Jump to content

Thomas Safelight


Recommended Posts

Does anyone use one of these?

 

I've sort of been halfway looking for one, and had a deal for the "big daddy" Duplex Super Deluxe come my way. I don't have it yet, but I know it's a bit of a beast and overkill for my bathroom-darkroom(spare bathroom primarily used for printing). Still, though, I couldn't pass this one up.

 

Just as a couple of questions:

 

1. I know that the filters are there to block out some of the extraneous spectral lines from the LPS lamps. The one I'm getting has a cracked lens. Is this a cause for concern, or should I be hunting for replacements?

 

2. Are these ortho film safe? I know that as a general rule ortho is safe under red, but I've just ordered a box of Ilford 4x5 ortho. Since I'm a bit blind on it, I'd like to watch it develop and being able to use it under this light would be a big help.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There seem to be quite a few old discussions on apug about it.

 

It sounds a bit too bright for a small darkroom to me. I have a Kodak Beehive that -luckily- came with a whole slew of filters. It's plenty bright enough mounted up high near the ceiling, and needs no warm up time.

 

Watch that the filters aren't faded, if so they may be unsafe. I'd definitely be wary of a cracked filter. Also remember that modern paper is very fast, and most of these safelights were designed years ago.

 

As for developing ortho by inspection... hmmm! You might be better off with a little filtered red LED torch (flashlight), that you can quickly turn on and off to monitor the film's progress. Red LEDs have an almost monochromatic output that should be totally safe at a low brightness.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks. It looks like I may have to do some work on it to get it usable for me, but I don't mind for what I'm paying for it.

 

You're not joking about modern papers being fast. I've been developing film for years, but am relatively new to printing. So far I've been sticking with Ilford RC papers developed in Dektol.

 

With a normal density 6x6 in my Beseler 23c, I'm often tossing in NDs to get the exposure time to something reasonable on an 8x10, and that's true even with a pretty dramatic crop. I'm not picky enough to be bothered by the sharpness loss from putting the lens to f/22 on an 8x10, but even doing that I was printing something not too long ago where the longest I could get the exposure without an ND was 6 seconds.

 

I tried shooting paper negatives in 4x5, but never even got close on the exposure and gave up in favor of cheap film :) . Then I finally just decided to use good film to learn(FP4+ mostly) and save the cheap film for experimenting.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You might want to look for a lower wattage lamp for your enlarger Ben. I'm not familiar with the 23c, so I can't suggest anything further.

 

Anyway. Good luck with the safelight. Just do a coin test on the paper for about 20 minutes a bit closer to the safelight than you normally work. If there's no sign of fog then you should be good to go.

 

For the ortho film, I really would stick with a red LED flashlight. A bit of research shows that LEDs with a narrow emission band at 660nm are easily obtained, and most ortho film's sensitivity drops to near zero at around 600nm.

 

The way it was done in a commercial darkroom I once worked in was to have a weak, deep red safelight under a transparent developing dish. The safelight was briefly flashed on to check development progress. I suspect for no more than 5 seconds total during the entire development time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not sure if I have any options on a lower wattage bulb. The 23c is probably one of the most ubiquitous enlargers in the US, at least for folks who do medium format(and 35mm) and even then the bulbs aren't super easy to find. A friend in the UK who is a light bulb collector lead me to some current production bulbs(Eiko, maybe) that work fine. I think he said, though, that the bulb was being over-driven dramatically as it's specced for 90V or so. My guess would be that this is done to get more output in the blue/UV region of the spectrum where papers are more sensitive. I think the rated lifetime in an enlarger is something like 50 hours, which of course for someone like me is a really, really long time.

 

I might try running it through a Variac and see if I can get the output down. Tungsten lamps are almost perfect black body emitters, so even if I shift the spectrum down(which happens when you lower the voltage) I'll still get some blue out of it.

 

I hadn't thought of that, though-thanks for the suggestion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I see you are in the U.S. so your Beseler 23 C should take a PH111A - a 75 watt bulb. These bulbs are readily available for about $10 from BH:

 

eiko ph111a | B&H Photo Video (this is the bulb I use)

 

sylvania / osram ph111a | B&H Photo Video

 

Freestyle also carries the bulb:

 

Search Results | Freestyle Photographic Supplies

 

For some reason Adorama is insanely expensive at $78 for the same bulb but with a Beseler brand; go figure.

 

By the way, with the PH111A in my Beseler 23CII, I have no problems with short print times either with 35mm or 120 6x6. I regularly expose my prints (on Ilford Multi-Contrast) for between 20 and 40 seconds

 

I agree with others that the safe light you are suggesting is for too bright for such a small darkroom. It may fog the paper. I, too have my darkroom set up in our "spare" bathroom. A small 7 inch by 5 inch safe light with a 15 watt bulb is more than sufficient.

Edited by bgelfand
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Your enlarging time for a Beseler 23C is far too short; something is not right. I assume you have the head at the proper setting for your negative size? One way to get the enlarger farther away from the paper is to use a longer than "normal" enlarging lens. 6X6 negatives should use an 80mm lens, a 105mm enlarging lens will move the head farther away from the paper and slow down the exposure. But when I used to enlarge 6X6 negatives on a 23C [80mm lens] my times were 20 to 40 seconds at f/11 to f/16.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

I have also found use for neutral density in enlarging.

For one, I think my lens only goes down to f/16, and I tend to go for 10s exposure.

For smaller prints, 5x7 or so, that is too much.

 

I put in a neutral combination of CP filters.

-- glen

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, I gave the light a trial run this evening.

 

I quartered a piece of 5x7 paper in the dark, then proceeded with the "penny test."

 

First of all, they're not kidding about this light being BRIGHT. When fully warmed up(~5 minutes) the room was bright enough that I could have shaved by the mirror(granted I rarely shave by a mirror, but the point stands :) ).

 

My first test showed pretty severe fogging in a minute or so. I scratched my head a bit, then started cutting up cardboard. I covered one filter(the one with cracks) completely and then half covered the other one.

 

I didn't test beyond 5 minutes, but I couldn't see any fogging with that arrangement. At least for now, I can't see a print taking longer than that from the time I take it out of the box to the time it's rinsing, so I feel good.

 

Even so, I'm tempted to break down and buy replacement filters while Freestyle still has some. I know that this really is overkill for my darkroom, but at the same time it's great to have such a nice piece of equipment and if I can make it "safe" I'm happy to use it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It will depend a little on which filters you have installed.

The common set was for high speed printing paper with the flaps open & color paper with them fully closed. But you might have a different set as several were available.

Now you've discovered the joy of a BRIGHT darkroom, you may do as I did, dropping the flaps simply to reduce light for things like shading & dodging!. If you can find some the aerosol "waterproofing your gutters & truck-bed" plastic paint/sealer, coating stuff will work well to bind, cover & seal the cracks, as long as you mask it properly.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...