From: bjs@RUTS.ccc.amdahl.com (Barry Sherman)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Re: Jobo CPE2 CPP2
Date: 23 Nov 92 20:59:43 GMT
Reply-To: bjs@RUTS.ccc.amdahl.com (Barry Sherman)
Followup-To: rec.photo
Organization: Amdahl Corporation, Sunnyvale CA

Steve Kosoff writes:

>
>Jobo CPE2 CPP2
>
>What are the differences in the above?  What advantages does one give
>over the other.

CPP2 over CPE2:

* Greater temperature stability.  I believe that it's +/- .1 C for the 
  CPP vx. +/- .2 C for the CPE.  Not sure just how significant.   I have
  hazy memories that some processes (E6) want a smaller tolerance than
  the .2 C but I'm not sure.  Since I got my CPP I've stopped worrying
  about temperature variations.

* The CPP has a built-in digital thermometer.  I think this is a nice 
  convenience, although it won't get you more accurate  temperatures
  than the CPE (in terms of the "base" setting, not the variation).  If the
  temperature knobs of the CPE work with detents, as do those on the CPP, then
  repeatability shouldn't be a problem.  If they're "inifintely adjustable",
  with no detents at the numbered markings then you'll have to fiddle with
  the knobs while watching a thermometer and allowing time for the temperature
  to stabilize each time that you tweak it if you're to get the temperature 
  set identically each time.

* Maximum print size on the CPP is 20x24 while I believe that it's 11x14 on
  the CPE.  Just as a suggestion:  try not to limit your sizes unnecessarily.
  M
any people seem to find that whether they're dealing with print size or
  film size, they wind up wanting to use something larger than what they
  thought they wanted when they bought their equipment.  

  I can't count the number of people I've talked to who'd like to use large
  format (4x5 and up) but are limited by their medium format enlargers.  
  Many people think that 11x14 is a really huge print.  And continue to
  think so for a year or so ...  Personally, I bought a 4x5 enlarger because
  I was sure that I'd want to move to 4x5 (from 35mm) someday.  Now that I'mm
  using 4x5 almost exclusively I'm realizing that I'd *really* like to be
  using 8x10 format.

  And when I built my darkroom I designed the furniture so that my "standard"
  print size would be 11x14 and I could, with significant difficulty, do
  16x20 and 20x24.  And I'm now realizing that I'd really prefer to 
  standardize on 16x20 but it's too awkward to do so enjoyably.

  Just a little observation here.  :-)

* The CPP has a solenoid-controlled cold water inlet.  This permits it to chill
  solutions as well as warm them.  I don't use this as I don't have plumbing
  in my darkroom but it sounds like a nice idea.

How come only the CPP and the CPE are being considered?   The CPA permits
the same print size as the CPP, while lacking the digital thermometer and
cold-water inlet.  I think, but am not *sure* that the CPA also has slightly
greater temperature tolerance.  But I'd think it to be a better bet than 
the CPE.

Barry
--


|----------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| Barry Sherman, Amdahl Corp.  | PROGRAM: n. A magic spell cast over a com-  |
| bjs@ruts.ccc.amdahl.com      | puter allowing it to turn one's input into  |
|                              | error messages.  tr.v. To engage in a pas-  |
|                              | time similar to banging one's head against  |
|                              | a wall, but with fewer opportunities for    |
|                              | reward.                                     |
|----------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| Amdahl, being a corporation, is a legal fiction.  Therefore it is incapable|
| of holding, let alone expressing, opinions.  Unfortunately, this has been  |
| said of me as well.                                                        |
|----------------------------------------------------------------------------|
Newsgroups: rec.photo