The Intrepid Compact: Taking 1979 By Storm

Speaking of enlargers, as we were when last we spoke, take a look at this fantastic little thing:

The Intrepid Compact enlarger head, control unit, and carriers

What is it? It's the Intrepid Compact LED 35mm and medium-format enlarger head and timer/controller, available in B&W multigrade and color (sorry, colour, that should be, as it's made in Great Britain (sorry, the UK)). It bolts to any standard copy stand (or any enlarger base and column that can be converted to a copy stand, I assume). You can even use a tripod if you have a good level*. You have to provide those bits, and your own M39 screwmount enlarger lens. For a little bonus, the timer actually has a B&W safelight built right into it.

Light emitting diodes
LEDs have proven to be a highly useful technology, replacing filament lamps in everything from vehicle headlights to keychain flashlights. But one thing for which they are absolutely perfect is enlarger heads. They're light as can be, consistent, adjustable in brightness and color (perfect!), feature instant-on and -off (perfecter!) and they hardly generate any heat at all and thus don't need to be ventilated (ideal). 

I could go on and on and on about all the ways enlarger makers contrived to address the inherent problems and supply these qualities in their products over the span of many decades, from using cold-cathode sources to Durst's innovation of putting the light bulb away from the negative stage and using an angled mirror to shine light down on the negative. (Some very early enlargers used the sun as a light source, and I kid you not. And you thought it was frustrating waiting for the clouds when your camera's on the tripod, the scene composed and ready to go?) As already mentioned, for B&W as well as for color, the dichroic-style light-mixing box was the best solution that evolved.

Two of the team members in the Intrepid workshop

...But LEDs are even better. Over-the-top better. Solutions through history just coped with all the difficulties; LEDs remove all the difficulties. Blitz 'em. Blow 'em away.

In the 1950s and '60s, although it's not often thought of in these terms, having one's own basement darkroom was a status symbol among other things. Cameras were clever and beautiful little mechanisms in a world where such things were not so common as they are now, and—think about it—having space in one's abode for what Nick Hartmann called "the room-sized accessory" meant that you had a basement at your disposal, which meant that you owned your own home, which in those days not everyone did and yet everyone aspired to do. The darkroom was a pleasant diversion in an era when video games were still only found in arcades (Pong, a very primitive one, debuted in the arcades in 1972). The darkroom hobby gained steam throughout the post-WWII years and peaked in 1979, when, by very rough industry estimate, there were 500,000 darkrooms across America and, ever so briefly, the circulation of the most popular darkroom magazine in America, Paul Sheptoe's Darkroom Photography, of which I am an ex-Contributing Editor, crested above 100,000, the first and only time that ever happened.

Let me just tell ya somethin': if the Intrepid Compact had come out in 1979, it would have taken the photography hobby by storm. It would have been the Mazda Miata of enlargers. It would have been as futuristic as the 3D printers the team at Intrepid use to make parts.

But the end was nigh
Unfortunately for the hobby, the handwriting on the wall was already beginning to appear by 1979. Steve Sasson was already tinkering with the self-contained digital cameras he had invented four years earlier at Eastman Kodak. By the 'aughts and the early 2010s, most of those basement darkrooms had been dismantled or transformed little by little into storage rooms; most of the manufacturers had ceased production (Beseler and DeVere soldier on); and the darkroom magazines had all shuttered their operations. So in 1979 the hobby had only <30 years left. Despite a few holdouts!

Intrepid amongst 'em. You go, guys. Analog is a niche now, but it will always mean fun for a few. Reader Josh R. (thanks, Josh) told me about the Intrepid Compact, and even offered to send me his so I could review it. Alas, I had to tell him that I lack the rest of the room-sized accessory, which would of course be necessary for the test.

My time in the darkroom (1980–2000) is done, much as I loved it. I do own a house, but I'd have to share the fieldstone-walled basement with the mice, the spiders, the damp, the odor (odour), and all the little radons whizzing about. But if any film-camera aficionados amongst you Millennials and Gen Z'ers want to print your own B&W (there's no reason to develop and print your own color IMO, except of course if you want to), this might very well be the killer app for a neat and efficient little darkroom** c. 2024.

And it's not even expensive. Check it out...just for fun.

Mike

P.S. And this concludes "enlarger week." Fortnight?

