1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.
  2. WELCOME Grumblers
    Backup is now done at 3PM EDT. You may find the server down for up to two minutes at that time.

Problem Tru Vue Conservation Clear

Discussion in 'The Grumble' started by neilframer, Aug 12, 2011.

  1. Jim Miller

    Jim Miller SPFG, Supreme Picture Framing God

    Not so, Jeff. "The rest of the spectrum" consists of visible light and infrared light, and all of it is damaging. As far as I know, nobody from any manufacturer or testing agency has suggested that UV radiation is the only source of damage, nor has anyone suggested that UV filtering stops fading. That myth has been perpetuated only by framers who are either uninformed or purposely devious.

    In any case, let's not get muddled up in myths or Mad Science. The facts are clear. Ultraviolet (UV) radiation, about 300 to 400 nanometers, has been proven more harmful than other wavelengths to inks, papers, and other materials used in framing. More than other wavelengths, UV radiation advances aging and deterioration, which commonly shows up in framing as faded colors, acid creation, and weakened fibers in paper and fabrics. Since it is the most harmful and we can not see it, removing as much of it as possible is beneficial. For most manufacturers and testing agencies in the framing industry, the actual range of measured UV filtering seems to be standardized at 300 to 380 nanometers. The narrow band from 380 to 400 nanometers is difficult to measure, since the transmission curve changes from near zero to near 100% very steeply.

    Remember ROYGBIV? Red, Orange, Yellow, Green, Blue, Indigo, Violet are the colors in the visible light spectrum that carries an image to our eyes, so it is beneficial to transmit as much of that light as possible. Ordinary glass transmits about 91% of it. 2.5 mm Museum Glass transmits more than 97% of it and reflects less than 1% of it. At about 99% transmission, 2 mm water-white glass products transmit less than 1% (99/97) more of visible light.

    Infrared (IR) radiation, about 700 to 1500 nanometers, is harmful as well, but in a different way. In a picture frame, IR mostly causes increased molecular activity, which generates heat and amplifies the effects of UV radiation, accelerating degradation of materials, such as colors and paper/textile fibers.

    It isn't rocket science, it isn't mystical, and it is unfortunate that some want to make it confusing. Read the manufacturers' published specifications, read the standards of scientists - conservators and testing agencies, then make your choices.
     
  2. Jeff Rodier

    Jeff Rodier SPFG, Supreme Picture Framing God

    That's what we do Jim is read and evaluate the information and make informed decisions. The problem lies with being told we are not using one company's info over other data. Green glass gets a brown coating to try to make the whites look white. Since my customers make choices as well many of them choose not to go to the extra expense to protect a 16 cent photo printed at Wal-Mart or a $10 poster from artdotcrap.

    The real question is why aren't you driving a Mercedes. Based on your criteria here a cheap designer print is worth more than human lives. You have the data but chose an auto that offers significantly less protection. Was cost a factor or do you not value human life as your arguement would suggest.

    A lower cost option would protect a lot of artwork that gets little protection now.
     
  3. Jim Miller

    Jim Miller SPFG, Supreme Picture Framing God

    If competing glass products were hanging side by side on identical framed artworks, some people could perceive a difference of some colors. But if those frames were separated by a only few feet, very few people could perceive the difference. You can try that test for yourself, just as I did.

    Beyond any doubt, the lighting in the room has a much more profound effect on color rendition than the slight difference of the glass covering the art.

    Over time, with exposure to any amount of light, visible colors of images change and would not remain intact. Improving the UV protection would result in colors deteriorating and changing more slowly. So, the real question is: How much change of an artwork's colors is acceptable over time? That is a question of protection, and when preservation is a concern, it is not absurd to place that priority above the usually-imperceptible difference of color.

    When preservation is not a concern, and presention is, then go for the cheapest non-UV filtering, optically-coated glass you can find.
     
  4. Jim Miller

    Jim Miller SPFG, Supreme Picture Framing God

    Whatever you're smoking, you should have brought enough for everyone. :icon11:
     
  5. Jeff Rodier

    Jeff Rodier SPFG, Supreme Picture Framing God

    I did but please don't drive home untill the effects have worn off.:shutup:
     
  6. Cliff Wilson

    Cliff Wilson SGF, Supreme Grumble Framer

    Lighting (actually the color temperature of the light) has a profound effect on how different colors are perceived by the eye, but it does not (given the same luminance) restrict or clip some of the color space.

