Hydroponic lamp for UV printing light source?

[adelorenzo]

I've been planning to build a UV light source based around 24" T5 flourescent tubes. Conventional wisdom is that you need to cram the tubes pretty close together to get even light distribution.

I've also been looking at these pre-made hydroponic grow lights that look like an inexpensive ready-made solution, like this one for example (http://www.ebay.ca/itm/121203681608?var=420192651632&ssPageName=STRK:MEWAX:IT&_trksid=p3984.m1438.l2649). The tubes are spaced out more but they have a reflector surrounding them.

Anyone tried one of these units? I wonder if it would work or if you would get uneven lighting.

108315

[adelorenzo]

Anyone have thoughts on this? Still trying to figure out if I should buy one of these or order all the parts to wire my own so I can get closer spacing with the tubes.

[onnect17]

You should explore using an array of LEDs as UV sources. You can easily find them in the auction site from 1w to 100w.

[adelorenzo]

I'm interested in LEDs as light sources but honestly I can't come even close to figuring out what to buy or how to put it all together.

[Jody_S]

The ones I've seen have been built around 1000W LPS (low pressure sodium, aka 'orange' street lights) lamps & ballasts. These are completely unsuited to UV alternate processes. I can't tell you offhand which fluorescent lamp has the best UV output, but for all of them the UV output is considered as 'waste', a loss for normal lighting. That doesn't mean it isn't there, to filter out UV output requires some ingenious engineering.

[adelorenzo]

There are a lot of options in flourescent tubes. I plan on using high output super actinic aquarium tubes that peak around 420 nm. Apparently they print a little slower than the black light tubes but with more contrast, at least according to this source:

http://unblinkingeye.com/Articles/Light/light.html

So I know the tubes I want but I'm trying to figure out if a pre-made fixture can give even light or if I need to do a custom unit so I can wire the tubes up closer together.

[hmf]

There are a lot of options in flourescent tubes. I plan on using high output super actinic aquarium tubes that peak around 420 nm. Apparently they print a little slower than the black light tubes but with more contrast, at least according to this source:

http://unblinkingeye.com/Articles/Light/light.html

So I know the tubes I want but I'm trying to figure out if a pre-made fixture can give even light or if I need to do a custom unit so I can wire the tubes up closer together.
According to the referenced material, the super actinic aquarium tubes print with more contrast and are faster for pt/pd.
"4) the Super Actinic (SA) aquarium tube that peaks at around 420 nm. SA tubes produce images of slightly greater contrast, and many reports suggest they are faster than BL and BLB units in platinum printing."

[mdarnton]

adelorenzo, got a link for those lights? I was thinking the same thing, but haven't found as nice of a setup as that. You buy them, and tell me if they work. :-)

I'm guessing something like this doesn't have the moxie for the job: http://www.tmart.com/14W-225-LED-All-Red-Hydroponic-Plant-Grow-Light-Panel_p96176.html

I've read people say "use LEDs", but haven't yet seen a DIY plan that promises to work.

[Vaughn]

The unit pictured may work fine -- one would just have to keep the light fixture a little father away from the contact printing frame than if the bulbs were closer together. The distance we are talking about should not significantly increase the exposure time.

[adelorenzo]

OK, I'll give this setup a try and let people know how it works.

In terms of bulbs, for that particular fixture I'm going to use T5 HO Super Actinics (http://www.reefsupplies.ca/online-store/UV-Lighting-T5-HO-24W-Super-Actinic.html). I'm just googling aquarium supply stores in Canada to find a supplier.

Basically the cost of the fixture and bulbs is about $200 with shipping for something that will print up to 11x14.

I don't think I could do an LED light source that size for anywhere near that price? Although you can buy super actinic LEDs on eBay...

[Tin Can]

Sounds good to me. I am considering a similar setup and actually growing some plants inside, no not those kind of plants, can't smoke the weed anymore.

If this system could also work for alt process printing, that would be fantastic.

Please update as you get it working.


OK, I'll give this setup a try and let people know how it works.

In terms of bulbs, for that particular fixture I'm going to use T5 HO Super Actinics (http://www.reefsupplies.ca/online-store/UV-Lighting-T5-HO-24W-Super-Actinic.html). I'm just googling aquarium supply stores in Canada to find a supplier.

Basically the cost of the fixture and bulbs is about $200 with shipping for something that will print up to 11x14.

I don't think I could do an LED light source that size for anywhere near that price? Although you can buy super actinic LEDs on eBay...

[Amedeus]

Not that much "UV" coming out ... super blue, yes (410-430nm ... not UV in my book, starts at <400nm) ... the real UV LED's are still expensive and they have even less output.

This said, super actinic + 365/395nm UV should be an interesting combination for alternative printing. But fluorescents are still less expensive when it comes to photons/$.


