Many thanks for sharing your experience! I'm still awaiting my chemicals to start with this art, and have been scratching my head on artificial light. Spent a LOT of time researching without really finding anything that wouldn't be extremely costly to someone just starting out. YOU answered ALL my questions. Can't thank you enough.
Thank you soooo much!!!! I have been trying and failing with different bulbs, exposure times, box heights.... this is such a huge help!! Thank you for taking the time to make this video!
@@NicoleSmallOneonOne Found their 100W version of the 365nm flood light on Ebay for $100. I followed your link and tried to buy it through that, but they don't ship to my address in the states. I wish I could have used your affiliate link for you. ;)
@@photogjimi4041 I am actually not affiliated with the company. I have been just sharing this light find out to and for everyone., but I appreciate that very much! Hmmm that is funny because they told me the ship to US and Canada. Maybe go through their direct website instead of through Amazon?
What can I say! You're awesomely smarter than me!😀🤦🏻♂️ I saw this on Amazon, but ordered the 50 watt Caydo LED which is supposed to emit the required 395nm wavelength as well. It was a little cheaper, but I'm hoping it will make artwork on both t shirts and wc paper. Thanks for sharing your clever box idea!👏🏽❤👌🏽
Thank you for showing this, I've been trying to find a video about exposure time using a home made light box and you have done this in one video. Many thanks.
It's great to see the test prints from that light. It looks great. I've been considering purchasing a UV light as the sun isn't plentiful for a lot of the year where I am. This looks like a good option.
Very informative video! I have recently purchased the same light and have had great results with exposure times around 26 minutes at a distance of 20" on larger pieces
You just made my day i purchased the same lamp on amazon , this changes everything i will no longer have to wait on day light and i will be also able to do anthotype as well . For the museum i ask my boss if we can get the 100w version i bought the 50w version . Thanks for sharing
that is very helpful... You just saved me time trying out mercury vapour lamps or other fluorescent tube constructions ( ha ha) ... I will go for it and give it a try. Otherwise, I love the sun - but it is raining again ;)
Hi Sonja! OY those mercury vapour lamps! 😵 (heheheeh!) I love the sun too; actually, I prefer it, but when you have weather that is often not working in your favour, it seems that you end up with no choice but to find something else. Let me know how it goes!
@@NicoleSmallOneonOne Ordered the lamp yesterday and received it already: it works fine ... I built a box and added some white art paper (on the top) inside, laid the print onto a white foam board - in the hope to create a bit of a bounce effect. 10-minute exposure, the distance around 10.5 inches, classic cyanotype formula and a smooth drawing paper = fine ;) I am happy. Will try some more tests with different papers and other formulas ... no doubt about it at all. It seems the perfect solution for a rainy day ' Eureka' ;) ... ps: after some prints today: the same set-up: exposure time was down to 4 minutes for fine detail, so it depends on the negative... so far, a reliable reaction on the paper
works great for sure. like someone said this would be good for wet prints also because that takes alot of experimentation and the sun isnt always reliable.
Hi Don. I think for salt prints you would need the 395nm, not the 365nm. The previous light I purchase was 395-400nm and worked for salt prints. I had experimented with salt prints after realizing it was not right for Cyanotype. I was trying to minimize on the loss of money but for now salt prints is not a direction for me......yet!
Even with my DIY UV fluorescent tube exposure bank I often have to use distances of no more than 12 inches and it exposes most processes in under 7 minutes. Maybe consider the 100 watt version of this light if you want quicker exposures or multiple prints as the light is larger and covers more area.
HI Matt. I don't really mind the need of a 10 minute exposure and I could have bought the 100 Watt light but I was not sure if the light would have worked. I already lost out on money on a light that I bought similar to this one which proved to not work for the Cyanotype . Not knowing if this light would work I wanted to make sure that if I loss, I would not lose that much.
@@NicoleSmallOneonOne I myself plan on purchasing the 100 watt it just suits my needs better. I'm going to ditch the UV flourescents as they are dangerous and sometimes they expose too fast and I like to do exposure inspections when I do printing processes. Anyways thanks for the research and experiments as you helped me find a safer and more usable alternative to my current setup. Take care and keep the videos coming.