    Yes, given any single instantiation of a framed image in seclusion it is difficult for most people to recognize visible hampering of the color space. Heck, "most" people don't see a 1/4 inch overcut with a ragged bevel. That doesn't make it acceptable. I have worked with "color people" that would be able to point out the color space clipping. Heck, that's what they do when looking at print results. Try attending one of those printer shootouts they did at PMA with one of the "color people."

    AND How much is actually delayed or prevented by clipping the color space?

    That is a question of perception, and when art presentation is a concern, it is not absurd to place a known provable reduction in color as a priority over unknown limited delta in preservation.​


    Sorry Jim, not that I WANT to argue, but I have been beginning to think that we have over-sold protectionism vs presentation. Not that we should NOT block non-visible UV!

    In fact, I strongly recommend ConClear for most framing jobs. But, when someone is so concerned about seeing their image that they opt for optically coated glass, it kind of bothers me that we (TV with Museum) are clipping the color of their image when we don't have to.
     
  7. Bob Doyle

    Bob Doyle SPFG, Supreme Picture Framing God

    When people bring in old framed prints to reframe the old glass is green in color. The white mats appear greener in color. When I was first framing the color changes between CC and reg glass were enough that I would put samples of both types of glass on the final choices to be sure that they were still "acceptable". Usually Bainbridge's Khaki would change so much that it wasn't acceptable. maybe it didn't bother other framers, maybe you didn't notice but I did. It was enough to be perceived by me and my customers. DenGlas didn't change the color at all.

    The glass we are using today doesn't shift the color nearly as much. While we can all spit and hiss like cats in a catfight, the perceived changes in glass quality to this framer is that glass has gotten better and truer to color of the art under it.

    I don't want to go back to green glass just because we don't like the glass of today and aren't willing to wait for the glass of tomorrow. As I see it the more competition TV has for our few dollars the more TV innovates and changes their product to try to meet our desires. I started with reg glass as my default. Switched to CC as the default, and I can see the price of Museum glass dropping to the point where it will become a default choice, with a down grade to CC glass as an option.

    When that happens TV will come out with another got to have premium glass. And we'll buy it and promote it.

    Love it, hate it, whatever. We are on a road of progress in glass choices.
     
  8. Bob Doyle

    Bob Doyle SPFG, Supreme Picture Framing God

    Cliff, people do see the 1/4" overcut when they pay a professional to cut the mat. What they don't see is the bow, the ragged edges or the 1/2" over cut in the mat they cut themselves :)

    They do see it after I charge them to frame their mats though :shrug:
     
  9. Jim Miller

    Jim Miller SPFG, Supreme Picture Framing God

    Tell us about color space, Cliff. What is it? How can it be clipped? When colors are clipped, how do you know how much color has been clipped?
     
  10. Cliff Wilson

    Cliff Wilson SGF, Supreme Grumble Framer

    WOW! Took me years to understand this. I'll try to do it briefly.

    Color Space refers to a way to model or represent color.

    As an example, the colors that can be represented by RGB (and there are many RGB color spaces) are VERY different than the colors that can be represented with a CMYK (Cyan, Magenta, Yellow, Black) space typically used by printers. Color spaces can be mapped into three dimensional models.

    An overview can be seen here in wikipedia. (It's actually more complicated than that.)
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Color_space

    There are some color spaces that, when mapped, can represent "all" of the colors we can see. LAB and LUV come to mind. LAB at 5000k white point is the color space used internally to map computer color profiles (ICC Profiles) to each other.

    Devices like monitors, scanners, and printers, all have different color spaces. (In fact, a different ink set or different paper, or different lighting can change the mapping of a devices color space.) When "moving" color representation from one device to another the representation of a particular color must be "mapped" into the color space of the other to get consistent color. This is what color profiles are intended to do.

    When mapping color from one color space to another we talk about any colors that are "lost" as being "clipped."

    In discussing the UV blocking properties earlier, I used the term "clipping," typically used in computer translation of color, to refer to the "loss" of visible color even though, in the computer case it is truly lost, and in this case it is just hidden.


