Durst TIM 60

I

Ian-Barber

Admin
Registered User
Joined
Aug 6, 2016
Messages
1,711
I have never owned an enlarger timer and was surprised to see a Durst TIM 60 in the charity shop bargain box so I bought it as unknown working.

Cleaned it up and plugged it into the enlarger and although its a bit hit and miss, it does count and turn off the enlarger.
I noticed that the dial was dimly illuminated so I shone a torch on it and then it started to glow like those toy skeletons we had in the 1980's

Anyone know how long its supposed to glow for as it seems to die after about 8 minutes
 
That's seems reasonable. A glow in the dark watch face has about the same time roughly. The duration is proportional to the amount of fluorescing material (likely not much with those small dials) and the brightness of the light. Set it outside in the sun for 20 minutes and see what it does.

If you are getting intermittent timing, it likely due to mechanical contacts inside the timer that have gotten dirty over the years. Find yourself a can of Dexoit. Unplug the timer, open it up and clean any contacts you can find by spraying a small amount of Deoxit onto the contact. You don't need much. Just a very light burst, and then work the mechanics back and forth to clean off the contact crud. Deoixit is magical stuff and can should last a very long time.

Nice find!
 
I haven't tried it yet for accuracy on times, it was the glow from the dial which bothered me, looks like i will have to give it a quick burst from the flash light before I do any printing.
 
Ian-Barber said:
I am guessing you haven't spent much time in the UK :)
It would probably get wet through
Click to expand...

Actually I have, and I was going to comment to that effect, but I thought it might be snarky :)

I think of the light in the UK as being dominated by liquid sunshine and photographed there accordingly ...
 
I too have never owned an enlarger timer - never thought I needed one until this week. Now a 'new' enlarger is jostling everything else in my tiny darkroom space. It fits - just - but does not leave much room other kit, including my usual enlarger switch. The location of the wall socket now means a timer seems sensible.
There is a Durst TIM 60 on the auction site right now. Is this a good idea? I don't mind rewiring things and cleaning contacts if I can get at them. I always prefer analogue dials to digital read-outs. My brain seems to be programmed that way.
What are the potential pitfalls with these devices?
Thanks as always, wise and experienced LF minds :)
 
For many years I managed without a timer, then someone gave me a Durst TIM 60. I have to say it is very useful, and much easier than my old method of looking at the second hand on a clock.

Alan
 
I'm amazed anyone can work without an enlarger timer.
I too was concerned about the glow and eventually covered the timer with a tea towel,
 
Last edited:
To me, having a look at this ancient tool is like a time warp shock, and a reminder to mum's egg timer :)

AnalogueWendy said:
What are the potential pitfalls with these devices?
Click to expand...

I wouldn't trust the accuracy of a mechanical clock nor could I print with this 60 full seconds option only.
My old timer has a manual dial, too, but a read-out with these early but good readable led digits.

My minimal requirement to a timer would be a food switch because of the need for both my hands doing burn and dodging voodoo.

More modern timers include contrast measuring possibilities which I find very helpful in finding an exposure base.
 
I used for 30 years my Meopta Viponel S15 timer, but when I retired I bought myself a Analyser Pro timer. After a steepish learning curve it changed my printing, once setup and calibrated it is a dream to use, you can get almost perfect results from the first test with it, and some prints it will be bob on from the first one. Its having the fine control that helps in printing.
 
Concerns about accuracy noted. Yes, something with a dial AND those early red LEDs would be an excellent comprimise, and a footswitch would be great (if I can make space for it).
I'm hoping that (re)learning to contact print using my old smiths darkroom timer (and an inline cable switch while dodging and switching filters )has been good for my brain health.
 
Accuracy isn’t as important as consistency in enlarging timers. One second steps will be fine if you’re doing relatively long exposures, which seems likely if you’re dodging and burning with contrast filters. The luminescent dial will give you no problems unless you place it face-down on the paper. Its light has to travel up to the ceiling and back again to reach the paper. Somebody at Durst will have thought of this already.
A foot switch does sound like a useful addition, but I’ve never had one so I can’t comment
Just for the record, Saint Ansel used a metronome. It was set in whole seconds - sixty beats per minute.
 
A word of explanation is needed here. Accuracy is when, if you set one second, you get one second. That’s what we’d all want. However, no device works perfectly and so that second may vary up or down by some small amount. Consistency is when that variation is very small, so that every exposure, although it may not be the exact time set, is the same as all the others. In printing the exact time is not critical because we are judging by examining the print, not by reference to an external standard. It would be different if we were building a gearbox.
It’s a very small and pedantic distinction, but tolerancing is an important part of engineering.
Naturally, what we’d all prefer is to have both precision and consistency. No dispute there.
I’m not suggesting that the Durst timer, which began this discussion, is in any way inadequate.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top