*Although I'm going to suggest that unless you have a very good tripod, and access to a machinist's level, I think this might frustrate you. Darkroom setup has a frustration threshold—you can cope with a certain amount of difficulties and seat-o'-the-pants solutions to problems, but once you surpass the threshold, you'll just defeat yourself. No need to be overly careful about this. But the frustration threshold is a pretty distinct line, so, if things aren't going well, be alert to the fact that you might have crossed it.

**Be sure to pay attention to ventilation. Often an afterthought, but essential, not optional.

Original contents copyright 2024 by Michael C. Johnston and/or the bylined author. All Rights Reserved. Links in this post may be to our affiliates; sales through affiliate links may benefit this site. As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases. (To see all the comments, click on the "Comments" link below or on the title of this post.)

Featured Comments from:

Jack Mac: "I love this posting. My peak darkroom moment was 1993 when I bought a house just because it had a fantastic darkroom. Sadly, I only found time to use it a few times. But like a classic car or classic camera, I didn’t need to use it, it was just pleasurable that I finally had one. I endorse your comment that amateur darkrooms are for B&W not color. And I strongly advise not to drink and develop. After a few beers, I once tried to develop B&W 120 film accidentally using color development chemicals. As you know, the bleach used in color development eliminates the silver in B&W film, so it’s the equivalent of mistakenly formatting your SD card before you download the photos."

Kodachromeguy: "Re 'The darkroom was a pleasant diversion': That was also the era when the 'man of the house' built electronic kits, such as the excellent ones from Heathkit. Audio fans still covet the Dynaco tube amplifiers. This economic model depended on one member of the family being able to support the family with one paycheck. The lady did the June Cleaver thing with running the house and cooking. The guy came home from his job, had a martini, ate supper, and disappeared into his darkroom or electronics shop. Another time; another America."

Mike replies: True dat. June works too now. And I saw on the news the other night that Americans work 10% longer each day than they did in 1979...you know, back when they were talking about the 7-hour workday and the 4-day work week.

Comments

[David Brown]

Well now, the Intrepid kit would be tempting as I already own all the other “bits”, but I also own two Beseler 4x5MXT! The space savings might be worth it. (I don’t do 4x5). I could sell the Beselers to cover the cost, but my reservation is that I am really tied to my RHDesigns Fstop timer. Any enlarger that comes with a proprietary timer won’t do. The first Beseler I bought had the computerized head with its own timer. It had to go and be replaced by the older straight dichroic head.

[robert e]

Fabulous! Seems ideal for a closet/bathroom/pantry setup, for those without a basement.

For a time I used a small red LED headlamp as a safe light. Far, far smaller, lighter and cheaper than the fancy analog filtered safelights I'd been borrowing, and much brighter too.

[Terry Burnes]

There is a lot of interesting stuff on that Intrepid Web site besides the enlarger head.

[Jeff]

I recall your attempt to build a darkroom in your Wisconsin house. Next thing we knew, you moved to this house, and built “pool hall” instead. Priorities (including maybe following a girlfriend? :) )

I designed and built 4 darkrooms from 1984-2007, in 4 different houses following work related relocations. Each included a dedicated space, with proper ventilation, light proofing and the works, including big sinks. My favorite was the first, with a Beseler 45 MXT enlarger. I remember hiring an expert to more optimally align it. I wonder what he ended up doing for a living.

I transitioned fully to digital in 2009, after another house move, and now make inkjet prints. Far more convenient and flexible. Not a silver print (although some companies can use digital files to make them), but still satisfying when done well.

[Roger]

Speaking of LEDs... This YouTube video by Veratasium tells the history of the blue LED. We wouldn't have LED light sources, monitors, or TVs without it and it was a bear to develop. Not a pretty story. Worth a view.

The Veratasium video:

https://youtu.be/AF8d72mA41M?si=EgNOl1T79MoO7iBg

[Stan B.]

I definitely want one... Will never use it, but helluva looker/conversation piece!

[Dave]

Re: LEDs. When my brother was a graphic design artist with an advertising firm, he told me that some company was going to try to make car headlights using LEDs. At that time, LEDs were usually used for red indicator lights.

Imagine our surprise about 20 years later!