    Edit: as an aside, some devices can not represent some visible colors. This can be measured with colorimeters. If color data is converted with profiles into and out of a color space that can not represent all color, color is lost. This is why storing images in "large gamut" color spaces (ones that can represent all or nearly all visible colors) is highly recommended. The best RGB space to my knowledge (I've been out of this field for a while) is AdobeRGB. This is why you should use AdobeRGB when editing in products like Photoshop.

    Hope that all helped and didn't confuse things. It's really only relevant to the earlier discussion because I used terms typically used in this science.
     
  11. osgood

    osgood SGF, Supreme Grumble Framer

    Cliff,
    Isn't it true that colours in art look different under different lighting? I've actually had some artists take their art and the matboard samples outside, into natural light to make sure they are compatible.

    I don't know that we can just ignore the UV knowledge that we already have, just because UV glazing changes some of the colours in art slightly.

    Keeping colours the way they were intended by the artist is high on the priority of most artists, but the changes under glazing or different light sources are imperceptable to the majority of consumers.

    It seems to me that the fanaticism about colour has come to the fore in this - the digital age - where artists are having their work printed.

    This thread has become very interesting.
     
  12. Jeff Rodier

    Jeff Rodier SPFG, Supreme Picture Framing God

    Good observation, I have one photographer that buys brown (Con Clear) glass for items with bright whites and green glass (Clear) for other items. If I were using the Artglass he would be getting water white and not have to color code his images in the future.

    Omega has begun delivering Artglass in this area so it is financially viable to offer it. Now that there is a better supply chain for the product we will see some shifts in buying patterns from frame shops around the country. The Artglass sample is shown with green glass and brown glass next to it on top of white board and really shows the color difference.
     
  13. Cliff Wilson

    Cliff Wilson SGF, Supreme Grumble Framer

    Guess I need to Clarify ...

    I've gotten a few PMs with questions that indicate I need to clarify what I was trying to say.

    I think UV protection is important. For the relatively small cost of ConClear vs Regular it seems to be the right thing to do.

    Some framers seem to think it's marketing hype and fluff. Some framer's think it's critical and absolutely necessary. I think it's somewhere in the middle and if you educate the customer in the benefits vs the cost they can intelligently make an informed decision. Too many come in my shop having been OVER sold on the benefits of UV filtering.

    That said, ConClear is my default glass and I think it is well worth the difference in price.

    When you get to Optically coated glass I think we needed to examine carefully the 97% mantra.

    Do customers opt for optically coated glass because they want more protection?
    NO, because it doesn't give them more protection.

    They opt for optically coated glass because it let's them see the art better. If the goal is to see the art better, shouldn't we be offering "maximum viewing" with optically coated glass?

    That would be the 92% variety that does not block some of the "high" violet colors.

    Is there a trade-off to a (admittedly immeasurable) drop-off in UV protection? yes. But, it would seem to me that since the GOAL of choosing optically coated glass is better visibility then I would guess that is more what the customer wants.

    As an aside, for the last month I have offered ArtGlass and Museum glass at the same price. Customers have opted for the Art glass 80% of the time when choosing optically coated glass. (a side note: optically coated glass represent about 10% of my total sales.) I am still experimenting. This is by no means scientific, conclusive, or even statistically significant. Just a small anecdote. Not to be used for your own decision making!
     
  14. Cliff Wilson

    Cliff Wilson SGF, Supreme Grumble Framer

    ABSOLUTELY!!

    Color Space is ONLY defined under a white point (temperature of the light) definition.

    Any given color is specified under conditions such as 5000 degrees kelvin or 6500 degrees Kelvin. When you purchase bulbs this is usually specified on the box.

    As Jim noted, the white point of the light can be a huge factor in color perception.

    This is orthogonal to color "loss" or hiding however.

    Understood. You should point out that the matboard and the art may have different perception under different lights (like a bulb in a house) and may NOT make a relative transition.
    In other words, two colors printed with different pigments on different substrates may look identical under one white point and look different under another.

    So, all they are doing is making sure it "looks right" in the sun, where it probably will never be hung! ;)

    That is why I "mix" the white point lighting in my shop to "simulate" a room with the lights on and a sunny window. For customers that seem to care, I point out that the color will be perceived differently under different lighting conditions.
     
  15. Bob Doyle

    Bob Doyle SPFG, Supreme Picture Framing God

    You know a lot about color and color theory and color science Mr Wilson. Are you sure you don't need to disclose any associations you may have with a professional color based company? Are you in the back pocket of Benjamin Moore? Or Sherwin Williams?


