First, thank you for this review! If I understand correctly, when testing white light + Ilford filters, you used white light from the head itself. This will affect the performance of the filters, because the white LED they use has shifted spectrum compared to the standard enlarger bulbs. I am using Intrepid (I am interested in B&W only) and overall I am happy. I believe Intrepid got the right idea but failed in the execution. Some extra comments for those who may be interested: I looked inside the controller (I decided to build my own with a better functionality, etc.) and it is far from well-designed (strange layout, many shortcuts in how circuits are connected). With a minimal effort, using only a simple logic analyzer, I was able to reverse-engineer the LED settings they use (via SK6812). And so (GRB W notation): Focus White - FFFFFF FF Focus Red - 00FF00 00 FLT White - 000000 FF FLT 5 - 0000FF 00 FLT 4.5 - 1700e8 00 FLT 4 - 2e00d1 00 FLT 3.5 - 4500b9 00 FLT 3 - 5d00a2 00 FLT 2.5 - 74008b 00 FLT 2 - 8b0074 00 FLT 1.5 - a2005d 00 FLT 1 - b90045 00 FLT 0.5 - d1002e 00 FLT 0 - e80017 00 FLT 00 - ff0000 00
I know the pain of this colour problem. I worked on a print for an artist friend, it was a negative of a green spikey bush, some warm yellow light casting over it and a delicate white spiderweb across it. Using some slightly expired (2 years) Endura I really couldn't get the green and yellows to separate. And the spider web was a tad cyan. I made so many test prints and I could see my friend wasn't over-awed with the print. Hearing you describe the LED's it makes perfect sense as to why this was happening. Like you say, the solution is a bank of different LED's.
Great review, it’s really good to see a product that got a lot of hype (sent out to lots of RU-vidrs for free) and then to see your hard cash that bought one and to see how it actually performs. For many people who only want to print black and white, this still will actually be a good option, I was suprised it printed at grade 5, which if you split grade print is key. With so many other enlargers out there a good second hand durst, is probably the way I’d go. Thanks again for the video
I do B&Wonly, find this enlarger very interesting forits size - I actually haveaBeseler 23CIII-XL. This oneon the Beseler column might be interesting :) Thanks for the video and well detailed explanation - as always. My best!
Thanks for another insightful video. I was looking into buying one of these for a while until an Omega D5 XL eventually came along. Glad I held off long enough, love the Omega. Hopefully Intrepid takes note.
Honest but gracious. The level of tech and science explanation you provided here was good confirmation to me that regardless of the kit and tech available, colour printing won’t be for me. I’ve always been confused by colour, I don’t get it, can’t “see it” as described. No I’m not colourblind, but neurologically have issues describing, remembering, differentiating. This gave me more insight to that which no neurologist or ophthalmologist has - so thanks. I hope that Intrepid do take this on board and consult with experienced professionals who have a thorough understanding, rather than just enthusiastic hobbyists. Given the vast improvements - in frustratingly slow iterations - they have made with their cameras, hopefully they will go for a more in-depth consultation and review and bring out a massively overhauled technical architecture with this.
Great review. This aligns with my friends experience and also what Lina Bessanova touched on in one of her videos. The intrepid enlarger is all I know currently and it’s been fine with my B&W stuff. I had an issue with mine and they were quite responsive. I’m not a fan of the way they handle upgrades/software. I bought some RA4 paper and chems but I think I’ll have to buy an old durst or devere (recommendations appreciated for 6x7 reasonably sized and priced)
Those intros are always cracking me up haha. 😂😂😂 But all jokes aside, I started using this one for my 6x7 negatives. My regular enlarger does not go bigger than 6x6 and it was either buying a bigger version of what I already use. Or seeing what modern day inventions do the trick as well. If you treat it well it is a good machine, and like you already mentioned it's 3D parts. and there of course things that can be improved. But as long as I have it it works just as well as my regular enlarger. And I can imagine if you are either have a lower budget or short on space it's perfect. The only thing that I think is cumbersome is focusing. While on my Durst it is pief poef done. On the Intrepid I almost cannot see the grain, and have to be really precise under the lens if I want to see the neg at all. Also the intensity was waaaaay too high on the regular setting. Other than that, I think it is a good buy for the money. :)
As someone who dove into color printing with this enlarger, it’s reassuring but also frustrating that the enlarger itself is contributing to my difficulty in balancing color prints. I think this is a great product, but really hope this is figured out.
