 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
| PhotoKB HomeDiscussion Groups Digital Photography Digital PhotoDSLR CamerasZLR CamerasPoint & Shoot CamerasFilm Photography 35 mmLarge FormatMedium formatDarkroomFilm and LabsOther EquipmentPhoto Technique Nature PhotographyPeople PhotographyTechnique GeneralGeneral Photo Topics General TopicsAustralian PhotographyUK PhotographyDirectoryPhoto Clubs |
Photo Forum / Film Photography / Darkroom / July 2009Safelight bulbs??
I have a Kodak safe light that looks like a metal cone. One end screws into a lamp socket, the other holds a round filter. It's probably from the 1960's or older, but it's the only thing I could get here in any color except red. I bought out the last of the locally availaible little red things that use nightlight bulbs and a bunch of the bulbs, so I am covered for red, but I wanted an orange (Wratten OC) filter as I can see much better by it. The problem I have, is that here in Israel, we have been ahead of everyone else in energy saving, CFL bulbs have been sold here, and used by me, since 1997. That's good, but it has caused the demand and therefore the supply of low wattage incadescent bulbs to dry up. I found a few Chinese made 7-10 watt bulbs, but they only last a few hours. I found a 15 watt bulb sold for refrigerators, but it has a different base and I am trying to adapt it, but may not be able to get those bulbs much longer and they are very expensive being made to operate at 0F and below. The smallest incadescent bulbs that are still common here are 40 watt bulbs. What is everyone else doing for safelights? Thanks in advance, Geoff.  SignatureGeoffrey S. Mendelson, Jerusalem, Israel gsm@mendelson.com N3OWJ/4X1GM > I found a few Chinese made 7-10 watt bulbs, but they only last a few > hours. I found a 15 watt bulb sold for refrigerators, but it has a [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > > What is everyone else doing for safelights? Here in Poland 15W bulbs are quite common and could be bought in almost any shop (supermarkets etc.), but it is also possible to get 5 and 7 watt ones. The prices are like 0.5 euros for the 15W ones and approximately 2 euros for smaller ones (they aren't so popular). Some of the popular makers is Tungsram (owned by GE) and PIL1 (polish). SignatureMaciej Zielenkiewicz RLU #232362 "This isn't right. This isn't even wrong." Wolfgang Pauli > Here in Poland 15W bulbs are quite common and could be bought in almost > any shop (supermarkets etc.), but it is also possible to get 5 > and 7 watt ones. The prices are like 0.5 euros for the 15W ones and > approximately 2 euros for smaller ones (they aren't so popular). Some > of the popular makers is Tungsram (owned by GE) and PIL1 (polish). Thanks, I tried the supermarkets with no luck. I asked on a local group and got some leads on real lighting stores, so I'll try them. Although we have not gone as far as to ban incadescent bulbs, the market seems to have spoken. Geoff. SignatureGeoffrey S. Mendelson, Jerusalem, Israel gsm@mendelson.com N3OWJ/4X1GM >What is everyone else doing for safelights? > >Thanks in advance, > >Geoff. I had solved the problem building a safeligt using a dozen of hi bright red leds, some resistors and an old phone charger. Being almost monochromatic, the illumination is much brighter that anything I had used before while testing safe for VC paper. The LEDs we're purchased in a small shop and I don't know manufacturer or model but is easy to source from major distributors components with known characteristics. > I have a Kodak safe light that looks like a metal cone. One end screws into > a lamp socket, the other holds a round filter. It's probably from the 1960's [quoted text clipped - 20 lines] > > What is everyone else doing for safelights? I use 7 1/2 watt 120 volt incandescent lamp bulbs. Whereas most incandescent lamps are designed to last about 750 hours, these little ones are designed to last 1250 hours. I do not know if I have ever had one burn out. Now if you run them at 220 volts, their lifetime would be very short. My safelights came with 15 watt bulbs, and they did not seem to fog paper, but since the lights are slightly less than the 4 feet distance from my working surfaces, I thought it would be better to use smaller lamps in them. Incandescent lamps run much longer as their input voltage is reduced. You might consider putting a suitable resistor in series with the bulb to dim the bulb slightly and increase its lifetime. The trick is to compute the proper resistance. If you measure the resistance of the bulb with an ohmmeter, it will be very low, so you will get too low a value to put in series. It is better to calculate it. If it is a 22 watt bulb at 220 volts, the bulb draws 1/10 amp, so it is 2200 ohm with a hot filament. So you might try a 110 to 220 ohm resistor to lower the voltage. You might wish to use a 5 watt resistor. > Thanks in advance, > > Geoff. Signature.