    Hmm?
     
  16. Cliff Wilson

    Cliff Wilson SGF, Supreme Grumble Framer

    ;)
    I spent many years as the Director of Color Mangement Products for Eastman Kodak. I think I've posted that in the past?
     
  17. Jerry Ervin

    Jerry Ervin PFG, Picture Framing God


    I am sure you have. I also read your post about color pretty closely because I know, you know. Ya know.
     
  18. Puppiesonacid

    Puppiesonacid SGF, Supreme Grumble Framer

    Con glass is about 2 and a half times the cost of regular glass. At least my cost.... and the types of glass I get.

    Just saying that its a little more then a little bit more. :)
     
  19. Jeff Rodier

    Jeff Rodier SPFG, Supreme Picture Framing God

    About the same for me.
     
  20. Cliff Wilson

    Cliff Wilson SGF, Supreme Grumble Framer


    I was about to post a different relative percentage when I realize why I have a different relative cost.

    It's probably not that I get ConClear for much less than you, but that I buy TV Premium for my Regular, so you are probably getting Regular for much less than I am.

    This is the kind of data that is why each of us has to make our own analysis and in all probability will come up with different conclusions.
     
  21. osgood

    osgood SGF, Supreme Grumble Framer

    I always explain that to those people.

    I have one artist customer who gets his art printed 400 miles away. When getting a piece printed the first time, he gets sample after sample printed and shipped to him until he is satisfied that it is very, very close to the colours on his computer screen. He is very particular about it, but people who buy the printed art do not know whether the art looks exactly the same as it does on the artists computer screen.
     
  22. pwalters

    pwalters SGF, Supreme Grumble Framer

    So, just to be clear...... this glass will stop my poster from fading?

    Dam - where is the icon for duck and run!!!!!!!
     
  23. Cliff Wilson

    Cliff Wilson SGF, Supreme Grumble Framer

    very interesting.
    Digital art I presume?
    Although they have probably gotten incredibly better, back in the '90s, monitors were very bad at color reproduction and notorious for have color shift over time. There were prepress shops that calibrated their monitor every morning and some that re-calibrated with the light shift during the day.

    get him a second monitor, then he'll have two versions he can pick from and the printer will be twice as likely to get close! ;)

    The funny thing is to watch an artist see art on the monitor for the first time that was originally watercolor or oil! Hold that up and see how close it is.

    edit: just to be clear ... in prepress, the input device (scanner/camera) is profiled and the monitor is profiled and calibrated AND the original is viewed in a white point controlled light booth. Not "held up to the monitor" because that can cause a different perception based on the ambient light. (in the '90s of course. Since color science hasn't changed I can't imagine that the basis of the setup could have changed dramatically. Probably easier to calibrate and profile and the devices are more consistent)
     
  24. Jim Miller

    Jim Miller SPFG, Supreme Picture Framing God

    Are you saying that a piece of glass is a color mapping device, and that different pieces of glass have different color spaces? Would that be one way to explain the difference in color rendition between ordinary green-edge glass, water-white glass, and color-corrected glass?

    This is not getting any clearer, if you will excuse the pun.

    We are mixing two different topics in this thread, which adds to the confusion of data and its relevance to certain framing applications. UV filtering is the original topic, but optical coating has come into the conversation, as well.

    Cliff, it seems your mention of "lost" or "clipped" colors refers to the coating on UV filtering glass, compared to ordinary glass. Is that correct? Or are you referring to the effect of optical coatings?

    How does "color clipping" relate to color rendition?
     
  25. Cliff Wilson

    Cliff Wilson SGF, Supreme Grumble Framer

    Guess I confused things by mixing technology terminology.
    Color space is a map of something's color capabilities into a 3d space. It's just a way to specify color. You could map the color transmission capabilities of different glass into different color spaces.

    Agreed, my fault. I introduced the juxtaposition of value of UV filtering and intention and desire from optical coating.

    Correct. since the UV range was mis-defined in history, >92% UV filtering blocks some visible colors. Optical coating came into play because I believe the desire for fidelity of the image when selecting optical coating supersedes the desire for the "maximum" protection.

