Re: sun vs exposure unit

From: Michael Healy ^lt;[email protected]>
Date: 05/26/05-02:57:57 PM Z
Message-id: <4295D5E5.12446.57B416@localhost>

I have to rely on the sun. I'm in Phoenix, so you'd think we'd have a lot of that, wouldn't
you? Unfortunately it is unpredictable due to high thin clouds and haze/pollution. In
December and January, there's often a cloud cover, and it can't be predicted, so coating
paper for a schedule involves a crap shoot. Also, between mid May and about October
1st, my brick-enclosed patio gets into the 150+ F degree range. The risk of melting
things like, oh, negatives and Pictorico seems to be very real. I can't compare to UV
because I'm still building my UV box; but times are fine, in the range of 2-4 minutes
depending on negative material, negative density, and print medium. Real film negs take
longer, printed negs can be much shorter. The main problem with sun, even here in
Arizona, really is variance - not only the season and the intense summer heat, but also
the longer exposure times needed before about 11AM and after about 2PM - longer then
and difficult to gauge. It's a real PITA. That's why I'm working on a UV box; but the sun
is perfectly doable if you set your mind to it and happen to live in Arizona. :)

Mike

On 26 May 2005 at 14:50, Barb wrote:

Date sent: Thu, 26 May 2005 14:50:20 -0500
From: Barb <rubyslpr@sbcglobal.net>
Subject: sun vs exposure unit
To: alt-photo-process-l@sask.usask.ca
Send reply to: alt-photo-process-l@sask.usask.ca

> Does anyone use the sun rather than an exposure unit? I was just
> wondering if anyone can tell me how it compares (time) to UV exposure
> unit. If so, please include your location and the time of day you do
> your exposures? Thanks so much, Barb
>
Received on Thu May 26 14:58:23 2005

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : 06/02/05-10:12:03 AM Z CST