You should explore using an array of LEDs as UV sources. You can easily find them in the auction site from 1w to 100w.

[onnect17]

A couple of pics of a little exposure box. It uses three 1w 395nm leds. No science in making one 30 times more powerful.
109205109206

[Jim Noel]

I've been planning to build a UV light source based around 24" T5 flourescent tubes. Conventional wisdom is that you need to cram the tubes pretty close together to get even light distribution.

I've also been looking at these pre-made hydroponic grow lights that look like an inexpensive ready-made solution, like this one for example (http://www.ebay.ca/itm/121203681608?var=420192651632&ssPageName=STRK:MEWAX:IT&_trksid=p3984.m1438.l2649). The tubes are spaced out more but they have a reflector surrounding them.

Anyone tried one of these units? I wonder if it would work or if you would get uneven lighting.

108315

In one issue of the Post Factory Journal Judy Seigel ran a test to determine light distribution of tubes. In the final test she put black tape on every other tube and laid teh coated paper directly on the tubes. When developed there was no evidence of banding. As a result, I lowered my tubes to 1" above my printing frame to speed up printing time. I have nver had a problem with banding.
So, yes what you are looking at should work very well.

[adelorenzo]

So I ended up going with one of these Virtual Sun six bulb T5 units (http://www.virtualsunhydroponics.com/virtual-sun-2-ft-6-lamp-bloom-flower-t5-ho-fluorescent-grow-light-kit) that cost about $150 delivered to my door in Canada (via eBay). I spent another $100 on four ATI True Actinic (http://www.atinorthamerica.com/bulbs.php) bulbs.

The nice thing about this unit is that the two outer bulbs are on their own switch. Right now I am only doing 8x10 so I just use the inner section of four bulbs. I set it up on a couple of cardboard blocks that came with the packaging and slide my printing frame underneath, the print is probably sitting about 3-4 inches from the light source. Add a couple of more bulbs and you've got a unit that can do up to 16x20 prints for less then $300.

So far the results have been excellent. I've just done a few salt printing experiments so far but I'm planning to try Kallitypes in the near future.

112744

[djdister]

So I ended up going with one of these Virtual Sun six bulb T5 units (http://www.virtualsunhydroponics.com/virtual-sun-2-ft-6-lamp-bloom-flower-t5-ho-fluorescent-grow-light-kit) that cost about $150 delivered to my door in Canada (via eBay). I spent another $100 on four ATI True Actinic (http://www.atinorthamerica.com/bulbs.php) bulbs.

The nice thing about this unit is that the two outer bulbs are on their own switch. Right now I am only doing 8x10 so I just use the inner section of four bulbs. I set it up on a couple of cardboard blocks that came with the packaging and slide my printing frame underneath, the print is probably sitting about 3-4 inches from the light source. Add a couple of more bulbs and you've got a unit that can do up to 16x20 prints for less then $300.

So far the results have been excellent. I've just done a few salt printing experiments so far but I'm planning to try Kallitypes in the near future.

112744

This is a really good find, thanks! Do you think there would be any benefit to switching to blacklight bulbs?

[Jim Fitzgerald]

I'm glad I saw this. I needed to make a UV box for upcoming demos that I will be doing t museums in the future. This is so much less of a hassle than building one. 6 bulbs shipped to me are only 130 and the unit is 120. So for $250.00 I have a nice unit that I can do carbon prints with. All the sizes I shoot. I'll just use it for 8x10's for now. Thanks for this info!

[angusparker]

I'm glad I saw this. I needed to make a UV box for upcoming demos that I will be doing t museums in the future. This is so much less of a hassle than building one. 6 bulbs shipped to me are only 130 and the unit is 120. So for $250.00 I have a nice unit that I can do carbon prints with. All the sizes I shoot. I'll just use it for 8x10's for now. Thanks for this info!

Before you make, consider the Arista UV units at Freestyle. They are well made and work very well. I have the 16x20 version. All metal construction, don't get hot and have very even illumination. I think they are worth the investment if you are going to do a lot of alt processes.

[adelorenzo]

This is a really good find, thanks! Do you think there would be any benefit to switching to blacklight bulbs?

From what I've read the blacklight (UV) bulbs would give faster printing times but the actinic bulbs may give better contrast. I based my choice on this article by Sandy King:

http://sandykingphotography.com/resources/technical-writing/uv-light-sources-for-printing

[adelorenzo]

I'm glad I saw this. I needed to make a UV box for upcoming demos that I will be doing t museums in the future. This is so much less of a hassle than building one. 6 bulbs shipped to me are only 130 and the unit is 120. So for $250.00 I have a nice unit that I can do carbon prints with. All the sizes I shoot. I'll just use it for 8x10's for now. Thanks for this info!

That's what I figured too. By the time you buy all the ballasts, bulbs, and then build a box you're looking at a lot of time and money.