    Sorry, not sure what you are trying to ask? Color clipping in the technology sense usually refers to a device's inability to create some visible colors. A monitor can NOT create all the colors we can see. A printer can NOT produce a different set of colors that we could see if it could print them. This characteristic is refered to as "clipping" those colors that the device can not reproduce.

    I used the term to refer to the colors in the "art" that are blocked by UV filtering greater than 92%.
     
  26. Bob Doyle

    Bob Doyle SPFG, Supreme Picture Framing God

    Wow,

    customer just came in with a frame that needed some work on it. I had used TruVue CC on it originally back in 2003-4.

    That piece of glass was very green tinted! Put a new piece of glass on the artwork. Jim, was TruVue using regular glass and just coating it? Glad they improved the glass used over the years...
     
  27. Jim Miller

    Jim Miller SPFG, Supreme Picture Framing God

    Are you suggesting that every spectral test in our industry is based on inaccurate UV wavelengths? If invisible UV radiation does not stop between 380 and 400 nanometers, where the visible range begins, what do you say is the UV range that needs to be tested?

    OK, what do you say are the colors blocked by UV filtering greater than 92%? Since all color is determined by wavelength, what visible wavelengths do you believe are blocked beyond 92% filtering?

    Please explain, as I'm having a hard time understanding this.
     
  28. Jim Miller

    Jim Miller SPFG, Supreme Picture Framing God

    They have always used Premium Clear as the substrate for Conservation Clear, and still do, as far as I know. The difference is that a few years ago they changed the UV coating to include color-correcting chemistry, which greatly improves the color rendition. I seem to remember something about reduced iron content in premium glass products, but I'm not sure about that. Anyway, all UV-filtering products now are much closer to water-white than to typical green-edge glass. Water-white (no iron) is still the best for colors, but at a significant price difference.
     
  29. Cliff Wilson

    Cliff Wilson SGF, Supreme Grumble Framer

    Yes.

    I don't know the exact number, but it's simple to do your own observation. Take the glass claiming to block 92% and put a piece on a white mat next to any glass claiming to block more, say 99%. Leave sopme of the mat uncovered as a control. The glass that "blocks more" will make the white mat appear tinted (somewhat yellow to my eye), indicating that it is blocking some visible rays, probably the "high end" of the violet range.

    explained above

    Try the experiment I described above.
     
  30. Cliff Wilson

    Cliff Wilson SGF, Supreme Grumble Framer

    Jim, I had done that experiment for myself a few times on different white substrates with the same visible result to me on all of them. Because of this thread, I just had three other people look at the same experiment and one couldn't see a difference even after I described it to him.

    The other two saw it right away.

    3 not being a sufficient sample set to prove or disprove anything, but, this yields a very preliminary theory. The defined 380nm to 400nm may be an average or a mean, or some other approximation and therefore, some people can "see" colors in the range typically considered to be "outside the visible range."

    What I'm observing may be a subset of the population.
     
  31. osgood

    osgood SGF, Supreme Grumble Framer

    If this difference is apparent on white, does that mean it also applies to colours?
    Have you done this experiment on colours to see if there is a noticeable difference?
    Is white a component of the 'colour spaces'?

    We do not have 92% blocking UV down here as far as I know, so I can't conduct the same experiment, myself.
     
  32. Cliff Wilson

    Cliff Wilson SGF, Supreme Grumble Framer

    White being the presence of "all" colors makes it easiest to see "blocking."

    On documents like diplomas that are clearly "off white" with little other color I only can see the "blocking" because I know it's there. (essentially irrelevant)

    On images, as you might expect, it seems to depend on the image content. I would hazard a very wild guess that the more "high end" violet in the image the more "blocking" occurs, but I have no specific example or spectral analysis that would indicate my guess is correct.

    Ormond, it is subtle.
     
  33. FramerDave

    FramerDave PFG, Picture Framing God

    It would be interesting to do a double-blind experiment.
     
  34. Cliff Wilson

    Cliff Wilson SGF, Supreme Grumble Framer

    agreed

    Actually, I'm glad it isn't just me ruminating and experimenting on this, which I assume this thread has started.

    I'd love to see a bit more of a controlled test with a reasonable number of people in controlled lighting conditions.

    I am still convinced that at least one goal has to be image fidelity, even if some of us can't tell the difference.
     