~. Jean-David Beyer Registered Linux User 85642. /V\ PGP-Key: 9A2FC99A Registered Machine 241939. /( )\ Shrewsbury, New Jersey http://counter.li.org ^^-^^ 07:10:01 up 40 days, 13:24, 3 users, load average: 4.02, 4.15, 4.13 > > I have a Kodak safe light that looks like a metal cone. One end screws into > > a lamp socket, the other holds a round filter. It's probably from the 1960's [quoted text clipped - 51 lines] > > - Show quoted text - I think the OP needs to consider what is available locally. Those sound good, but I am not sure what is available in Israel. If the enclosure will withstand a higher wattage bulb, it is also possible to reduce the illumination by simply moving the safelight farther away, shining the light on a dark wall or covering part of the filter with black paper. Having tried any of these suggestions it is still necessary to test the result. > The problem I have, is that here in Israel, we have been ahead of > everyone else in energy saving, CFL bulbs have been sold here, and used > by me, since 1997. That's good, but it has caused the demand and > therefore the supply of low wattage incadescent bulbs to dry up. I use 3W CFL lamps in my beehive safelights. They are supposed to produce equivalent light output to 15W incandescents. They certainly seem to produce about the same amount of illumination in my darkroom, and no fogging problems when used for similar periods of time. Ian >I have a Kodak safe light that looks like a metal cone. One end screws into > a lamp socket, the other holds a round filter. It's probably from the [quoted text clipped - 22 lines] > > What is everyone else doing for safelights? If that 40 watt bulb can indeed fit in your safelight, what about hooking it up to a variable resistor? A specific one commonly available (I trust even in Israel) is the room dimmer. Get an electric/junction box which allows two switches/receptacles, one two prong receptacle, and one room dimmer. Mount the dimmer and the receptable in the box suitably wired. If desired, add a cover plate. If desired, add rubber feet/felt pads to the bottom of the box. Plug your safe light wire into the receptacle and turn on/off the safelight using the room dimmer. You may want to mark the cover plate suitably to indicate illumination levels. And connect the box to any wall receptacle using a length of suitable wire ending in a male plug - I suggest cannibalizing an plain old extension cord - cut off the female end and wire it into the box. >I have a Kodak safe light that looks like a metal cone. One >end screws into [quoted text clipped - 39 lines] > > Geoff. AKA Beehive lamp. Get the smallest wattage compact fluorescent lamp you can obtain and use some layers of plain writing paper over the filter or inside against the filter. The compact fluoresent lamps have some after glow but that should not be a problem for a safelight. I don't think they run hot enough to cause problems with the paper. Signature-- Richard Knoppow Los Angeles WB6KBL dickburk@ix.netcom.com > AKA Beehive lamp. Get the smallest wattage compact > fluorescent lamp you can obtain and use some layers of plain > writing paper over the filter or inside against the filter. > The compact fluoresent lamps have some after glow but that > should not be a problem for a safelight. I don't think they > run hot enough to cause problems with the paper. Thanks, and to everyone who suggested something. I went to another lighting store today and found a bunch of GE 15 watt bulbs (made in Hungary).I bought six, so I am set for a long time. I'm still thinking about the other possibilites as I need more safelights, and I doubt that there more Beehive lamps around (here). Geoff. SignatureGeoffrey S. Mendelson, Jerusalem, Israel gsm@mendelson.com N3OWJ/4X1GM >> AKA Beehive lamp. Get the smallest wattage compact >> fluorescent lamp you can obtain and use some layers of [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] > > Geoff. Are you not able to get these thing via eBay, they seem to turn up pretty frequently there. However, I know you have to deal with some pretty serious restrictions. I think Ilford made a similar lamp, they certainly made filters that fit the Kodak lamps. -- Richard Knoppow Los Angeles WB6KBL dickburk@ix.netcom.com A 1 amp diode in series with the bulb will reduce the wattage (but not by half). Try a 1N4004. 