[redhuttrading]

Hi all

Been printing a while now and currently use a heath robinson setup using a 275w Photoflood bulb 18inches from the screen for 18 minutes. This has worked great for two years now.

However, I'm looking to reduce the time spent exposing images and was thinknig about this https://www.lightbulbs-direct.com/product-type/specialist-bulbs/ultraviolet/black-light/blb-mlw-uv-lamp-160w-es-uva/ which is a Black Light Blue bulb in the range of 370 - 400nm which is supposedly the optimum UV lightsource.

I'm guessing that this will be much better than I currently have as it's rated at 160w, whereas most Flou exposure units are rates at much lower.

Any help would be great.

 

[NoXid]

Hard to know for sure, as watts is just a measure of how much electricity it sucks, not of how much UV it outputs. My unit uses a 1000 w metal halide intended for stadium lighting (where it would be enclosed in a fixture to filter out the harmful UV and just emit "white" light). Whereas this bulb looks to have a coating to block the "white" light and just emit the UV. It may, or may not, emit more UV per watt than my bulb. Perhaps someone here has direct experience with such a bulb.

That said, I get 25 second exposures with Saati PHU emulsion. If you aren't already using a polymer emulsion, that is the cheapest and easiest thing you can do to decrease exposure time. (Note, do no get Saati PHU2; it is twice as slow, so as to give super-fast LED units more exposure latitude.)

 

[redhuttrading]

Hi Noxid

Thanks for the response. I currently use two part emulsion.Prod Ecran which I have used since day one.

Not sure what the UV Output is of the bulb, I'll see if I can get a data sheet on it.

I'll have a look at the Saati PHU emulsion you mentioned.