  35. FramerDave

    FramerDave PFG, Picture Framing God

    I must be color blind or a lousy framer, because I can't tell enough of a difference to worry about it.
     
  36. Cliff Wilson

    Cliff Wilson SGF, Supreme Grumble Framer

    Has nothing to do with being a framer.

    1) you may not be able to see that part of the color range (apparently some can't)
    2) you may not feel the difference is enough to worry about. Which is a subjective evaluation that must be made.

    I am putting together a glazing display, which will show the difference.
    I will explain to my customers the difference to the best of my ability.


    As an FYI, I currently believe and am treating both the incremental protection and the incremental visibility as subjective and still not quantifiable, but real.
     
  37. Pat Murphey

    Pat Murphey SPFG, Supreme Picture Framing God

    Are you doing the experiment with the same glass, different coatings? If not, your color experiment is not validating your coating claim. Also, TruVue's color correction coating on CC adds an additional variable.
     
  38. Cliff Wilson

    Cliff Wilson SGF, Supreme Grumble Framer

    Frankly, for our practical purposes, my supposition on the cause is irrelevant.

    Bottom line is we have two choices for "Optically Coated glass with UV protection." They have different characteristics. I am experimenting with the product offerings as they are available to me.

    Your statement does point out a potential flaw in my theory. It might not be that the 99% UV is blocking visible rays, but that something else in the TV substrate is causing a color shift.

    We, at this end of the product receiving line, can't control enough variables to isolate and guarantee what the root cause may be.
     
  39. Jeff Rodier

    Jeff Rodier SPFG, Supreme Picture Framing God

    Cliff, the brown tint on the UV glass from TV is a big piece of the puzzle. If you compare Premium Clear to Con Clear you are looking through the same glass but CC has the tinting to try to shift the color closer to real color.

    Anybody working with color in printing knows that if you add selective color it shifts the other colors in the artwork. The ArtGlass product is not green to begin with and that is why the colors are much more true. It's hard to say what the results would be if the base glass were the same but we are having to choose between 2 entirely different products.

    You should add a piece of UV acrylic to the sampling since it has no natural green color and no brown tint has been added.
     
  40. Jim Miller

    Jim Miller SPFG, Supreme Picture Framing God

    You call that color-clipping? I call it the tint of the glass. In terms of tint, three variations of glass are commonly available to framers:

    1. Ordinary high-iron, green-edge glass, which shows a green tint that people can perceive, although most of them do not usually care about that.

    2. Color-corrected glass, which provides much better color rendition than ordinary glass. It is still slightly tinted, but not enough to perceive in framed display unless it is placed right next to water-white glass. For all Tru Vue Conservation glass products, the color correction in the 99% UV-blocking coating offsets the green tint in the glass.

    3. Water-white glass is free of iron, so it is, has always been, and probably always will be the best color-rendering glass available. Also, it is the most expensive type of glass.

    Cliff, the 92% UV blocking glass you refer to is water-white and 2 mm thick, right? Its thickness is only 80% of the 2.5 mm, 99% UV filtering glass in your comparison. So, if there is a 20% difference in color, it might be attributed to little more than the difference of glass thickness.

    I do not have a convenient source for ArtGlass, so I can't duplicate your comparison. However, I would be very interested to know how Ultra-View (2 mm water-white) and AR Glass (2.5 mm, no UV coating) compare to the 2 mm, water-white ArtGlass.

    In most framing, for most people, color rendition is not a big deal. If you framed four identical, framed images with four different glass procducts, on four different walls of a typical room with typical lighting, most people could not perceive an difference in any of them. A few feet apart, the difference of color rendition would not be obvious to most observers.

    In any case, it is only a temporary concern. The color differences may not be visibly obvious at first, but a decade or two later, after the images have been affected by ambient light, the 99% UV-protected images might look significantly better.

    I'd say you're half right about that, Cliff. Color rendition and its importance may be subjective and a matter of personal opinion, but light damage is not subjective. Fading, embrittlement and yellowing of paper & textiles, and other light damage are absolute realities - objective, not subjective. The only variables are time, intensity of exposure, and susceptibility of the image's color chemistry.
     
  41. Cliff Wilson

    Cliff Wilson SGF, Supreme Grumble Framer

    yes, I will have to try to get some Ultra-view and add it to the experiment

    I guess I just don't agree with either of these statements.
     