400V @ 1amp. About 10c or less. Murray >>AKA Beehive lamp. Get the smallest wattage compact >>fluorescent lamp you can obtain and use some layers of plain [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > > Geoff. Will the series diode work with a compact fluorescent lamp? I think either the clipped sine wave or the decereased voltage might not let the bulb work Although the clipped sine wave might not be a problem.. >A 1 amp diode in series with the bulb will reduce the wattage > (but not by half). Try a 1N4004. 400V @ 1amp. About 10c or less. [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] >> >> Geoff. On 5/9/2009 2:42 PM K W Hart spake thus: > Will the series diode work with a compact fluorescent lamp? I think either > the clipped sine wave or the decereased voltage might not let the bulb work > Although the clipped sine wave might not be a problem.. *Please* don't top post. Won't work (well) with most CFLs. Should work OK with dimmable CFLs. By the way, it isn't a clipped sine wave; it's a half-wave rectified sine wave. >>A 1 amp diode in series with the bulb will reduce the wattage >> (but not by half). Try a 1N4004. 400V @ 1amp. About 10c or less. [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] >>> safelights, and I doubt that there more Beehive lamps around >>> (here). SignatureSave the Planet Kill Yourself - motto of the Church of Euthanasia (http://www.churchofeuthanasia.org/) Sorry, been away -late answer. The quick answer is 'NO'. Fluoros work to a completely different system. That's why the usual dimmers warn against using them to control fluoros. Incandescent only. Get a fluoro specific dimmer. A diode actually extends the lifetime of a normal bulb. Murray > Will the series diode work with a compact fluorescent lamp? I think either > the clipped sine wave or the decereased voltage might not let the bulb work [quoted text clipped - 21 lines] >>> >>> Geoff. On 5/23/2009 7:24 AM Murray spake thus: > Sorry, been away -late answer. The quick answer is 'NO'. > Fluoros work to a completely different system. > That's why the usual dimmers warn against using them to > control fluoros. Incandescent only. Get a fluoro specific > dimmer. > A diode actually extends the lifetime of a normal bulb. Actually, you got it a little backwards. No such thing as a "fluorescent-specific" dimmer. What you *can* get are dimmable fluorescents, that work with any dimmer. Please don't top-post. >> Will the series diode work with a compact fluorescent lamp? I think either >> the clipped sine wave or the decereased voltage might not let the bulb work [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] >>>> safelights, >>>> and I doubt that there more Beehive lamps around (here). SignatureFound--the gene that causes belief in genetic determinism I see your request not to top post - unfortunately my program displays from the top, down, and I don't have to scroll all the way thru countless repetitions of previous postings to get to the actual new message. BTW - never seen dimmable fluoros here (Australia) only dimmers labeled as suitable for fluorescent lamps, But since I don't look all that often you are doubtless correct. Murray > On 5/23/2009 7:24 AM Murray spake thus: > [quoted text clipped - 33 lines] >>>>> safelights, >>>>> and I doubt that there more Beehive lamps around (here). In article <4a1f855b$0$24400$5a62ac22@per-qv1-newsreader-01.iinet.net.au>, > I see your request not to top post - unfortunately my > program displays from the top, down, and I don't have to > scroll all the way thru countless repetitions of > previous postings to get to the actual new message. Get a real newsreader and learn how to snip. : In article : <4a1f855b$0$24400$5a62ac22@per-qv1-newsreader-01.iinet.net.au>, : > I see your request not to top post - unfortunately my : > program displays from the top, down, and I don't have to : > scroll all the way thru countless repetitions of : > previous postings to get to the actual new message. : Get a real newsreader and learn how to snip. You may try finding a newsreader capable of threading. Having to scroll to the bottom of a post to read the new content is a pain. It's much easier if the new content is on the top of the post. Signature------------------- Keep working millions on welfare depend on you > You may try finding a newsreader capable of threading. Having to > scroll to the bottom of a post to read the new content is a pain. > It's much easier if the new content is on the top of the post. My newsreader is a real newsreader and is quite capable of threading and I'm smart enough to snip. This is an argument that's basically newbie against experienced -- and Microsoft isn't NNTP friendly. I've made the arguments from the position of a top poster when I was a newbie over a decade ago. >> You may try finding a newsreader capable of threading. Having to >> scroll to the bottom of a post to read the new content is a pain. [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > arguments from the position of a top poster when I was a newbie over a > decade ago. You use MT-Newswatcher, and yes it is very good. I'm rather surprised to read Frank's comment. He's an old-timer and admin expert. : >> You may try finding a newsreader capable of threading. Having to : >> scroll to the bottom of a post to read the new content is a pain. [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] : > arguments from the position of a top poster when I was a newbie over a : > decade ago. : You use MT-Newswatcher, and yes it is very good. I use tin. It's old and I don't think it's being worked on anymore but I like it. : I'm rather surprised to read Frank's comment. He's an old-timer and : admin expert. It makes sense when you think about it. I set tin to thread on subject. This means when I see a thread I'm interested in with say 10 posts. I select that thread and I get the first post in the thread then I get the second and so on. By the time I get to the second post I've already read the posts that preceeded it and I'm only interested in the new content. When the new posts are top posted the new content is at the top and is easy to find and read. When the new post is bottom posted I have to go look for it. As a rule I don't read the old content every time I read a message. Signature------------------- Keep working millions on welfare depend on you On 6/9/2009 10:16 AM Frank Pittel spake thus: > : I'm rather surprised to read Frank's comment. He's an old-timer and > : admin expert. [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > is at the top and is easy to find and read. When the new post is > bottom posted I have to go look for it. Well, actually, it *doesn't* make sense when you really think about it. Your statement above assumes that a thread takes a linear path and sticks strictly to its subject. As we all know, this is often not the case here. Sometimes someone will take a particular aspect of the question and discuss it, or even introduce an entirely new part of the topic, or a new topic altogether. Going by your method, all this would be lost without quoting and attribution, which is why it makes sense to do it. > As a rule I don't read the old content every time I read a message. That may explain why you're often confused about things. SignatureFound--the gene that causes belief in genetic determinism : On 6/9/2009 10:16 AM Frank Pittel spake thus: : > : I'm rather surprised to read Frank's comment. He's an old-timer and : > : admin expert. [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] : > is at the top and is easy to find and read. When the new post is : > bottom posted I have to go look for it. : Well, actually, it *doesn't* make sense when you really think about it. Actually when you think about it, it makes more sense to top post then to bottom post. : Your statement above assumes that a thread takes a linear path and : sticks strictly to its subject. As we all know, this is often not the [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] : be lost without quoting and attribution, which is why it makes sense to : do it. It's still a single thread to at least my newsreader. If I need to reread what the poster was responding to I have a number of choices. The quickest and most obvious is to simply continue reading. Since what the poster is responding to is on top it's easy to find. The next choice is to simply read the post the responder was replying to. There's always the option to have my newsreader show a graphical tree of the thread with all the subthreads. : > As a rule I don't read the old content every time I read a message. : That may explain why you're often confused about things. As always you're right and everyone else in the world is wrong. Over a billion people in the world and you're the only one that's always right. Signature------------------- Keep working millions on welfare depend on you On 6/14/2009 7:18 AM Frank Pittel spake thus: > : On 6/9/2009 10:16 AM Frank Pittel spake thus: > > : Well, actually, it *doesn't* make sense when you really think about it. > > Actually when you think about it, it makes more sense to top post then to > bottom post. And yet you bottom-post. > : > As a rule I don't read the old content every time I read a message. > > : That may explain why you're often confused about things. > > As always you're right and everyone else in the world is wrong. Over a > billion people in the world and you're the only one that's always right. It's not just me. The overwhelming majority of posters in this group bottom-post. Like the old Kafka saw goes: In