Hi Nicole, when using this light, I am doing ( 2) 9x12 at a time with it, using a larger piece of heavy glass )don't need clips) with the light suspended centered and overhead being held by a reptile stand (lol), the light gets pretty hot, and my exposures are about 35 minutes, using a transparency-- I have light suspended 13 inches above the glass covered paper with transparency on top. I would like to contain the light in the area, so scattered blacklight isn't hitting my artwork in surrounding area...I am thinking of just creating a large folding cube that fits over my large flat file which this is all attached to. I am going to buy the 100watt bulb because I have larger pieces to do, and I think I will set that up on other side of flat file, again witht the stands so light can suspend....the light inside the cardboard box seems hazardouse to me because it gets hot, and that could ignite--am hoping with the 100w light my exposures will be reduced for the 9x12 and larger sized ones--what's nice about the stands and you can adjust them to whatever height you want, and also depth distance...you may want to check those out! While the manufacturer says their wavelength is safe for eyes and skin, I do wear uv goggles from home depot, and an expensive UV face shield that cost me about $100. I am not taking any chances! thanks for your fab videos!
Hi Jamie, The light has a wide spread which is great. I use clamps because I use a light piece of glass, one from a clip frame, and as an extra measure of security just incase I may feel the need to adjust placement, even with my heavier sheet of glass that I use when out in the sun. I use the box as a cover in order to prevent the spill of light which yes could be considered hazardous, but the top edge of the light does not emit any heat, the area touching the box, at least the light that I presently have. The stands sound quite interesting! Thank you for sharing! The wavelength on this light is not safe, but safer from how it is made when compared to similar lights on the market and regardless of that I bought a pair of UV eye goggles that cost me just about the same, I too do not take any chances! Your exposures will be reduced with the 100 Watt light for sure. I bought the 50 Watt when I discovered it because I was not sure if the light would have worked and did not want to loose out on too much if it didn't. I am very happy that you are enjoying the videos!
@@NicoleSmallOneonOne thanks Nicole, my 50 watt like yours felt very warm on top, glad you are wearing the uv glasses, they put they are not needed on the item description, but I agree I don't trust it... I was reading up on a clever foam core set up that someone was using to make a light enclosure for shooting, and using magnets glued to edges...I am thinking of perhaps making something like this that is easy to break down and could contain the light just on top of my flat file...amd worried that the spread of light is not safe for my artwork on wall in vicinity, Will let you know if my design works out...
Thanks for the great videos Nicole. So well thought out. They're incredibly helpful. I'm going to purchase an LED UV to replace a UV florescent unit that I built years ago. Was wondering how the Everbeam is working out for you after three years. Also was wondering if you had thoughts on 50W vs 100W. I noticed someone mention the lights put our some heat. Does you 50W run very hot? Thanks again, I'm looking forward to watching some of your other videos. All the best, Tom
Hi Gaye. The big difference would be that in a given situation, less time would be needed to expose a print with the 100W light versus the 50W light. This does not mean that the 50W light does not pack a punch(!), but if large prints are your goal, say on average bigger than 11x14, the 100W might be the better choice only because exposure times would be less compared to using a 50W light.
I’ve been scratching my head, thinking about how to build something for indoor development. Your simple and elegant solution makes it clear I was overthinking the problem. Have you considered covering the inside of the box with a reflective material? It seems to me that Mylar or foil could increase the effective intensity and maybe give a smoother light. Or am I overthinking again? ;-) Thanks for the informative video!