  42. Jim Miller

    Jim Miller SPFG, Supreme Picture Framing God

    UV on 92 vs 99-Untouch-MidRes.jpg UV on 45 vs 92-Untouch-MidRes.jpg UV off-Untouch-MidRes.jpg


    I just took these three unretouched* photos on my design table a few minutes ago. The frame and camera remained stationary for all three photos, and the ambient light was unchanged during the 3 minute photo session.

    I moved the UV device (battery-powered) to compare the UV-blocking effects of regular glass (blocks 45%) vs water-white optically coated (blocks 92%), and then water white optically coated (blocks 92%) vs color-corrected optically coated (blocks 99%).

    You decide.


    *However, I turned the images right-side up and reduced their size & resolution.
     
  43. Cliff Wilson

    Cliff Wilson SGF, Supreme Grumble Framer

    Jim, links seem broken oops, guess they're fixed now.

    ok, we can kick around the balck light thing for a long time --- of course a light design to emit a subset of light that is played against product, intended to block said subset, will exagerate the visuals.

    The predominently black surround and black in the image are designed to hide color differences.

    This is a marketing tool designed to sell one attribute. Of course it creates extraordinary delta appearances in favor of the attribute it is trying to sell.

    I do see color differences. Which is "correcter" can't be told without a control (no glass) and which is "betterer" can't be told with the device limitations infolved int he technology.

    Essentially, I don't think these images show us much of anything.
     
  44. Bob Doyle

    Bob Doyle SPFG, Supreme Picture Framing God

    Cliff, Jim.

    we sell perception. People bring in great art and we sell them a frame and mat based on their perception that we have improved, or enhanced the artwork. People bring us glue and paper clip artworks by their grandkids and we sell them on the perception that the framing package will help preserve the memories.

    The glass we sell them is a big part of that perceived difference we are making for them. The glass makes a difference and I do not feel like I am cheating anyone. I feel like I am giving them the best I have to offer.

    But it is all based on our perceptions.

    Color shift, color retention. perception....

    Now stop bickering you sound Norm and Cliff Clavin arguing on your bar stools....
     
  45. Cliff Wilson

    Cliff Wilson SGF, Supreme Grumble Framer

    Agreed. I don't think any of the options are "cheating" anyone.

    again, agreed

    awww, but Dad, it's fun!
     
  46. Bob Doyle

    Bob Doyle SPFG, Supreme Picture Framing God

    Oh you don't have to tell me :) I think Jim and I used to spend hours debating minutia :). Almost miss those days.... :)
     
  47. Jim Miller

    Jim Miller SPFG, Supreme Picture Framing God

    Exaggerate the visuals? Come on Cliff. It is a demonstration of UV blocking, and there is no exaggeration. UV is UV. Black is black. White is white. The three images are identical. These unretouched photos clearly show how much UV is blocked, and how the black and white images are rendered under all three types of glass.

    If you want to see a more-colorful UV blocking demonstration, it would be fairly easy to make something like this using color images. I'm sure we'd all like to see such a photographic comparison, and it's your turn.

    I guess you mean the black light shows up on the white parts of the image. Yes, indeed it shows a good comparison of real UV blocking attributes.

    Yes, side-by-side there are obvious color differences, but we probably would not perceive the differences if those identical images were separated by a few feet.

    You're talking like a color engineer again, Cliff. :icon21:
    Why does it matter which of the images is "correcter"? The question of which is "betterer" is a matter of personal opinion.

    These images show us color differences and "extraordinary delta appearances". I'd say that is something.:thumbsup:
     
  48. Jim Miller

    Jim Miller SPFG, Supreme Picture Framing God

    But Bob, wasn't that one of the best elements of Cheers? Put the next round on my tab.:beer:
     
  49. Cliff Wilson

    Cliff Wilson SGF, Supreme Grumble Framer

    It is. But, it will have to wait until next week. I'm headed North (North Conway, NH) for the weekend very shortly.

    I think this is a true statement for some. Not all. Then, we get to my earlier question "what are they paying more for when they are opting for the increased cost of optically coated glass?"



    I'll get the next round!! :beer:
     
  50. MerpsMom

    MerpsMom <span style="color: red"><b><i>Charter Member</i><

    I love this place. :)

    MM
     
Sponsor Wanted

Share This Page

Wizard Ad