Date: 10/27/01-02:11:03 PM Z
I think it is a great work that you are working on, and I look forward in
reading the article!
<< 4. No surprise that the 75 watt Super Actinic was much faster (by
over a full stop) than the 20 watt BL tubes. It also produced greater
contrast than the BL tubes. >>
Hmmm.... this is very interesting. It almost sounds like Super Actinic, by
spectrum itself, is not necessarily faster that BL tubes. Your test result
shows that it is more than twice faster than BL tubes, but the power used by
Super Actinic in this case is nearly 4x of that for BL tubes (that is, if one
person is using 1 SuperActinic and another is using 4 BL tubes, the BL might
still be faster).
Of course on the practical side, as we cannot squeeze 4 BL tubes in the space
of one SuperActinic tub, it can still be useful for getting faster speed by
using Super Actinic if we don't have 75W BL tubes (I don't know if we do),
but it sounds like it is more power related rather than spectrum related; so
could it be another myth that Super Actinic is really faster?
<< 5. The *Big* surprise for me was that the GE BLB tubes were also much
faster than the BL tubes (and of about the same contrast). In fact,
the 20 watt BLB tubes were even faster (by about 1/2 stop) than the
75 watt Super Actinic tubes!!! >>
Sandy, is the age of the tubes taken into consideration?
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : 11/02/01-08:55:27 AM Z CST