[Peter Jeffrey Croft]

Yes, I have fond (maybe) memories of my darkroom days in the 70s & 80s - a Durst F60(?) 35mm and 6x6cm enlarger, Paterson tank, Rodenstock and Minolta lenses and all the gubbins. Also a Cibachrome roller (yes, I tried). Agfa Speed rings a bell.

I produced quite reasonable B&W prints (by my very amateur standards) and an occasional Ciba success, but the cost was too high for me - AU$4 per sheet if I remember correctly. If I took three attempts per Ciba print, it was better to go to the professional labs.

In the end, when I moved house in 2013, I gave the lot away free to a friend. He was very happy.

But digital changed everything! I had a Fuji 6x9cm at one stage and in film days would not have been able to print them. But flat bed scanning opened it all up for me. Wunderbar! I produced damn good scans this way.

[Stefan Kassel]

The Intrepid enlarger solution is really a blissful thing ! Light source, the timer/contrast regulation and the small size and weight of it is altogether "enlightening". Intrepid Co. has even made it possible to convert a 4x5" camera into an enlarger using the "Intrepid 4x5 Enlarger Kit" that uses the same light source as their "Compact enlarger". Downsizing and enlarging 120 and 35mm negatives is possible as well !

[John]

All these articles about enlargers remind me of a memory gap I have: I can remember my early endeavors in a darkroom and I can remember that in my student years I took pictures of events on Saturday, then developed the film and printed the images and dropped those off at the local paper, with some ending up in print. But for the life of me, I cannot remember where I did the developing and the printing. This bugs me whenever darkrooms come up.

[hugh crawford]

Sounds like the Graflarger in my speed graphic kit.
From the ad copy for it:

THE NEW GRAFLARGER BACK*
*with Aristo Cold Light
The Graflarger Back plus your Graphic or Graflex Camera equals a really good enlarger everyone can afford to own.
Graflarger can be used either as a horizontal or vertical enlarger. It's an excellent retouching stand, also suitable for contact printing. Its light source, the famous Aristo Cold Light, will not buckle film or harm your camera or lens. Three sizes: 2¼4 x 3%4,
3¼ × 4¼ and 4 x 5.

Apparently, it’s just the thing for setting up a 4 x 5 darkroom in a hotel.

[Bob Rosinsky]

Cool concept. Wish it had been available 30 years ago.

[Allan Ostling]

I revived my interest in film cameras in 2017, when I decided to make a photographic record of Phoenix, Arizona. It's possible that this metroplex of five million souls will be dust in the wind, perhaps in thirty years when the water supply runs dry. After exposing about 5,000 images (mostly 35mm but some medium format)I completed the project at the end of 2023.

Film provides a tangible means of storage for an unpredictable future. No darkroom or englarger was required --I have a dark closet for loading my developing tanks. High definition camera scans with the negatives sandwiched between anti-newton glass plates complete the process.

I have not had a darkroom since the start of the 21st century. I'm happy with Lightroom.

[Gary Nylander]

Re: Be sure to pay attention to ventilation. Often an afterthought, but essential, not optional.

I agree it's good to pay attention to ventilation in the darkroom and it should be essential, not optional. I have worked in several darkrooms over the years as a newspaper photographer and also for my photography. My very first darkroom was a closet in my parent's home, I never even thought about ventilation and no one ever mentioned it, but that was close to 50 years ago. However, the first real professional darkroom I worked in was when I started working for a local weekly newspaper, the Goldstream Gazette in my hometown on Vancouver Island this was soon after I graduated from high school. The darkroom had no ventilation system, it was in the back of the newspaper office. We made half-tone prints with an 85-dot screen that was made with print paper held down with a vacuum easel with a conventional enlarger (Beseler) The print paper was fed into a Kodak Ektamtic machine. I suppose the ventilation system was maybe not as crucial as there were no open trays of chemistry to develop the prints. Film development was done with stainless steel daylight tanks. The Kodak Ektamtic machine had two chemical solutions that sat upright in the machine, developer, and stabilizer. Once a week or so the machine had to be taken apart and the transport rollers had to be cleaned.

When I moved to Ontario for a photographer's job at the Brampton Daily Times, the darkroom had no ventilation system. I don't recall ever having a conversation with other staff or even thinking that a ventilation system was needed. We made prints on regular RC print paper in open trays, these were sent to the production department to be turned into half-tone prints.

