Re: update: screw-in BLB light-box

is white the best color for UV reflection? i seem to
remember reading that it wasn't. is silver better?

--- jude.taylor@comcast.net wrote:

> Richard,
>
> I did not use any reflectors, but that is a
> possibility that might help. The top of the box
> INSIDE above the bulbs is all white and should, as
> far as I can figure, reflect rather than absorb the
> UV. There are, however, several inches of space
> from the tip of the coil to the base of the ceramic
> sockets (top of box), and the sides of the box were
> not painted white or lined with reflective material.
>
> Hummmh! I wonder if silver / white "tea chest"
> paper lining would work?
>
> --
> Judy Rowe Taylor
> Mukilteo, WA
> Art is a voice of the heart, a song of the soul.
> www.enduringibis.com
> jude.taylor@comcast.net or
> judyrowetaylor@enduringibis.com
>
>
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: <jude.taylor@comcast.net>
> > To: <alt-photo-process-l@sask.usask.ca>
> > Cc: <sanking@clemson.edu>
> > Sent: Monday, August 01, 2005 7:33 AM
> > Subject: update: screw-in BLB light-box
> >
> >
> > > Hello Sandy King (who first posted a query about
> the
> > > screw-in BLBs as a possible source of UV for alt
>
> > > processes) and anyone else interested in knowing
> how they
> > > worked.....
> > >
> > > This past weekend, during an excellent workshop
> on PT/PD
> > > printing taught by Kerik Kouklis at the Cascades
> Academy
> > > of Photography, which is located in lovely "old
> town"
> > > Issaquah, Washington, I was able to compare
> printing times
> > > in my lightbox (6 screw-in 13 watt BLBs with the
> print
> > > frame 4" from Light source) with one of Edwards
>
> > > Engineering fluorescent tube boxes. Needless to
> say, the
> > > times were longer - a tad more than 10x - but
> the results
> > > were the same.
> > >
> > > Stated specifically: A digineg created with
> Keith
> > > Schreiber's method (looks orange on screen but
> prints
> > > yellow-green) and printed on Pictorico OHP using
> an Epson
> > > 1280 (dye inks) with 100% PD soln. on Cranes
> "Platinotype"
> > > (B&S name for this paper) required 1 min 50 sec
> in the EE
> > > box, where as the same required 20 min in my
> box. All
> > > other factors were more-or-less (read
> "unscientifically
> > > determined to be" ) equal.
> > >
> > > For the time being, as I perfect coating
> techniques, etc.,
> > > I am not bothered by the excessive time - gives
> me an
> > > opportunity to make notes which I tend to forget
> to do
> > > when I am working at a faster pace - but will
> most likely
> > > give the 20 watt bulbs a try before building a
> larger tube
> > > box.
> > >
> > > Anyone know right off the top of their head if I
> might
> > > expect exposure vs wattage to be linear in this
> situation
> > > (i.e., will the increase from 13 watts to 20
> watts cut my
> > > time by about one-third)? If not, I will go
> back to some
> > > of the published data / manufacturer's data to
> search out
> > > the answer to this question. If it is less than
> linear, I
> > > probably wont bother with the more expensive
> screw-in
> > > bulbs, but just go right to a tube box sometime
> in the
> > > future.
> > >
> > > Thanks!
> > > Judy
> > >
> > > --
> > > Judy Rowe Taylor
> > > Mukilteo, WA
> > >
> > Judy, does your light box have any sort of
> reflector in
> > it? It seems to me that without a reflector most
> of the
> > light output of the compact flourscent lamps is
> wasted. My
> > first thought is to use small reflectors around
> each lamp,
> > something along the lines of the small utility
> reflectors
> > hardware stores sell. One would have to make sure
> they were
> > reasonably efficient for near UV. Aluminum is
> good, not sure
> > about other materials. There certainly must be
> other and
> > better ideas about how to do this.
> >
> > ---
> > Richard Knoppow
> > Los Angeles, CA, USA
> > dickburk@ix.netcom.com
> >
>
Received on Fri Aug 5 12:14:11 2005