Luminous Landscape Forum
Raw & Post Processing, Printing => Printing: Printers, Papers and Inks => Topic started by: vaphoto on December 04, 2008, 08:50:15 pm
-
I need a way to display and light individual prints at camera club critique sessions.
Thanks
vaphoto
-
The Photographic Society of America designed, and over the years improved, a standard print viewing box for their judging sessions. This link shows how to build it:
http://psa-clubservices.org/club_services/...viewing_box.pdf (http://psa-clubservices.org/club_services/technical_assistance/print_viewing_box.pdf)
One of their members came up with a lighter, more portable version:
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1306/is_/ai_11145032 (http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1306/is_/ai_11145032)
Aloha,
Aaron
-
Seems odd that anyone would critique prints with an incandescent light source.
The design seems OK but I would suggest using Solux lights.
-
Seems odd that anyone would critique prints with an incandescent light source.
The design seems OK but I would suggest using Solux lights.
Given the age of these designs, I doubt that Solux lights were widely used, if even available. If you look carefully, you'll see that they used a mix of fluorescent and tungsten light.
Solux bulbs may work fine, but you should also take into account the amount of heat they generate. Black-backed Solux bulbs might help reduce the heat from the rear of the bulbs.
Aloha,
Aaron
-
Solux bulbs may work fine, but you should also take into account the amount of heat they generate.
The other thing people tend to forget when considering building boxes with Solux bulbs is that they're intended to be (much) farther from the print than an incandescent or fluoro need be. All the great color rendering in the world does you no good if you end up with the lighting being one tiny hotspot on a corner of your image.
-
The other thing people tend to forget when considering building boxes with Solux bulbs is that they're intended to be (much) farther from the print than an incandescent or fluoro need be. All the great color rendering in the world does you no good if you end up with the lighting being one tiny hotspot on a corner of your image.
That is something I was thinking about some time ago. The normal flood type halogens have a wider bundle but the light is quite irregular in its distribution. I etched the glass in front with a glass etch paste and that helps for the last but it still isn't enough to shorten the distance. I think a reflective design is needed or the light source and display panel should be split in two parts. Reflective aluminium extrusion profiles in a parabolic shape exist like they are used in the Just Normlights. They are the most neutral in reflection but it will be a more expensive option.
Ernst Dinkla
Try: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Wide_Inkjet_Printers/ (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Wide_Inkjet_Printers/)
-
Reflective aluminium extrusion profiles in a parabolic shape exist like they are used in the Just Normlights. They are the most neutral in reflection but it will be a more expensive option.
Ernst Dinkla
Ernst: Do you have an opinion about which viewer would do a better job in a setup for comparing a print to the softproof on a monitor: a Just Normlicht viewer or an equivalent GTI viewer?
-
Ernst: Do you have an opinion about which viewer would do a better job in a setup for comparing a print to the softproof on a monitor: a Just Normlicht viewer or an equivalent GTI viewer?
No opinion on one versus the other. I have a Just Normlight and no experience with the GTI.
There have been enough threads here that discussed the 5000 Kelvin standard and the use of high quality fluorescents to meet that standard. I agree with the conclusion that the Solux halogens (and the Philips Diamondlux made with a Solux license) may be a better choice with their full spectrum and IR filtering. Like I agree that the 5000 Kelvin standard doesn't fit work for galleries and musea if the last use halogens and in particular Solux halogens that have a 4000 Kelvin color temperature or lower. That's the reason I was thinking about a viewer design with halogen lamps.
It is ironic that we get better ink sets with lower metamerism and at the same time adapt the viewing lights to the viewing conditions later on so with less chance of metamerism between proof and practice. With a variety of jobs for different goals I have no intention to drop the Normlight but another one next to it for the specific task of proofing exhibition prints isn't a bad idea.
Ernst Dinkla
Try: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Wide_Inkjet_Printers/ (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Wide_Inkjet_Printers/)