the fight between you and the world, back the world. SignatureFound--the gene that causes belief in genetic determinism : On 6/14/2009 7:18 AM Frank Pittel spake thus: : > : > : On 6/9/2009 10:16 AM Frank Pittel spake thus: [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] : > Actually when you think about it, it makes more sense to top post then to : > bottom post. : And yet you bottom-post. I'm clearly not as religous about it as you are. In this thread I'm following your lead in the worst possible posting methods. I'm posting in the middle of the previous post. : > : > As a rule I don't read the old content every time I read a message. : > : > : That may explain why you're often confused about things. : > : > As always you're right and everyone else in the world is wrong. Over a : > billion people in the world and you're the only one that's always right. : It's not just me. The overwhelming majority of posters in this group : bottom-post. Yet top posting in this group and most others top post. Signature------------------- Keep working millions on welfare depend on you On 6/14/2009 1:27 PM Frank Pittel spake thus: > : On 6/14/2009 7:18 AM Frank Pittel spake thus: > [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > your lead in the worst possible posting methods. I'm posting in the middle > of the previous post. Actually, that's what you're spozed to do. It's called "QUILA" (meaning "quote and in-line answers"), an acronym I hadn't heard of until just today. It's really bottom posting, because your replies come below the text being replied to, just like in a normal conversation. Very easy to follow. SignatureFound--the gene that causes belief in genetic determinism > Yet top posting in this group and most others top post. I don't know of any groups I post to where top posting is the norm, and that sentence awkward -- possibly due to mild dyslexia. Mildly dyslexic people sometimes find interleaved posts confusing to adapt to. My news reader puts the older material in fainter type, so it's clear what's new and what isn't. > I see your request not to top post - unfortunately my > program displays from the top, down, and I don't have to > scroll all the way thru countless repetitions of > previous postings to get to the actual new message. I am sorry things work out that way for you. There are two problems, and only one of them is yours. 1.) When responding, the responder should delete all unnecessary material from the post to which he is responding. Usually, retaining only the context needed to make the response understandable is enough. 2.) When responding, either respond at the bottom or, when appropriate, immediately after the part to which you are currently responding (when you are responding to several parts of the original message). Signature.~. Jean-David Beyer Registered Linux User 85642. /V\ PGP-Key: 9A2FC99A Registered Machine 241939. /( )\ Shrewsbury, New Jersey http://counter.li.org ^^-^^ 09:15:01 up 65 days, 15:29, 3 users, load average: 4.09, 4.33, 4.31 > 1.) When responding, the responder should delete all unnecessary material > from the post to which he is responding. Usually, retaining only the > context needed to make the response understandable is enough. If only they would.... Unfortunately, so many people will not snip the countless lines of old material, making top posting almost necessary. Those who vehemently condemn top-posting, claiming it's "against the rules," and citing "netiquette" and all that, should instead go after the many posters who leave 600 lines of old, already outdated and now irrelevant material from several different previous postings... and then respond with a two-liner. That's even worse. Having to scroll, scroll, scroll just to get to the next response is a real nuisance, thanks to those bottom posters who do it badly. Regardless of all that... ;-) I remember starting out printing b&w a million years ago at age 12 with the aid of a Kodak safelight that probably used 4w nightlight bulbs. The kit came with three large translucent domes of red, green, and orange. Printing my own stuff was fun. On 5/29/2009 12:01 PM Howard Lester spake thus: >> 1.) When responding, the responder should delete all unnecessary material >> from the post to which he is responding. Usually, retaining only the [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > to the next response is a real nuisance, thanks to those bottom posters who > do it badly. That's still not any justification for top-posting. When I advise to bottom post, that *implicitly* includes trimming the text before posting. You'd thing that would go without saying, but as you say, too many idjits just blindly quote the entire damn previous message, sometimes