In a message dated 95-10-27 12:24:23 EDT, you write:
>Subj: UV bulbs
>Date: 95-10-27 12:24:23 EDT
>From: sanking@hubcap.clemson.edu (s carl king)
>To: DKenn473@aol.com
>
>
>Thank you for your recent posting to alt-photo-process
>regarding UV light sources and the URI bulbs and Ice Cap ballast. I was
>wondering if you had any experience with convention BL tubes to offer any
>sort of comparison. Several years ago I constructed a BL
>bank of (12) 24-inch, 20 watt tubes for carbon printing and am curious as to
>how much I could shorten exposure times with these higher watt bulbs.
>
>Thanks for any information you can provide.
>
>Sandy King
>
>
My first light source was just what you describe and I was running anywhere
from 20 min. to 1 hour exposure times. NOW I average about 3 min maximum
exposure times! I've had to re think my whole way of working. I use to be
able to get so much done durning those long exposures.... NOW I find I have
to want to expose prints or I get a major back up in the sink! So to answer
your question there is a huge difference in exposure time! There also seems
to be some increase in contrast and the new bulbs are much more consistent!
I found I had a heat problem with the BL blubs that does not exist with then
new ones due to the short exposure times.
Anytime-
David Michael Kennedy