Sden Cool White 2% Daylight Cool White 3% Daylight
1. 1.58 1.70 1.60 1.70
2. 1.55 1.67 1.56 1.70
3. 1.46 1.65 1.44 1.70
4. 1.29 1.60 1.39 1.66
5. 1.22 1.54 1.24 1.61
6. 1.09 1.45 1.17 1.53
7. .93 1.31 1.02 1.47
8. .78 1.21 .95 1.32
9. .62 1.09 .86 1.22
10. .42 .91 .68 1.07
11 .30 .77 .62 .88
12. .29 .58 .54 .79
13. .20 .43 .26 .58
14. .13 .23 .20 .44
15. .10 .17 .10 .33
16. .08 .13 -- .24
17. -- -- -- .13
18. -- -- .10
19. --
ata provided for the BL and Cool White tubes is the
same as reported in a previous comparison I posted
comparing BL and Cool White tubes. The tissue used for the Daylight tests was from the same batch and identical sensitizing, exposing and developing procedures were followed. All other parameters reported in the original tests, including clarifications provided in subsequent messages, were
identical.
What is most impressive of about the Daylight tubes
is their ability to print negatives with a very high
density range, yet at the same time retain high
Dmax values in the shadows. In my working conditions BL tubes are not capable of this. Compare, for example, the step in Test One sensitized with 1% sensitizer and exposed with BL tubes with the
step in Test Two sensitized with 3% sensitizer and exposed with Daylight tubes. Each reproduces density into step 18 but the shadow density of the Daylight exposed steps has a much higher Dmax.
Test One (Comparison of Sylvania UV tubes, GE Daylight tubes and GE Cool White tubes at sensitizer strengths of 1/4% and 1%.
sden 1/4% 1%
UV GE Day White UV GE Day White
1. 1.73 1.73 1.38 1.32 1