sunlight vs. carbon arc...any difference?

Takatoriyama

D
Takatoriyama

  • 4
  • 1
  • 64
Tree and reflection

H
Tree and reflection

  • 2
  • 0
  • 62
CK341

A
CK341

  • 3
  • 0
  • 70
Plum, Sun, Shade.jpeg

A
Plum, Sun, Shade.jpeg

  • sly
  • May 8, 2025
  • 3
  • 0
  • 103
Windfall 1.jpeg

A
Windfall 1.jpeg

  • sly
  • May 8, 2025
  • 7
  • 0
  • 81

Recent Classifieds

Forum statistics

Threads
197,625
Messages
2,762,089
Members
99,423
Latest member
southbaybrian
Recent bookmarks
0
Joined
Sep 15, 2005
Messages
515
Location
Salt Lake Ci
Format
Multi Format
Is there any noticable difference in any of the alt. processes using the sun as the light source vs. a carbon arc or mercury vapor, or any other type of UV light source?

Just curious....I'm making Kallitypes using the sun right now and that question popped into my head.

:D
 

sanking

Member
Joined
Mar 26, 2003
Messages
5,437
Location
Greenville,
Format
Large Format
Michael Slade said:
Is there any noticable difference in any of the alt. processes using the sun as the light source vs. a carbon arc or mercury vapor, or any other type of UV light source?

Just curious....I'm making Kallitypes using the sun right now and that question popped into my head.

:D

Yes, there may be differences. When you use the sun as a light source you are in essence taking advantage of light from every part of the spectrum, whereas with artifical light sources you are using primarily lighty in the UV and near UV area. In many cases the particular spectrum that is used can cause subtle or even significant color changes in the image. You will quickly see this if you do some printing with salted paper.

With kallitype, assuming you will later tone the images, there is not likely to be a lot of difference in image tone, if any. But every situation is different so don't take that to the bank.

Sandy
 
OP
OP
Kimberly Anderson
Joined
Sep 15, 2005
Messages
515
Location
Salt Lake Ci
Format
Multi Format
I figured you'd be the one to chime in! :wink: I still need to send you some moo-lah, carbon's are coming up.

I am not planning to tone my Kallitypes. I do not plan to do any salted paper prints either, but who knows...

Is there a reference guide that shows which band of UV light is optimum for a given printing process? Or...even within a given process there are different formulas, I wonder if the band of UV used for any given recipie of process can make changes?

I am using the forumla for Kallitype from the 'Keepers of Light' book. I mixed my solution from scratch according to the recipie in the book.

Today I am printing on Somerset paper and am getting very rich deep blacks with only 5 minutes of time in the sun during mid-day. I did not expect such short exposures with the sun as I have been using a Nu-Arc primarily up until today.

Thanks for the insight...


sanking said:
Yes, there may be differences. When you use the sun as a light source you are in essence taking advantage of light from every part of the spectrum, whereas with artifical light sources you are using primarily lighty in the UV and near UV area. In many cases the particular spectrum that is used can cause subtle or even significant color changes in the image. You will quickly see this if you do some printing with salted paper.

With kallitype, assuming you will later tone the images, there is not likely to be a lot of difference in image tone, if any. But every situation is different so don't take that to the bank.

Sandy
 

scootermm

Subscriber
Joined
Jun 10, 2004
Messages
1,864
Location
Austin, TX
Format
ULarge Format
The article on Unblinkingeye by sandy is VERY informative and helpful
http://unblinkingeye.com/Articles/Light/light.html

its overloaded with very useful info and will likely cover more than you ever desired about the UV technical aspects (I cant imagine how long it took mr king to compile it, but nonetheless is a great resource)

In regards to Sunlight versus artificial light UV sources. I did majority of my Van Dyke browns and such using the sun at first. worked wonderfully and gave short printing times.
I now use a BLB UV bank of 48" flourescents and one of the main advantages I find is the repeatability and control. I can make test strips and know that with future prints Ill be able to limit my waste because I now have a controllable light source.
take that for what its worth.

plus I can print in the middle of the night if I want. which is nice.
 

photomc

Member
Joined
Jul 20, 2003
Messages
3,575
Location
Texas
Format
Multi Format
Have to agree with Matt, the main reason I went with the UV light box (BLB bulbs too) was for 2 reasons - 1 repeatable results, and 2 - I can print at night :D
It does make a difference for me, but I do Ziatypes and VanDykes so as Sandy said your results may vary.

Why not tone your kallitypes? If I understand the process, they are much like VanDyke Brown and really will not last long at all unless you tone them...but I may be mistaken.
 
Joined
Sep 24, 2003
Messages
1,041
Location
Holland, MI
Format
Pinhole
One of those references probably discusses speed; I admit I skipped some lines as I read this.

One comment on light spectrum. 'Low pressure pulsed xenon' lamps used in some process camera applications, and making their way into surplus users' hands, supposedly 'mimic' the solar spectrum. (rest deleted as wandering subject matter; for once I exercised a bit of posting self-control!)
 
Photrio.com contains affiliate links to products. We may receive a commission for purchases made through these links.
To read our full affiliate disclosure statement please click Here.

PHOTRIO PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Ilford ADOX Freestyle Photographic Stearman Press Weldon Color Lab Blue Moon Camera & Machine
Top Bottom