>>> There's a decent looking Beseler 23 series with a cold
>>> light head on Craigslist.
[quoted text clipped - 29 lines]
>
> Greg
I am not a particular fan of cold light heads. Several
years ago I bought one for my Omega D2v but went back to the
condenser head before long. I got good results from the cold
light head but it was no better than the condenser and,
after a careful alignment, no more uniform plus I prefer the
tungsten source when I am using VC paper (which is most of
the time). The cold light does give more light output for
4x5 negatives and is useful in printing very dense ones but
that is a rare condition.
One can always put a cold light head on most enlargers
but original heads may be hard to find so if you buy an
enlarger with an Arista head on it and don't also get the
original you are pretty much stuck if it turns out you don't
like the cold-light head.
BTW, despite some contrary claims in popular literature
there is no difference in tone rendition of a cold light
head from any other kind of diffusion source and, when paper
grade or negative contrast is adjusted, no difference
between diffusion and condenser heads. Dr. Richard Henry, in
his book _Controls in Black and White Photography_ (long out
of print) shows curves made using both adjusted paper grade
and adjusted negative contrast with both types of light
source. The curves lie exactly on top of one another.

Signature
---
Richard Knoppow
Los Angeles, CA, USA
dickburk@ix.netcom.com
____ - 17 Jan 2008 23:42 GMT
> I am not a particular fan of cold light heads. Several
> years ago I bought one for my Omega D2v but went back to the
[quoted text clipped - 19 lines]
> and adjusted negative contrast with both types of light
> source. The curves lie exactly on top of one another.
I agree with all the above, and would add just a simple note for
discussion. One would have to selectively adjust contrast to match the
light sources - that is the same filtration won't produce the same
characteristic curves using the same negative. My personal belief and
you have stated a portion of it, that is: the cold light source was
first introduced as a light source for printing quite dense collodion
negatives that museums and archiving facilities had in quantity as a
quicker method for masking some lighter defects.

Signature
Reality is a picture perfected and never looking back.
Richard Knoppow - 18 Jan 2008 11:22 GMT
>> I am not a particular fan of cold light heads.
>> Several
[quoted text clipped - 48 lines]
> quantity as a
> quicker method for masking some lighter defects.
I think you are thinking about mercury vapor lamps.
These were widely used for motion picture phtography in the
silent era. Some they were also used for plate burning for
half-tone plates and in some large format enlargers such as
the old Saltzman units. These lamps must be run continuously
and exposure controlled with a shutter. The output is mostly
near UV.
Cold light heads are fluorescent lamps. They are actually
similar to a low pressure mercury lamp inside but the inside
surface of the envelope is coated with a fluorescent
material which converts the UV to visible light. The mix of
materials in the coating determines the spectral output.
There are low equivelent color temperature cold-lights which
will work fairly well with variable contrast filters. I
believe the Ilford VC lamp is composed of two fluorescent
lamps, one concentrated in the green range. However, most of
the old cold-lights were very blue intended to be used with
graded paper.
While any diffusion head tends to blur certain kinds of
negative blemishes the increased paper contrast needed to
print with them sometimes brings them right out again. Even
with a cold light one must be careful of dust:-)
I don't know when cold light was introduced but I think
it may have been as early as the late 1930's. They
certainly became popular in the late 1940's.

Signature
---
Richard Knoppow
Los Angeles, CA, USA
dickburk@ix.netcom.com