[Alt-photo] experience with UV light meters

Marek Matusz marekmatusz at hotmail.com
Tue Nov 13 21:45:14 UTC 2018


Thanks

Sent from my iPhone

> On Nov 13, 2018, at 3:10 PM, Damiano Bianca via Alt-photo-process-list <alt-photo-process-list at lists.altphotolist.org> wrote:
> 
> Pay attention to temperatures of lamps.
> In my experience 2 degrees C may change UV emission of 5% and more.
> Lamps have undulatori emission
> Damiano
> 
> Il mar 13 nov 2018, 16:56 John Isner via Alt-photo-process-list <
> alt-photo-process-list at lists.altphotolist.org> ha scritto:
> 
>> I just want to make sure everyone who read my earlier post about my
>> problems with the PPM-2 reads this:
>> 
>> The erratic intensity readings from the PPM-2 were caused by a faulty
>> 4-foot extension cable.  After replacing the cable,  the PPM-2 behaved
>> properly.  I had to repeat all the tests I had done.  But at least I can
>> now rely on the results of those tests.    Thanks to Ian Parker of
>> lighmeasure.com for helping me diagnose the problem.
>> 
>>> On Sat, Nov 10, 2018 at 3:35 PM John Isner <john.isner at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> 
>>> Has anyone tried the Light Controller LC2 System from Ian Leake Studio
>>> <https://nam01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fianleake.com%2Flight-controller-lc2-system%2F&data=02%7C01%7C%7C5b520253b7ac40ab83c708d649ac7804%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C636777402436739624&sdata=%2BaOyOv8YOIiE5msBj43Kl6KQoH9uOf%2F3MZbseQDF39s%3D&reserved=0>?  If so, how do you
>>> like it compared with the PPM-2 meter, which seems to be somewhat popular
>>> on this listserv?  A big advantage of the LC2:  it has an optional power
>>> controller that can turn off the exposure unit when it reaches a
>> specified
>>> dose, while the PPM-2 must be watched.  Of course you pay a lot extra for
>>> that power controller!  I assume both meters do an equally good job of
>>> measuring dose.
>>> 
>>> The PPM-2 displays instantaneous intensity as well as total dose.  For
>> the
>>> last two days, I have been testing my UV exposure unit with a borrowed
>>> PPM-2.  I initially thought a plot of Intensity vs. time would tell me
>>> something about my bulbs.  But I find the intensity display to be less
>>> useful than I had hoped.  The numbers move so erratically that it is hard
>>> to spot a trend.  If the PPM-2 displayed a 5-second moving average, it
>>> would be more useful.
>>> 
>>> One conclusion I have reached, after running many tests with the PPM-2,
>> is
>>> that my UV unit (fifteen  actinic fluorescent tubes, five electronic
>>> ballasts, all less than six months old) is behaving very erratically.
>> For
>>> ten minute exposures, even with a long preliminary warm-up, the dose can
>>> vary as much as 2/3 of a stop.  This tells me I MUST switch from
>> time-based
>>> exposure to dose-based exposure.  The question is whether I should I go
>>> with the PPM-2 or the LC2 system.
>>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> Alt-photo-process-list | altphotolist.org
>> 
> 
> Il 13 nov 2018 4:56 PM, "John Isner via Alt-photo-process-list" <
> alt-photo-process-list at lists.altphotolist.org> ha scritto:
> 
> I just want to make sure everyone who read my earlier post about my
> problems with the PPM-2 reads this:
> 
> The erratic intensity readings from the PPM-2 were caused by a faulty
> 4-foot extension cable.  After replacing the cable,  the PPM-2 behaved
> properly.  I had to repeat all the tests I had done.  But at least I can
> now rely on the results of those tests.    Thanks to Ian Parker of
> lighmeasure.com for helping me diagnose the problem.
> 
> 
>> On Sat, Nov 10, 2018 at 3:35 PM John Isner <john.isner at gmail.com> wrote:
>> 
>> Has anyone tried the Light Controller LC2 System from Ian Leake Studio
>> <https://nam01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fianleake.com%2Flight-controller-lc2-system%2F&data=02%7C01%7C%7C5b520253b7ac40ab83c708d649ac7804%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C636777402436739624&sdata=%2BaOyOv8YOIiE5msBj43Kl6KQoH9uOf%2F3MZbseQDF39s%3D&reserved=0>?  If so, how do you
>> like it compared with the PPM-2 meter, which seems to be somewhat popular
>> on this listserv?  A big advantage of the LC2:  it has an optional power
>> controller that can turn off the exposure unit when it reaches a specified
>> dose, while the PPM-2 must be watched.  Of course you pay a lot extra for
>> that power controller!  I assume both meters do an equally good job of
>> measuring dose.
>> 
>> The PPM-2 displays instantaneous intensity as well as total dose.  For the
>> last two days, I have been testing my UV exposure unit with a borrowed
>> PPM-2.  I initially thought a plot of Intensity vs. time would tell me
>> something about my bulbs.  But I find the intensity display to be less
>> useful than I had hoped.  The numbers move so erratically that it is hard
>> to spot a trend.  If the PPM-2 displayed a 5-second moving average, it
>> would be more useful.
>> 
>> One conclusion I have reached, after running many tests with the PPM-2, is
>> that my UV unit (fifteen  actinic fluorescent tubes, five electronic
>> ballasts, all less than six months old) is behaving very erratically.  For
>> ten minute exposures, even with a long preliminary warm-up, the dose can
>> vary as much as 2/3 of a stop.  This tells me I MUST switch from
> time-based
>> exposure to dose-based exposure.  The question is whether I should I go
>> with the PPM-2 or the LC2 system.
>> 
> _______________________________________________
> Alt-photo-process-list | altphotolist.org
> _______________________________________________
> Alt-photo-process-list | altphotolist.org


More information about the Alt-photo-process-list mailing list