HI Gizmo Photo and thank you very much. You are not overthinking at all! Yes I have thought of using foil inside the box camera but I have never gone that far. I have only tried a diffused mini black light inside the box which did not work at all and I thought that the foil might do the same. The issue I have come to realize is more so the lens / projection of the image that falls onto the paper, too diffused which is why it is so problematic along with other factors of course. When you think about creating a digital negative, there is most of the time a need to add sharpness , sometimes a little more than the usual and this is applied to the process of doing right out flat in plain open sun. There needs to be a more defined/dense image projected onto the paper. I have looked into UV lenses specifically for this but they are atrociously expensive. I will be trying a few things if I get the chance to before summer ends and will share my findings, hopefully a solution :)
@@NicoleSmallOneonOne I was thinking about covering the inside of the development box vs. the box camera. I’ll add that I apprehended simplicity of your approach. It’s very easy to think that the solutions must be found in more and more complex and expensive gear. A cardboard box solves a couple problems, including any worries I had about shielding my eyes from the light. I’ll be watching more of your content and taking notes.
@@NicoleSmallOneonOne No worries at all. You are generous with your time responding to comments, and a little glitch every now and then is par for the course.
Thank you so much for this video! Here in québec, canada we are deep in winter so I'm looking forward to trying this method! Do you think this UV technic would work on fabric ?
HI Mia! I have never used the Cyanotype on fabric so I cannot say for sure but I don't see why it shouldn't work. The light clearly works for the Cyanotype formula so maybe it just might be a matter of trying out different fabrics to determine which will give you the final result that you want.
@@NicoleSmallOneonOne I find that peroxide brings out the deep blue immediately and that the prints are less sensitive to total exposure time. I just dump in a few mls of low percentage peroxide solution from the pharmacy (on the shelves, nothing prescription).
@@oudviola Yes I know the peroxide does this but I just let it do it's thing on its own time. I have a few Cyanotypes in frames on a wall and they look just fine.
Hi Nena. For the length of 10 minutes it does get very warm, but not hot. I would not suggest using this light for a length of 3-4 hours at a time, not sure if they are made for that type of heavy duty use, but I am just placing out my own thought out there and I could be wrong. Maybe contact the company and ask them about usage of the lights to find out if long periods of use is ok with the lights.
thank you Nicole I was wondering which UV lamp was suitable. I want to do A3 size wet cyanotype process would this lamp give enough coverage for a larger print? Thank you
HI Gill. You are welcome! I did a 12x16 sized Cyanotype with this light so yes it can. Exposure times will be in the long range, ( 30min +). Distance of the light will play a part in good coverage too.
@@gillyb44 HI. Yes that is right. The larger the print the higher the light would need to be to enable a full and more balanced coverage all around. For example, an 8x10 print vs a 12x16 print. The 12x16 print would need a light source further away than that for an 8x10 print. The higher the light or further away the light, the larger the spread of light. For your sized print, this does not mean it needs to be 10 feet away but at a distance for even coverage. You may have to test that out to determine the right distance and you can do that by just creating a thick border around the paper and expose. You will then get to see where you would need to make adjustments, in time or distance or both. I hope this helps you!
Thanks so much for your info. I live in eastern Ontario, Canada, and have worked with Cyanotype al summer. With winter coming I am looking for an inside solution. After having had your everbeam for almost a year, what is your current opinion of it?
Hi Heidi. I will be honest and say that this summer I have not really used it as much , (aside from a few things I have experimented with), and that is mostly because I have been focused on inbox Cyanotypes, which will only work with sunlight...but to be honest, I do prefer the sun over the UV light bank but for the winter months, it is a dream to have. Your creativity does not have to stop and wait for the next spring/summer season. I find the Everbeam light to work well for both small and large prints. I have done a few new prints, (I have not shown yet), sized 12x18 and I am very happy with them/15-20 minute exposures. I find the light to be durable and heavy duty making prints back to back with a 10-15 minute break in between. It has a nice spread of light and the light spreads out nice and even. The warranty is pretty good on it too...2 years.
@@NicoleSmallOneonOne thanks so much Nicole. I have actually gone ahead and bought the same Everbeam lamp and it arrived an hour ago. I just tried it, handheld over a little piece of paper on the living room floor, for a few minutes (all very haphazardly) and it seemed to work! I am rather excited so now I have to get it installed in a somewhat more efficient way…
@@NicoleSmallOneonOne just some info about me. I am a fibre artist and have come across cyanoprinting on the internet this summer. While waiting for the chemicals I played with Curcuma sunprinting but once the chemicals arrived I switched to Cyanotype. I started Cyanotype with negatives but over the summer also used plant material. Over these past months I found your info extremely helpful, some of the best on the web, thanks so much for it.