Hello. Thank you very kindly for an accurate review. Since LED’s are not there yet, I would suggest to check out the LPL 7700 Pro. Very reasonable price on the second hand market and in very decent conditions. I can add the fact that using a Sekonic colour meter with the majority of the high end LED fixtures like Arri Orbiter, Aputure LS1200, Aputure CS15, Vortex 8 and many more, you can never get a smooth curve and the values are never the ones you dial in.
Great detai, thanks! Glad to see that it can hit a gradev5, Lisa Bessanova had issues with her preview unit. You're findings on colour match my experience, the colour shifts are huge, and it ca be frustrating. That said, my colour printing is limited to the occasional print to stick on the fridge, so I don't mind too much. It seems good enough for me for B&W, atleadt it'll be a while before I outgrow it. If intrepid do upgrade the light I'll probably upgrade, it's definitely a project I'm keen to support
The curve for the LEDs indicates that the “green” LEDs are really at the peak wavelength that would be usually designated cyan. They are putting too much light into the blue sensitive part of the paper response. If Intrepid could get the same LED package with green LEDs at 550 nm, that part of the problem might be solved. The coarseness of the yellow color adjustment may be more related to the electronics and programming than to the LEDs, though there may be an interaction there. I hope Intrepid sees these videos and starts looking for ways to improve the situation. If your LED emission curves are correct, they will need to find different LEDs. Question: What do the color sensitivity curves for multigrade paper look like? Did Intrepid choose these LEDs to suit multigrade paper and then try to piggyback color printing on to the choice they had made for black and white?
The problem is not so much the 550nm wavelength for green. The main issue is the 8 bit color depth of the addressable RGB LEDs used in the head. This is an unfixable problem unless they (Intrepid) fundamentally change their LED head design.
Fascinating review. Thx. I own one and intend to use it only for B&W split-grade printing. As another commenter noted, I don’t believe I have the brain or brainpower to do colour printing with any enlarger.
Of course you do. 🙂 The viewing kit is SO helpful and you just add points on a normal dichro head. What he didn't mention is that there are filters in 5 point increments. I don't know why it wouldn't work, although I think you would have to do testing to confirm.
I think the problem is you are comparing this to the best equipment available when film photography was at its peak and highly profitable. The fact that this new enlarger exists at all is a miracle. It is also absolutely the most rewarding gadget I have ever purchased. I have made some beautiful black and white prints and will be starting with colour over the next few days. Will the colours be perfect, probably not, but if I wanted that I would be using my digital camera. The difficulty and imprecise nature of film and darkroom printing is a big part of what makes it so enjoyable, for me at least. I would love to use the big classic enlargers and traditional methods you are so adept with but they are just totally impractical for me as I just don’t have the space or the money and I think that is true for most people. I really hope intrepid can bring out future models with some of the improvements you mention but the film community is small now and they need our support if they are ever going to achieve that. Just remember there is only one company left even making colour paper… beggars can’t be choosers.
I would disagree. If the correct components are easily available but the incorrect components are chosen for economy or laziness in design, the problem is the maker, not the user. To give the excuse that film isn’t precise so the tools don’t need to be expects eveyone’s standards to be set by the lowest denominator. I would gladly pay an extra $20-$50 for a version that used the right parts and functionality. I want a scalpel and they handed me a chainsaw.
Comparing it to available equipment is the best thing to do. The unfortunate reality of this enlarger is it doesn’t do what it’s supposed to or is advertised to . Price is also a good consideration to pay attention to, it’s quite expensive as deals on good enlargers can still be found. Just this week I got a BNIB Durst m707 with timer, rodenon 50mm and 80mm lenses for €200. An amazing enlarger for an amazing price and one that will be much more capable than this diet enlarger.
@@Notimportant1995 You can’t compare a new product to used items on eBay where the quality and availability is completely random. I actually got my Intrepid boxed and new for less than half price on eBay, if you want a fair comparison. The intrepid does a lot of things better than a vintage enlarger. For a start it doesn’t need a 100w bulb and heat isn’t an issue. Changing contrast is just a button press. It has a nice and bright safe light built in. It can be used to scan your negatives. The whole thing is much smaller and packs away easily. It absolutely does everything it is advertised to do, just not in the same way as vintage equipment.
@@TheNakedPhotographerA chainsaw lol. I think you are being really harsh on this product. I’ve seen some other RU-vidrs get some great colour prints from this enlarger. Perhaps try an image with some more colour in it, and without comparing it to anything else see if it is a pleasing photograph in its own right.
