Re: new to list

On Wed, 3 Nov 2004 Dalyvoss@aol.com wrote:

>
> Hi Judy,
>
> You wrote,
>
> " Another advantage of the fluorescent light table, at least
> mine,
> is that the paper can extend beyond the sides (I use plate glass on
> plate glass, not a contact frame), so you can use a paper larger
> than
> the negative, which many contact frames don't permit -- for a self
> border on the print."
>
> This sounds like what i would want to do. I've read though, that plate
> glass absorbs some of the UV light. Can anyone enlighten ( hehe) me about that?
> it will be ok for me to simply cover the negative and paper with a sheet of
> glass?

See Post-Factory #6, page 20-22, "Light Carpentry," for several models of
home made light tables, some from off-the-shelf parts, Bob Schramm's
garage, Jarek Mirowicz's fold-up to put in the closet, and mine own, begun
with my sole carpentry skill of hammering nails into brackets, then
over-elaborated, but you never know til you try. Either way, it works
fine.

Meanwhile, the thing about plate glass cutting down on UV is another of
those myths (like the one about the great gum-pigment ratio test heheheh).
Well, maybe it cuts down some light, but so does anything. However, since
my negative stage is OVER the bulbs, not under them, I can use a somewhat
thinner plate to receive the neg-paper sandwich, then cover with a heavier
plate for weight (plus two gallon jugs of liquid for extra weight). You do
need that weight to get the sandwich fully flat and tight if you're not
using a vacuum.

In fact there are as many myths about glass as about gum-in-general. When
I broke the cover glass of the vacuum easel in my NuArc, I spent over $100
to replace it with, I'm blanking on the name now, something like Starphire
water white glass -- supposedly the clearest purest glass in the known
universe. Except it stank for gum printing and not very good for other
media. I replaced it with plain plate for $20.

Judy
Received on Wed Nov 3 23:20:23 2004