@@heidiroukema2771 Awesome Heidi! The easiest and effective way to install it is by using a cardboard box. It isn't the best looking but it works out quite well. I hope it works out well for you!
@@heidiroukema2771 Thank you Heidi! I am so happy to hear that the information I have shared has helped you. Do you have an instagram account? I would love to see your Fibre art work as I am not familiar with that.
HI. Hmmm.. It would be hard to tell you that as much will be subjective. Is your negative dense or thin, what you would like it to look like as a final print in regards to tone and what is your set up/distance of the light to the print. The best thing to do for any initial print is to do a small test print. Cut a smaller piece of paper and expose it under the negative you plan to use and break it into sections; example, one section for 5 minutes, another for 10 minutes and other for 12 minutes etc.. This will help you determine an exposure time that will work best for your print as you want to see it and take note of the distance that you place your light from the print so if you want to do it again you will know exactly what exposure time you would need. I hope this helps!
Hi Wesley. The link goes directly to 365nm when I click on the link. Also, you have selections of the different ones and they are written under the price, so if it so happens to show 395nm all you have to do is select the 365nm light which will highlight in orange. Hope this helps.
@@NicoleSmallOneonOne that one is 100W though. Yours is 50W, which only exist in 395nm on Amazon. Anyway, I was watching other videos and found this guy who made his own box using LED strips of 395nm and it works just fine. Maybe your previous light (the one you mention in this video czcams.com/video/E6rnpF61CKY/video.html) was just too weak. I guess 20W is not enough.
@@WesleyAlcoforado I am not sure what to tell you Wesley. Perhaps the 50watt is out of stock as I know it has been selling very well. I bought a second 50watt recently just before the new yearfrom the EXACT LINK that I have shared here.. Did you try sending them a message ? The mention of the light, sharing of the link to the light and showing that it works is the only thing that I can really help you with Wesley. Any other issues in regards to what they may or may not have in stock, or where the link may lead to now, I unfortunately cannot help there. I have had others who have bought the light source directly from the link I placed here. I am happy that you found another resource to obtaining the light you seek, and good luck on your UV light build, let me know how that goes.
@@WesleyAlcoforado Just to add, you are right, there are a lot of people who have built their own UV light units, but I did not want to get into that after looking into it.
Hi Wesley, I contacted the company and they have been out of stock of the 50 watt light, that is why the link now directs to the 100watt light. They will re-stock the 50 watt but are not sure of it's arrival.
@@ivanr.2339 Hi Ivan, I received a reply from them and they said that they will be selling to UK, Europe, and Australia early next year. So not too far away!
Many thanks for sharing your experience! I'm still awaiting my chemicals to start with this art, and have been scratching my head on artificial light. Spent a LOT of time researching without really finding anything that wouldn't be extremely costly to someone just starting out. YOU answered ALL my questions. Can't thank you enough.
That is awesome and you are so welcome!
Thank you soooo much!!!! I have been trying and failing with different bulbs, exposure times, box heights.... this is such a huge help!! Thank you for taking the time to make this video!
HI Susan! I am happy that you found me and that the video has helped you!
I got this uv light thanks to your video and now my cyanotypes rock!
Awesome!
Wish I could like this video twice! I nearly spent more money and spent an age trying to build a UV lamp. Thank you!!
HI Adam! You are so welcome!
Your videos have saved me a ton of time and headaches! I can't thank you enough!
Your so welcome Jimi!
@@NicoleSmallOneonOne Im having a hard time finding the 365nm version on the US version of Amazon.
@@photogjimi4041 HI. It is a Canadian company which is why it is not found as an item on the US amazon. They do ship to the US though.