Color enlargers with dichroic heads are still made, although the market is full of used stuff for the fraction of the price. Unless your type of photography is shooting expired film with pinhole cameras or Holgas, I would not recommend buying this. You'll get a decent second hand Durst, Meopta or similar enlarger for the same amount of money.
I didn’t realize the Intrepid timer can be set to tenths of seconds. Now I can get more granular with f-stop printing. I would like to see you make prints with the Intrepid using b&w negs you previously printed with your Devere and comparing them. Did you test the Intrepid timer’s safelight?
WOW cool，i'am designing a enlarger and just meet same problem controllable LED strips for general use just not work,now trying to use special stand alone ledchips at 680、540 and 470 nm，spectrum chart provided by manufacturer looks nice and narrow，what do you think about this wavelength choice?😁 i knida understand what Intrepid have choosen to do, from my (desprate yet proceeding😂)experience,designing "right" stuff as small batch of spcific led board or "fine"controller can be stupidly expensive stupidly fast. but sitll hoping someone can do something better......😔
hello again I think they do have a software update already for that issue like I said I'm a new on this but I heard about that Update Hope you may be able to find it and use it
I think the issue is that everything is built to a price point. Additionally, not many manufacturers are making new film enlargers. For an intro to film photography and or the occasional print batch the price is right. Would someone be willing to pay 2,3, or even 4x the price currently being asked? Coming from someone who bought both the original enlarger attachment for their 4x5 camera, and now this one when it first came out. Not a fanboy, but can appreciate the cost considerations bringing a niche product to market.
Well, considering you need to buy a copy stand (or an old enlarger to butcher), the price is not that low. Minimum that is required is a tripod without leg braces, or better with a horizontal arm. Oh, and a lens. Why not just to buy an old enlarger?
@@TheNakedPhotographer understood, was definitely a lot of trial and error the first time I used it. It makes me appreciate all of the automation we had with the mini labs back in the mid 90s. I worked at wolf camera as a kid when digital was just coming to market. Still have fond memories of borrowing a "demo" F5 for small shoots and personal work. Kids want that vintage, film look; color accuracy doesn't appear to be a high priority these days
@@Girbasova not that many around any more, particularly color. I made my stad from misc parts of Amazon more commonly used for 3d printers, CNC, etc. they're aluminum extrusions with v groves and t nuts. I then picked up a macro tripod head for additional adjustment and to distance it from the column for 11x14 prints. Mine needed to be very compact for a small bathroom, one day in a different house I'll have a proper dark room
@@TheNakedPhotographer That's probably the direction Intrepid should go with these enlargers. Maybe remove the "color" features of this model and make it a b&w enlarger only (ideally for a little lower price too). Then have a deluxe model that can do color and b&w that has the better LEDs.
No offense to intrepid but after using their 4x5 for a few years, I wouldn’t buy another product from them. I used this enlarger at a friends house when they were dialing it in. I couldn’t get accurate colors from this. Used both Kodak and Ilford chrome color correctors and no dice.
I had their enlarger after their kickstarter and the issue was the lens plane was not parallel to film plane resulting unsharp prints towards the edges. They have had sent me another copy and the issue was the same, film and lens planes were not parallel so I have returned for full refund.
It's great to have a clear, technical analysis of this Intrepid enlarger light source, but I think the reality is that its sales are driven mainly by social media hype, not by technical analysis. Frankly, the idea of someone paying more than $500 for the light source/timer plus a fairly low-fi enlarger head always seemed to me to be a poor deal, but the idea of buying the light source/timer package to update an older, serious enlarger to do color work seemed attractive. Now, it seems that it doesn't function well at printing color. This is clearly a "buyer beware" product, so IMO those who buy it do so at their own risk. My only objection to its existence in the market is that newbies who suck into its hype, which probably defines most of its buyers, will quickly learn the hard way that it's a fairly useless device and be put off enlarging in general by its experience.
@@TheNakedPhotographer , changind LEDs is probably a big deal. If they are not of a programmable digitally controlled type, you'll need an extra unit to created the stable and adjustable flux. A 3-channel unit.
We get what we paid for. I think that is a sloppy product, even for B&W (half steps is quite steep for many people, me included, and it is even worse for split grading). But hey, there is no other enlarger like this one in the market. If you do not have the space there is no other way.
