Jeffrey D. Mathias (jeffrey.d.mathias@worldnet.att.net)
Mon, 28 Jun 1999 16:05:05 -0400
William Laven wrote:
> ... In my tests, Super Actinics, which emit a narrow
> band peaking at 420nm, print faster then traditional "black light" bulbs,
> which emit a broad band that peaks at 350 or 360nm. A friend of mine did
> comparisons of BL vs. Super Actinics with POP and found the SA's produced
> shorter exposure times and at least a grade's worth more contrast.
>
> Eric Neilsen did some comparisons of BL vs. SA for Pt/Pd, too....
OK, I would like to see something written up on what comparisons were
made and what the resulting prints showed.
I was just printing, unfortunately at 88F since I haven't put an air
cooler into my darkroom yet (still cooler than outside)(Didn't think I'd
really need it up north here, but this dang el-ninya thing has given us
a hot drought in Boston. I can control just about everything else.) I
could not get enough exposure on AFO 66%RH. I tripled my exposure and
the print showed about the same weakness. Then I went outside in direct
sun, and wouldn't you know, a great print.
Now I have always suspected that things may get exaggerated at higher
temperatures. I am really wondering now just what influence the
spectrum of light has on this process. It does seem to have a
substantial contribution. So, if you all got some data, I would
appreciate the details. If not, does someone have the ability to run
some careful comparisons with various incident spectrums. Right now it
makes me want to move back to the desert.
-- Jeffrey D. Mathias http://home.att.net/~jeffrey.d.mathias/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0b3 on Thu Oct 28 1999 - 21:39:37