@@NicoleSmallOneonOne Found their 100W version of the 365nm flood light on Ebay for $100. I followed your link and tried to buy it through that, but they don't ship to my address in the states. I wish I could have used your affiliate link for you. ;)
@@photogjimi4041 I am actually not affiliated with the company. I have been just sharing this light find out to and for everyone., but I appreciate that very much! Hmmm that is funny because
they told me the ship to US and Canada. Maybe go through their direct website instead of through Amazon?
What can I say! You're awesomely smarter than me!😀🤦🏻♂️ I saw this on Amazon, but ordered the 50 watt Caydo LED which is supposed to emit the required 395nm wavelength as well. It was a little cheaper, but I'm hoping it will make artwork on both t shirts and wc paper.
Thanks for sharing your clever box idea!👏🏽❤👌🏽
Awesome!
Thank you for showing this, I've been trying to find a video about exposure time using a home made light box and you have done this in one video. Many thanks.
Hi JH. I am glad this video was of help to you!
really pleased to have found your VLOG - I am just starting out in London so the light info is very very useful THANKYOU
Hi Weavil, thank you and you are so welcome! Have fun!
Thank you, Nicole!, for your generosity! On your advice, I got the same light. Works like a charm! Love your meticulousness!
Hi Esery! You are very welcome. Now we do not have any excuses 😃😃!
@@NicoleSmallOneonOne Zero!
It's great to see the test prints from that light. It looks great. I've been considering purchasing a UV light as the sun isn't plentiful for a lot of the year where I am. This looks like a good option.
I have been in the same boat as you, sun not around for most of the year. Now I have no excuses. :)
Thanks for this. Clear and down to earth!
Thank you Virginia. I am glad that you enjoyed the video!
Very informative video! I have recently purchased the same light and have had great results with exposure times around 26 minutes at a distance of 20" on larger pieces
Thank you Liam! Wow! Do you have the 100 Watt light?
Thanks so much for sharing this. I will be trying it out today!
Your so very welcome Sarah have fun!
I just found this video, super helpful. Thank you!
Hi Melanie, I am glad this has been helpful!
You just made my day i purchased the same lamp on amazon , this changes everything i will no longer have to wait on day light and i will be also able to do anthotype as well . For the museum i ask my boss if we can get the 100w version i bought the 50w version . Thanks for sharing
Fantastic and your welcome! It feels so good to know that you don't have to wait for the weather to be right, you can do it all year round!
Thank you so much! We do no have much sun in The Netherlands lately and I use an old facial tanner but this is so much better!
HI Ike. You are so welcome!
Thanks so much for this!
Hi! You are welcome Kim!
Thank you. your video is very useful i love it.
@@nadamagdi5566 Hi and thank you. You are so welcome!
that is very helpful... You just saved me time trying out mercury vapour lamps or other fluorescent tube constructions ( ha ha) ... I will go for it and give it a try. Otherwise, I love the sun - but it is raining again ;)
Hi Sonja! OY those mercury vapour lamps! 😵 (heheheeh!)
I love the sun too; actually, I prefer it, but when you have weather that is often not working in your favour, it seems that you end up with no choice but to find something else. Let me know how it goes!
@@NicoleSmallOneonOne Ordered the lamp yesterday and received it already: it works fine ... I built a box and added some white art paper (on the top) inside, laid the print onto a white foam board - in the hope to create a bit of a bounce effect. 10-minute exposure, the distance around 10.5 inches, classic cyanotype formula and a smooth drawing paper = fine ;) I am happy. Will try some more tests with different papers and other formulas ... no doubt about it at all. It seems the perfect solution for a rainy day ' Eureka' ;) ... ps: after some prints today: the same set-up: exposure time was down to 4 minutes for fine detail, so it depends on the negative... so far, a reliable reaction on the paper
@@sonjadetiege3554 Fantastic!
works great for sure. like someone said this would be good for wet prints also because that takes alot of experimentation and the sun isnt always reliable.
Yes it is a perfect alternative
Great results. Thanks for sharing your findings. I’m hoping to use this for salt prints.