When I moved back to British Columbia, I started at the Kelowna Daily Courier, where I spent the majority of my 41-year newspaper career. The darkroom did have a ventilation system! It was a fan mounted in the lower part of the darkroom door. As I recall it was never plugged in, It did work through, but I'm not sure how effective it would have been as it was venting the stale darkroom air directly into the general office at the paper, so maybe there were too many complaints from staff when the fan was plugged in. The paper had a darkroom technician and I filled in for him on the weekend. So my darkroom time was much less, eventually, the paper went all color and we used a Wing-Lynch semi-automatic film processor for the C-41 film, the negatives were then scanned. My exposure to darkroom stale air was minimal as the years went on, although when I had to make up new chemistry for the Wing-Lynch machine, the worst part was adding a few drops of glacial acetic acid to the bleach, that was nasty stuff.

For my work outside of my day-to-day newspaper work, I had a darkroom of my own at home because I was shooting black and white 4x5 sheet film with large format cameras. First I used the bathroom in my apartment and used the fan in the bathroom for ventilation. Eventually, I moved into a house and turned one of the bedrooms into a darkroom, I closed off the window and even had some plumbing connected to a sink as it was next door to the bathroom. For several years I happily printed away sometimes making large 16x20-inch prints which produced a lot of chemistry odors because of the big trays until one day I started thinking "Hey what about ventilation?" I gave this a lot of serious thought and research. I thought about sticking a bathroom fan in the ceiling above the sink where the development was done. I found out that those bathroom fans don't do much, they were never designed to get rid of that much nasty darkroom odors. Plus where to vent it to?

What I found is that a proper ventilation system could be very, very expensive and would require significant alterations to my house. There is something called negative airflow and positive airflow. To exhaust the chemical fumes properly I would need an exhaust hood, these hoods are generally made of stainless steel, about the length of the sink or working area in the sink, and would sit about 24 inches or so above the trays, this is the fan that exhausts the stale chemical-laden air to the outside, in the case of my home the vent pipe from the hood would go up through the ceiling and out the roof. There is a lot of technical knowledge that is way beyond me in how chemical fumes can be heavier than air so from what I understand, the closer the exhaust fan is to the source of the chemical release (ie trays) the better.

Then there is the positive airflow, since I would be sucking the bad air out of the sealed darkroom then there has to be a source where new fresh air from outside is brought into the darkroom at the same rate as the old air that is being expelled. I would need another fan system to bring in the fresh air. So really two fan systems are needed one to remove stale air and the other to bring in fresh air. All of this would have to be built and designed by a professional as it would have been beyond my basic home improvement skills to tackle such a project. The cost would have been prohibitive, not hundreds of dollars but in the thousands of dollars and that was close to 20 years ago. In the end, it was one of the reasons I decided to shut my main printing darkroom down and just have a small area in my laundry room to process my film where ventilation was not as much of an issue.

[Mark Sampson]

I'm glad to see someone answering a question that the photo industry dismissed as irrelevant decades ago. The Intrepid enlarger looks like a quite usable machine, and I expect that they'll sell quite a few.
Admittedly I spent a fair amount of time from 1981-2009 around color enlargers, but I think that this is like someone re-inventing the phonograph turntable: pointless to most, but very useful to a small (but dedicated) minority. And here's to them!

[Steve Justad]

My memory and a quick check on the internet says blue led's were not available until the early '90's. Color enlargers are going to need red, green, and blue led's. Red, green, and yellow led's had been available for years by the early '90's, but not blue. White led's came even a bit later. So I question the ability of the Intrepid to print color by using led's in 1979.

Just after reading about the new blue led's we had a family get together. My brother's then wife worked for a patent attorney. I talked with her quite a bit about patenting a led enlarger and started preliminary work. The electronics were simple, needing not much more than what could be purchased at the local Radio Shack.

But about the same time I purchased my first Mac and an early version of Photoshop. A few years earlier I had seen prints made by a tri-color scanning laser printer. They were the handwriting on the wall, so to speak. It was 10 years or slightly more before I had my first digital camera, but sure saw it coming. Analog photography was going the way of the passenger pigeon. I can still see where printing b&w analog could be an enjoyable hobby. Printing analog color, not so much. Hell, printing digital color is not all that much fun.

I did end up building a led color enlarger head. It resides on my unused for 20-plus-years Durst L1000. I still think about printing analog, but then have a lapse back to sanity.