[Amedeus]

Thanks for the link Angus ... looks like well engineered units, they have quite a range !


Before you make, consider the Arista UV units at Freestyle. They are well made and work very well. I have the 16x20 version. All metal construction, don't get hot and have very even illumination. I think they are worth the investment if you are going to do a lot of alt processes.

[Jim Fitzgerald]

The Arista unit is 20x24 for 700.00. Nice unit but to much. I need one for demos. I've got two Nu Arc 26 1k units. Something portable is all I need. If Freestyle made a smaller unit I'd most likely buy it.

[djdister]

The Arista unit is 20x24 for 700.00. Nice unit but to much. I need one for demos. I've got two Nu Arc 26 1k units. Something portable is all I need. If Freestyle made a smaller unit I'd most likely buy it.

Yeah, the price of the Arista unit is not much different from the Edwards Engineered Products line. Great boxes, but not so portable. I notice that Freestyle doesn't even list a 16x20 box anymore.

[Vaughn]

I'm glad I saw this. I needed to make a UV box for upcoming demos that I will be doing t museums in the future. This is so much less of a hassle than building one. 6 bulbs shipped to me are only 130 and the unit is 120. So for $250.00 I have a nice unit that I can do carbon prints with. All the sizes I shoot. I'll just use it for 8x10's for now. Thanks for this info!

I found that the greatly diffused light from flourescent bulbs gave a noticeable less sharp and less contrasty image for carbon printing that a single merc vapor lamp (or plate burner). But I can see where they would be nice for demos. The lack of sharpness is due, I believe, to the very thick emulsion of the way you and I make carbon prints. This is not much of a problem with platinum prints which have no emulsion.

[Jim Fitzgerald]

I guess my other option would be to break out my old Mercury vapor 450 watt unit and build some kind of housing around it. Again, just for demos and only 8x10's. Hum.... maybe???

[Vaughn]

I guess my other option would be to break out my old Mercury vapor 450 watt unit and build some kind of housing around it. Again, just for demos and only 8x10's. Hum.... maybe???

When I set up my three 750W Mercs for workshops, it can be a bit over-whelming! I'll be doing a carbon demo locally in a month -- the one or two 750W lights will be in a different room altogether! I have not decided yet if I will use 8x10 or 11x14 negs for the demo.

But for demo purposes, a bank of BL bulbs might be nice -- and you should give platinum printing a go one of these days...a nice way to use those negatives that did not quite have the contrast you wanted for carbon printing! And 14x17 platinum prints would be an efficient way to use up any excess income you might have lying around...

;)

[Jim Noel]

I've been planning to build a UV light source based around 24" T5 flourescent tubes. Conventional wisdom is that you need to cram the tubes pretty close together to get even light distribution.

I've also been looking at these pre-made hydroponic grow lights that look like an inexpensive ready-made solution, like this one for example (http://www.ebay.ca/itm/121203681608?var=420192651632&ssPageName=STRK:MEWAX:IT&_trksid=p3984.m1438.l2649). The tubes are spaced out more but they have a reflector surrounding them.

Anyone tried one of these units? I wonder if it would work or if you would get uneven lighting.

"Conventional wisdom" is wrong. Yes,the closer together the tubes the more light, thus faster printing times, but banding is almost non-existent unless the tubes are several inches apart. an inch or so makes no difference. This was proven 10+ years ago when every other tubes was covered with black tape and the paper laid directly on them. No banding occurred.

As for types of tubes, type BL are preferred over BLB or super actiinic if you are planning on printing palladium, kallitype or similar.

108315

[adelorenzo]

As for types of tubes, type BL are preferred over BLB or super actiinic if you are planning on printing palladium, kallitype or similar.

I based my choice on Sandy King's article (http://unblinkingeye.com/Articles/Light/light.html) which suggests that the opposite may be true. Unless I experiment myself I won't know for sure but right now the Super Actinic bulbs seem to be doing the trick.

[adelorenzo]

I made my first kallitypes last night and the results were good. My printing times are +/- 5 minutes with this set-up. My regular negs don't have enough contrast for this process so I'm going to need to work on that but the light source seems to be working well.

I'm sure that there are better options out there but for $200 and zero time I'm quite happy with this unit.

Here are a couple of pictures, this is with a 12x16 contact frame underneath and only running the four inner bulbs on the unit.

[Tin Can]

I made my first kallitypes last night and the results were good. My printing times are +/- 5 minutes with this set-up. My regular negs don't have enough contrast for this process so I'm going to need to work on that but the light source seems to be working well.

I'm sure that there are better options out there but for $200 and zero time I'm quite happy with this unit.

Here are a couple of pictures, this is with a 12x16 contact frame underneath and only running the four inner bulbs on the unit.

How do you like it now?

Any suggestions for improvement and/or usage up to 16X20"?