Hi Don. I think for salt prints you would need the 395nm, not the 365nm. The previous light I purchase was 395-400nm and worked for salt prints. I had experimented with salt prints after realizing it was not right for Cyanotype. I was trying to minimize on the loss of money but for now salt prints is not a direction for me......yet!
Even with my DIY UV fluorescent tube exposure bank I often have to use distances of no more than 12 inches and it exposes most processes in under 7 minutes. Maybe consider the 100 watt version of this light if you want quicker exposures or multiple prints as the light is larger and covers more area.
HI Matt. I don't really mind the need of a 10 minute exposure and I could have bought the 100 Watt light but I was not sure if the light would have worked. I already lost out on money on a light that I bought similar to this one which proved to not work for the Cyanotype . Not knowing if this light would work I wanted to make sure that if I loss, I would not lose that much.
@@NicoleSmallOneonOne I myself plan on purchasing the 100 watt it just suits my needs better. I'm going to ditch the UV flourescents as they are dangerous and sometimes they expose too fast and I like to do exposure inspections when I do printing processes. Anyways thanks for the research and experiments as you helped me find a safer and more usable alternative to my current setup. Take care and keep the videos coming.
@@mattayers3794 That is awesome. I am glad to have been helpful and more is a comin'!
@@mattayers3794 Did you ever buy the 100W light for exposing the cyanotypes? How did it go?
Very nice !!
Thank you
Hi Nicole, when using this light, I am doing ( 2) 9x12 at a time with it, using a larger piece of heavy glass )don't need clips) with the light suspended centered and overhead being held by a reptile stand (lol), the light gets pretty hot, and my exposures are about 35 minutes, using a transparency-- I have light suspended 13 inches above the glass covered paper with transparency on top. I would like to contain the light in the area, so scattered blacklight isn't hitting my artwork in surrounding area...I am thinking of just creating a large folding cube that fits over my large flat file which this is all attached to. I am going to buy the 100watt bulb because I have larger pieces to do, and I think I will set that up on other side of flat file, again witht the stands so light can suspend....the light inside the cardboard box seems hazardouse to me because it gets hot, and that could ignite--am hoping with the 100w light my exposures will be reduced for the 9x12 and larger sized ones--what's nice about the stands and you can adjust them to whatever height you want, and also depth distance...you may want to check those out! While the manufacturer says their wavelength is safe for eyes and skin, I do wear uv goggles from home depot, and an expensive UV face shield that cost me about $100. I am not taking any chances!
thanks for your fab videos!
Hi Jamie,
The light has a wide spread which is great. I use clamps because I use a light piece of glass, one from a clip frame, and as an extra measure of security just incase I may feel the need to adjust placement, even with my heavier sheet of glass that I use when out in the sun.
I use the box as a cover in order to prevent the spill of light which yes could be considered hazardous, but the top edge of the light does not emit any heat, the area touching the box, at least the light that I presently have.
The stands sound quite interesting! Thank you for sharing!
The wavelength on this light is not safe, but safer from how it is made when compared to similar lights on the market and regardless of that I bought a pair of UV eye goggles that cost me just about the same, I too do not take any chances!
Your exposures will be reduced with the 100 Watt light for sure. I bought the 50 Watt when I discovered it because I was not sure if the light would have worked and did not want to loose out on too much if it didn't.
I am very happy that you are enjoying the videos!
@@NicoleSmallOneonOne thanks Nicole, my 50 watt like yours felt very warm on top, glad you are wearing the uv glasses, they put they are not needed on the item description, but I agree I don't trust it...
I was reading up on a clever foam core set up that someone was using to make a light enclosure for shooting, and using magnets glued to edges...I am thinking of perhaps making something like this that is easy to break down and could contain the light just on top of my flat file...amd worried that the spread of light is not safe for my artwork on wall in vicinity, Will let you know if my design works out...
@@jaimiegordon2065That is great! Let me know how it all works out.
