Graflex.org

FrankS · Posted: Fri Jan 31, 2003 12:10 am Post subject:

Anyone actually using one of these? I don't have a 4by5 enlarger yet and the idea of using the camera and a light source (even homemade) sounds interesting. Switching to a lensboard with a proper enlarging lens is no problem.

_________________
...preferring to be on the shiny side of the film, Frank S.

Graflite · Joined: 08 Nov 2001 Posts: 103 Location: Southeast US

FrankS

I have a Graflarger that fits on the back of my 4 x 5 Pacemaker Crown and it works very well, it uses an Aristo Cold Light Grid lamp assembly which works well for graded papers, but can be problematic for Variable Contrast (VC) papers.

I had a set of Kodak 6 x 6 inch VC filters that I cut to fit the 4 x 5 aluminum negative carrier that is used in the Graflarger (other sizes can be found occasionly, or even made with black mat board) and used the filters to print on VC papers, but it is cumbersome to keep everything clean and dust free, unless you like spotting prints.

I recently bought a Cosar Mornick Dichroic colorhead unit and am working on fabricating a unit that will mount the colorhead to a larger plastic box (found at Radio Shack) and securing it to a gutted Graflarger box (bulb was broken) which in turn will be mounted to the back of the 4 x 5 Pacemaker Crown.

I am hoping that the larger Radio Shack box will act as a light scattering diffusion chamber when painted matte white along with the gutted Graflarger box (I think gloss white would cause hot spots), and hopefully will properly cover the full 4 x 5 format, but I'll have to wait and see.

The colorhead is very light as most of the weight is in the transformer which sits on the back of the baseboard, so I don't think there will be too much strain on the back of my Pacemaker Crown.

If this project works then I will use the colorhead to print VC papers and then perhaps try using it for RA-4 color papers.

It is projects like this that make Photography interesting and stimulating for me, not to mention just plain fun, almost like the first roll of film I developed when I was 12 years old.

graflite

jdman · Joined: 13 May 2001 Posts: 302 Location: Midwest

I made a light housing , tried different bulbs, still ended up with a hot spot. Fixed that by adding the fresnal lens from a Graflok back about a inch from the neg. Now getting decent enlargments and no hot spot. Modified a 4x5 film holder, as my negative holder. Took about 10 minutes to bolt it to my Bessler 23 stand. It may not look great but I get nice 8x10's. Russ

Graflite · Joined: 08 Nov 2001 Posts: 103 Location: Southeast US

Russ

I am a little worried about a hot spot too, but I'm thinking it would be more of a problem if I was using an incandescent bulb instead of the colorhead.

The reason I say this is the light from the colorhead is so difuse and even across the face of the frosted glass in the colorhead that it may not be a problem.

However your idea of a fresnel glass is a good one, and I still have the "milk" glass panel from the gutted Graflarger where I will secure it in it's original place once I complete the construction.

I may end up experimenting with different configurations until it works (or doesn't work), but once I complete the project and try a few test runs I'll post the results.

graflite

RichS · Posted: Fri Jan 31, 2003 6:26 pm Post subject:

Sorry, but somone just has to say this...

Please do not 'gut' and destroy a Graflarger!

They are not all that easy to find and will never be made again. It would be like gutting a Speed just for the bellows. The light tubes are still in production from Aristo and easily replaced.

If you need a frame, why not gut an old film holder for a Graflok frame? Or just make a wooded frame with a slot in each side?

Anyway, just had to express this...

Henry · Posted: Fri Jan 31, 2003 8:20 pm Post subject:

Right on, Rich! I'm with you 110% on that.

Graflite · Joined: 08 Nov 2001 Posts: 103 Location: Southeast US

I did not foresee that RichS and Henry would misunderstand my intentions and that I might destroy something like a Graflarger in the manner that they describe.

However I did fail to mention that the transformer is also burned up, and that omission is my fault and perhaps the reason for the confusion, but I did save the "innards" of the Graflarger and am storing them safely for another day and another time.

Although not mentioned in my posts I have taken steps to restore the Graflarger to a workable state, should I purchase a new grid lamp assembly ($$) and another comparable transformer ($$).

I agree that using a film holder or a wooden box for a frame for the negative holder is a viable alternative and I may consider it in the future, but for now, this is all that I have.

graflite

RichS · Posted: Sat Feb 01, 2003 4:25 am Post subject:

I didn't mean any offense with the expression of my opinion about 'gutting' a Graflarger. But it did sound like your modifications would destroy it beyond restoration. If you're simply planning on an alternative light source inside the Graflarger head, that's a totally different story. And I can partially understand your point with the transformaer being bad. They should be fairly cheap though since it's simply a small neon sign transformaer and could be had used fairly easily. The "cold light" is basically just a neon sign with gases mixed for proper photographic use. A new tube would be about $110 or so as I remember. I bought one last year for mine.
I also just recently bought a used transformer for "just in case". It was a bit more expensive though because it came with a 5x9 cold light tube. Too big for the Graflarger, but useful for someting home made. The person I got it from may have more if you're interested? I think I paid $40 for the transformer and tube combo.