Digital BW, The Print

Thanks, CD, for the comments. I was looking at the Solux info over the weekend, but the comments I read re the heat generation concern me. I was unaware of the other differences you mentioned.

I've been satisfied with what I can achieve with this Ott-Lite. So, I think I'll save my money for now and, once I've confirmed that the bulb with the "HD" designation is at least comparable to the original "Vision Saver" 18w bulb, probably replace this bulb and then investigate alternatives when it's time once again to replace the bulb.

Tom

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, CDTobie <CDTobie@...> wrote:
>
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You may not be aware that the Ott-Lite products are not good for 
> critical appraisal of prints as they have a spiky spectrum unlike true 
> daylight or tungsten bulbs.  Off course tungsten is far less blue than 
> daylight and therefore not really suitable as it gives a distorted 
> appearance to what you are evaluating. The best option is the bulbs and 
> enclosures available from So-lux. 
> 
> Solux create their own color universe; no other artificial light source produces results similar to them. On the other hand, professional proofing booths and light boxes produce results very similar to Ott-Lites, both being multi-phosphor fluorescents. So if your goal is to be seeing what other proofing lights show, an Ott-Lite isn't a bad low cost choice. Multi-phosphor fluorescents also use much less energy, last far longer, and retain their color accuracy much longer than Solux bulbs, as well as reducing the possibilities of burns, and not overheating your studio. Solux really need to be switched on quickly for a print check, then turned off again, due to heat as well as fairly rapid color change over time. Multi-phosphor fluorescents can be run 24/7 with little energy use, little heat buildup, and little change over time. So these other factors should be considered when choosing a light source.
> 
> 
> C. David Tobie