> > The Darkroom Automation Precision Enlarging Meter
> > http://www.nolindan.com/da/index.htm
> I wonder if it might make a good easel densitometer?
A very good one, though an 'easel densitometer' won't
read the same as an ANSI/ISO densitometer. On the other
hand the 'density' it reads is the density that matters.
Readings are very stable, all meters are calibrated,
linearity is excellent. And it has a delta mode for
reading intensity differences so if used as a
densitometer it is easy to zero out film base+fog and
enlarger height/f-stop.
> I've calibrated my EM-10 against a step wedge for use as
> one.
And every EM-10 is different. A volume control potentiometer
is used for the logarithm conversion: the graph of OD/Meter reading
is not pretty.
http://www.nolindan.com/em10graph001.jpg
> I figure about .05 resolution.
.05 OD -> .15 stops
The resolution depends on the density as the readout
isn't linear. And you have to turn the lights on
to read the dial.
> Not bad for $24.50. Dan
For it's original purpose - to match light intensity
when making Ilfochromes it is a great little gadget.
As a densitometer, it can be done, and it is cheap,
but it was never meant to be one.
dan.c.quinn@att.net - 05 Sep 2006 10:42 GMT
> > I've calibrated my EM-10 against a step wedge for use as
> > one.
[quoted text clipped - 4 lines]
>
> http://www.nolindan.com/em10graph001.jpg
Not pretty. That's true. I've calibrated mine as with an
8x10 enlargement using the projection of the step wedge.
I calibrated for 5 f stops; f8 - f32. At f8 the more dense steps
and at f32 the less dense steps can be measured at
a greater resolution.
> > I figure about .05 resolution.
>
>.05 OD -> .15 stops
Exactly 1/6 stop.
> And you have to turn the lights on to read the dial.
Even at f32 I can read the dial.
> > Not bad for $24.50.
>
> For it's original purpose - to match light intensity
> when making Ilfochromes it is a great little gadget.
> As a densitometer, it can be done, and it is cheap,
> but it was never meant to be one.
Ilfochromes? Any print. Dan
Nicholas O. Lindan - 05 Sep 2006 15:16 GMT
>>>>> [Comparison of Ilford EM-10
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?A=details&Q=&is=REG&O=productlis
t&sku=24631
>>>>> With the Darkroom Automation Precision Enlarging Meter:
http://www.nolindan.com/da/em/em1003main.htm
> Nicholas O. Lindan [from Darkroom Automation] wrote:
> > And every EM-10 is different. A volume control potentiometer
[quoted text clipped - 4 lines]
> > Have to turn the lights on to read the dial
> Even at f32 I can read the dial.
I can't.
> > For it's original purpose - to match light intensity
> > when making Ilfochromes it is a great little gadget.
> Ilfochromes? Any print. Dan
Designed for Ilfochromes / Cibachromes ... color balance
shifts if the exposure time changes; the goal is to make
all prints at the same exposure time. The
lens aperture is changed to keep the light on the
easel constant. The 'calibration' value on the back
is the dial setting for an 18% gray at 20 seconds
[or thereabouts] with Ilfochrome.
They _can_ indeed be used for any print but they were
not designed for general purpose measurement of light.
And that is why the ugly response curves weren't a
design issue in the product: Ugly works; Ugly is
cheap; Ugly is good.
Some use the meter as they were intended - to keep exposure
time constant - when printing black and white. For a 2 stop
range, say 5.6-8-11 for a 50/2.8 El-Whatsitogon this works
fine. For a four stop range, 5.6-8-11-16-22, it's ok:
optical performance suffers a bit at f16/22 but print size
is probably 3.5x5 and so the issue is moot.
Early enlarging exposure meters had a piece of
paper with an oil spot on it and a small light bulb
behind the paper. When the light from the enlarger
equaled the light from the light bulb the oil spot
'disappeared. Same technology in the year
1702 with parchment and a candle: hence the use of
a 'foot-candle' as the standard unit of light, the
candle was placed one foot behind the oil-spotted
parchment.
Back to the EM10:
For general purpose use the ugly calibration curve means
you have to calibrate each EM-10 with a step tablet and
densitometer.
Caveats with the EM-10:
o At low light levels it can take 5 seconds for
the meter to settle down due to the memory of
the CdS cell.
o The calibration curve drifts with temperature
and humidity so the meter should be checked if
darkroom conditions are other than normal.
o The calibration curve drifts with time? I have
one that behaves very differently than it did a
year ago. This only happened in one sample and
the problem may not be in the meter but in the
measurement or record keeping.
o The calibration drifts with use: the meter uses a
plain-ole radio volume control. Expect the same
problems with the meter as you have with some
radios: you just _can't_ get the volume right
anymore. If the meter is always futzed with at
the same dial setting the carbon in the volume control
at that location wears out.
Ilford's instructions as printed in the B&H web site
have the meter recalibrated every printing session:
record what the meter reads that day with a
standard negative/magnification/f-stop . They are
a lot more stable than that, but calibration should
be checked periodically.
* * *
The 'no enlarging meter/EM-10/DA meter' debate is an
extension of the 'Throw Down Your Exposure Meter, Fools.'
threads that pop up:
Some [well, at least one] think 'Sunny-16' is the be-all
of exposure. For others, what the camera picks when
set to A or P is all that's needed. And some think if you
really want to do it right a precision spot-meter is
the way to go.
Pays your money - makes your choice. A good exposure
meter isn't needed to take a fine photograph/make a fine
print but it does make the success rate higher, extend
the envelope of what can be achieved and lessens the time
and waste.
One cheap meter and a box of paper in the waste basket
costs the same as a good meter without using all that
paper on test/oops/just a bit more|less prints.
With a good meter [and a bit of practice] you don't get
close, you nail it. No sights, plain sight or a scope:
which do you want on your rifle?
--
Nicholas O. Lindan, Cleveland, Ohio
Darkroom Automation
http://www.nolindan.com/da/index.htm
n o lindan at ix dot netcom dot com
Lloyd Erlick - 05 Sep 2006 16:14 GMT
On Tue, 05 Sep 2006 14:16:45 GMT, ...
carbon in the volume control wears out.
--Nicholas O. Lindan
September 5, 2006, from Lloyd Erlick,
This explains everything!
I'm indebted to you for this! The shock of
recognition, no batteries needed ...
regards,
--le