RE: Powerful UV point source

About this list Date view Thread view Subject view Author view

From: S Wang (stwang@direcTVinternet.com)
Date: 07/13/02-09:07:48 AM Z


At 2:04 AM -0400 7/13/02, Judy Seigel wrote:
>When I tried grow lights for cyanotype, they were abysmal -- about 1 hour
>for what takes 3 minutes with BL (tho other types of grow light could be
>better).
>
>IME there's little if any advantage over BL in metal halide, except you
>get to use 1000-2000 watts of electricity instead of a puny 100 - 160, so
>you can run your air conditioner more... There may be somewhat more
>contrast, but for gum, which has so many controls in emulsion &
>development, etc., this seemed irrelevant.
>
>Judy

That may be true for gum, especially with digital negatives. But a
friend of mine who uses pyro and pyrocat, often needs to expose his
carbon and Kallitypes for one to two *hours* under a 1000 watts metal
halide bulb.

Another reason to use digital negatives.

My experience with Grow Lux bulbs is like yours - they are nearly
worthless for cyanotype.

Sam


About this list Date view Thread view Subject view Author view

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : 09/19/02-11:11:00 AM Z CST