Thanks for the great videos Nicole. So well thought out. They're incredibly helpful. I'm going to purchase an LED UV to replace a UV florescent unit that I built years ago. Was wondering how the Everbeam is working out for you after three years. Also was wondering if you had thoughts on 50W vs 100W. I noticed someone mention the lights put our some heat. Does you 50W run very hot? Thanks again, I'm looking forward to watching some of your other videos. All the best, Tom
Hi Nicole. Thank you for this information. If it was a 100W 365nm light, what difference would it make.
Hi Gaye. The big difference would be that in a given situation, less time would be needed to expose a print with the 100W light versus the 50W light. This does not mean that the 50W light does not pack a punch(!), but if large prints are your goal, say on average bigger than 11x14, the 100W might be the better choice only because exposure times would be less compared to using a 50W light.
I’ve been scratching my head, thinking about how to build something for indoor development. Your simple and elegant solution makes it clear I was overthinking the problem. Have you considered covering the inside of the box with a reflective material? It seems to me that Mylar or foil could increase the effective intensity and maybe give a smoother light. Or am I overthinking again? ;-)
Thanks for the informative video!
HI Gizmo Photo and thank you very much. You are not overthinking at all!
Yes I have thought of using foil inside the box camera but I have never gone that far. I have only tried a diffused mini black light inside the box which did not work at all and I thought that the foil might do the same.
The issue I have come to realize is more so the lens / projection of the image that falls onto the paper, too diffused which is why it is so problematic along with other factors of course.
When you think about creating a digital negative, there is most of the time a need to add sharpness , sometimes a little more than the usual and this is applied to the process of doing right out flat in plain open sun. There needs to be a more defined/dense image projected onto the paper.
I have looked into UV lenses specifically for this but they are atrociously expensive.
I will be trying a few things if I get the chance to before summer ends and will share my findings, hopefully a solution :)
Oh..I just thought about it, have I gone off track? Please let me know if I have.
@@NicoleSmallOneonOne I was thinking about covering the inside of the development box vs. the box camera.
I’ll add that I apprehended simplicity of your approach. It’s very easy to think that the solutions must be found in more and more complex and expensive gear. A cardboard box solves a couple problems, including any worries I had about shielding my eyes from the light. I’ll be watching more of your content and taking notes.
@@gizmophoto3577 I did get mixed up! I thought you were solely referring to a box camera, sorry about that.
@@NicoleSmallOneonOne No worries at all. You are generous with your time responding to comments, and a little glitch every now and then is par for the course.
Thank you so much for this video! Here in québec, canada we are deep in winter so I'm looking forward to trying this method! Do you think this UV technic would work on fabric ?
HI Mia! I have never used the Cyanotype on fabric so I cannot say for sure but I don't see why it shouldn't work.
The light clearly works for the Cyanotype formula so maybe it just might be a matter of trying out different fabrics to determine which will give you the final result that you want.
@@NicoleSmallOneonOne Yes I will test it for sure ! Thanks for you response !
Aha good work! Will look at getting that light. Did you have peroxide in your water developer?
At amazon.ca the 50W unit is $60 and the 100W unit is $100. So the 100W is cheaper per watt!
Hi Mark! No I never use peroxide. I just rinse in plain water .
@@NicoleSmallOneonOne I find that peroxide brings out the deep blue immediately and that the prints are less sensitive to total exposure time. I just dump in a few mls of low percentage peroxide solution from the pharmacy (on the shelves, nothing prescription).
@@oudviola Yes I know the peroxide does this but I just let it do it's thing on its own time. I have a few Cyanotypes in frames on a wall and they look just fine.
Great! Does the UV lamp get warm->hot if it’s on for a longer period, like 3-4hours? Thinking of wet cyanotypes.
Hi Nena. For the length of 10 minutes it does get very warm, but not hot. I would not suggest using this light for a length of 3-4 hours at a time, not sure if they are made for that type of heavy duty use, but I am just placing out my own thought out there and I could be wrong. Maybe contact the company and ask them about usage of the lights to find out if long periods of use is ok with the lights.
