one future possibility. But it's like, one has to face the reality that in 10-15 years, there will probably be irresistible digital capture and printing advances in the larger format that will make such an investment seem short sighted.

With the diffused tungsten lighting in my set-up, I have printed some silky B&W images as well an initial impressive batch of 8x10 Cibachromes using color Ilford sheet filters.

If I'm going to make a commitment further than a sheet of Anti Newton glass or perhaps a glassless neg carrier, yes, I would go all the way and consider what you're suggesting and/or do the quixotic thing and get a full Durst color 4x5.

Time for me to stop typing and get in the darkroom. Andre

-- Andre Noble (andrenoble@yahoo.com), October 03, 2001.