adding only a line or two at the bottom. Like they say, it ain't rocket science ... SignatureFound--the gene that causes belief in genetic determinism : > I see your request not to top post - unfortunately my : > program displays from the top, down, and I don't have to [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] : I am sorry things work out that way for you. There are two problems, and : only one of them is yours. : 1.) When responding, the responder should delete all unnecessary material : from the post to which he is responding. Usually, retaining only the context : needed to make the response understandable is enough. : 2.) When responding, either respond at the bottom or, when appropriate, : immediately after the part to which you are currently responding (when you : are responding to several parts of the original message). These days I find that I prefer top posting to bottom posting. It makes threads easier to read. Back in the days before threaded newsreaders I admit it was easier to read a post when the reply was at the bottom. Signature------------------- Keep working millions on welfare depend on you > These days I find that I prefer top posting to bottom posting. It makes threads > easier to read. Back in the days before threaded newsreaders I admit it was easier > to read a post when the reply was at the bottom. I am bottom posting for all your preferences. I hardly consider myself as a 'newbie' since I have been using computer comms for 25 years. Started on bulletin boards and packet radio with a Kaypro4 under CP/M and an external 300baud modem using dialup. Who remembers YAPP and YAM these days? I am presently using Thunderbird and Firefox as Mozilla now has difficulties with some newer sites. Pity, as I am still not convinced that 2 programs are better then one. I have set replies to top posting since nearly all my correspondence is personal mail and the recipient knows full well what he has sent. No sense in boiling your cabbages twice. If my reader showed mail from the bottom up, bottom posting might make more sense. Naturally I set the reader to 'threads with new posts'. If you have a suggestion of a better reader then tell me, but I don't promise to use it, but will check it out. Forget Linux - I have found it seems like a solution looking for a problem. IE is out for me, too. Think N1H1. The sound/noise ratio of some threads is terrible - how much of this thread is about the original poster's request for help with bulbs? Less than 90%. Little wonder that the internet is starting to groan under the load. Dropping the voltage to an incandescent bulb will make it redder and in a green light that will cut emitted wattage appreciably. I await your reply with interest. Murray VK4AOK - now there's a giveaway! :-) > Thanks, and to everyone who suggested something. I went to another lighting > store today and found a bunch of GE 15 watt bulbs (made in Hungary).I bought > six, so I am set for a long time. > > I'm still thinking about the other possibilities as I need more safe lights, > and I doubt that there are more Beehive lamps around (here). _____ Geoff, Got my Thunderbird newsreader working again on Mac OS X after a month or more switching from OpenBSD. I noted your question about safe lights. Someone suggested a regular triac based light dimmer. That would work fine as they can usually handle 600 Watts. I have used with great success a single diode to run several safe lights on half power by inserting a simple and cheap silicon diode in the line. The diode i picked was the 1N4004. It is small and can be hidden in the standard plug, or in one of those Bakelite in-line rocker switches. Current limitation is 1 Amp, so this means that you can drive up to 220 Watts worth of safe lights with one diode. This comes to about five 40 Watt bulbs. I use this simple trick to dim the safe lights while focusing the enlarger. I use amber dome filters on my lights. For specifications of diodes see http://www.diodes.com/datasheets/ds28002.pdf. I have no idea how easy/difficult it is to buy these diodes in Jerusalem. Regards / John contrex_nospam at shaw dot ca > The smallest incadescent bulbs that are still common here are 40 watt > bulbs. [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > Geoff. Geoff bulbnam.com is your best friend for bulbs. Failing that send me some .jpgs of what you have and I am sure I have what you need. Bob AZ USA >> The smallest incadescent bulbs that are still common here are 40 watt >> bulbs. [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > > Bob AZ USA Shouldn't that be bulbman.com? |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2010 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.