Re: carbon arc lamp

Art Chakalis (achakali@freenet.columbus.oh.us)
Sat, 16 Sep 1995 01:41:45 -0400 (EDT)

Responding to the very end of the this string of notes.

Not trying to be your mother, but the lamps you've found are extremely
dangerous, they can and have blinded engineers working on systems that use
them (they are used in food and pharmaceutical plants to sterilize liquids
and the headspace in tanks). Your eyes don't respond to high intensity UV
so your pupil stay wide open while the short wave length UV these lamps
emit fry your retina's. Try something else or at least learn braille
while it's a little easier to do.

Also check out the spectral sensitivity of what your working with. When I
did this for dichromates I was surprised to find that it is more sensitive
to blue light than the UV that I had been lead to believe.

Pardon the sarcasm . . . but the lamps are dangerous!

Art Chakalis
Columbus, Ohio, USA

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

On Sat, 16 Sep 1995, Gordon J. Holtslander wrote:

> Please skip to bottom of message for new stuff
> ________________________________________________________________________
> Gordon J. Holtslander 112 Science Place
> HOLTSLANDER@SKYFOX.USASK.CA Department of Biology
> URL: /~holtsg University of Saskatchewan
> Saskatoon, Saskatchewan
> Tel (306)966-4433 S7N 5E2
> Fax (306)966-4461 Canada
> ________________________________________________________________________
>
> On Fri, 15 Sep 1995, Judy Seigel wrote:
>
> > Greg, Gordon, Christopher, David.....anyone:
> >
> > I seem to have missed something, so maybe someone will kindly explain WHY
> > YOU ARE DOING THIS!! Why are you trying so hard to get dangerous, high
> > wattage, heat-making lamp when cool, safe, high UV, low wattage, long-life
> > (9000 hours), fast fluorescent bulbs are so available and easy.
> >
> > I've never used carbon arc or self-ballasting mercury - maybe they're
> > special enough to counter all problems. Like how?
> >
> > Also, it isn't clear whether these bulbs come in a reflector, but my
> > experience with single bulbs for UV exposure is that the light is VERY
> > uneven over print area larger than 4x5 inches.
> >
> > Please, ENLIGHTEN me!
>
> Call me lazy, The self ballasting mercury bulb was ridiculously cheap.
> Its very easy, just screws into an ordinary light socket, I'm only
> printing from 4X5 negatives, so I don't get uneven lighting. It works for me
>
> The MV bulb is relatively safe, not giving off any harmful vapours,
> though it does get hot. It would be dangerous if I dropped and broke it
> though.
>
> When I start making larger prints I'll make a flourescent printer. Has
> anyone tried using germicidal flourescent tubes? These are used to keep
> rooms sterilized by bathing them with UV light (They are turned off and
> normal lights are turned on when people go into the room). Germicidal
> lamps do not have an inner phosphorous coating and thus give off a great
> deal of UV light. So much so that they are rather hazardous to use.
>
> Yes, I've managed to find a dangerous flourscent tube.
>
>