[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Google
  Web www.spinics.net

Re: scanner quality when profiling?



Steve Jacobson wrote:
> 
> Fortunately, glass is not a very good transmitter of UV, and I would expect
> the scanner glass to reduce the UV component even further (but probably not
> eliminate the higher-frequency UV).  So I would expect that a certain small
> percentage of UV (400 nm - 375 nm) gets through and might cause some small
> amount of fluorescence of the scanned material.  I don't believe UV below
> 375 nm even gets through the glass.  I don't have a UV meter, otherwise I
> would measure the UV from my scanner.  If someone else has one, I would be
> interested in having them measure the UV.  I don't think fluorescence is a
> big problem, but I haven't tested it.
> 
...
> 
> The question gets even more interesting because all the 5000K light sources
> discussed on this list and those I saw at the Seybold show (with the
> exception of a few halogens) were fluorescent, and these will emit some UV
> (even the sun emits UV, as those who lay out in the sun too long will
> testify).  Thus, the viewing characteristics under either artificial of
> natural daylight will probably cause some fluorescence of the inks, and
> might be similar to the scanner.  Viewing though a piece of window glass
> will probably reduce the UV to what the scanner produces, and "look" the
> same to the scanner as it does to the viewer.
> 

Does this mean that for contact printing Platinum, in which
I want UV, I'd better get a vacuum unit rather then relying
on glass for making the contact?

Pam

-- 
Pamela G. Niedermayer
Pinehill Softworks Inc.
1221 S. Congress Ave., #1225
Austin, TX 78704
512-416-1141
512-416-1440 fax
http://www.pinehill.com
-
Please turn off HTML mail features. Keep quoted material short. Use
accurate subject lines. http://www.leben.com/lists for instructions.


[Photo]     [Yosemite News]    [Yosemite Photos]    [Scanner]     [Gimp]     [Gimp] Users

Powered by Linux