Nicole Small | One on One thank You, good to know! The same heating thing happens with the face tanner as well.
thank you Nicole I was wondering which UV lamp was suitable. I want to do A3 size wet cyanotype process would this lamp give enough coverage for a larger print? Thank you
HI Gill. You are welcome! I did a 12x16 sized Cyanotype with this light so yes it can. Exposure times will be in the long range, ( 30min +). Distance of the light will play a part in good coverage too.
@@NicoleSmallOneonOne thanks for the quick reply Nicole. So are you suggesting it would need to go a bit higher to get the coverage?
@@gillyb44 HI. Yes that is right. The larger the print the higher the light would need to be to enable a full and more balanced coverage all around. For example, an 8x10 print vs a 12x16 print. The 12x16 print would need a light source further away than that for an 8x10 print. The higher the light or further away the light, the larger the spread of light.
For your sized print, this does not mean it needs to be 10 feet away but at a distance for even coverage. You may have to test that out to determine the right distance and you can do that by just creating a thick border around the paper and expose. You will then get to see where you would need to make adjustments, in time or distance or both. I hope this helps you!
Thanks so much for your info. I live in eastern Ontario, Canada, and have worked with Cyanotype al summer. With winter coming I am looking for an inside solution. After having had your everbeam for almost a year, what is your current opinion of it?
Hi Heidi. I will be honest and say that this summer I have not really used it as much , (aside from a few things I have experimented with), and that is mostly because I have been focused on inbox Cyanotypes, which will only work with sunlight...but to be honest, I do prefer the sun over the UV light bank but for the winter months, it is a dream to have.
Your creativity does not have to stop and wait for the next spring/summer season.
I find the Everbeam light to work well for both small and large prints. I have done a few new prints, (I have not shown yet), sized 12x18 and I am very happy with them/15-20 minute exposures. I find the light to be durable and heavy duty making prints back to back with a 10-15 minute break in between. It has a nice spread of light and the light spreads out nice and even.
The warranty is pretty good on it too...2 years.
@@NicoleSmallOneonOne thanks so much Nicole. I have actually gone ahead and bought the same Everbeam lamp and it arrived an hour ago. I just tried it, handheld over a little piece of paper on the living room floor, for a few minutes (all very haphazardly) and it seemed to work! I am rather excited so now I have to get it installed in a somewhat more efficient way…
@@NicoleSmallOneonOne just some info about me. I am a fibre artist and have come across cyanoprinting on the internet this summer. While waiting for the chemicals I played with Curcuma sunprinting but once the chemicals arrived I switched to Cyanotype. I started Cyanotype with negatives but over the summer also used plant material. Over these past months I found your info extremely helpful, some of the best on the web, thanks so much for it.
@@heidiroukema2771 Awesome Heidi! The easiest and effective way to install it is by using a cardboard box. It isn't the best looking but it works out quite well. I hope it works out well for you!
@@heidiroukema2771 Thank you Heidi! I am so happy to hear that the information I have shared has helped you. Do you have an instagram account? I would love to see your Fibre art work as I am not familiar with that.
I bought the same light, what do you think, how long should the box be in order to get the best print results with an A4 size paper?
HI. Hmmm.. It would be hard to tell you that as much will be subjective. Is your negative dense or thin, what you would like it to look like as a final print in regards to tone and what is your set up/distance of the light to the print.
The best thing to do for any initial print is to do a small test print. Cut a smaller piece of paper and expose it under the negative you plan to use and break it into sections; example, one section for 5 minutes, another for 10 minutes and other for 12 minutes etc.. This will help you determine an exposure time that will work best for your print as you want to see it and take note of the distance that you place your light from the print so if you want to do it again you will know exactly what exposure time you would need.
I hope this helps!
The one you have is really 365nm or 395nm in wavelength? The link in the description leads to a 395nm 50W light.
Hi Wesley. The link goes directly to 365nm when I click on the link. Also, you have selections of the different ones and they are written under the price, so if it so happens to show 395nm all you have to do is select the 365nm light which will highlight in orange. Hope this helps.
@@NicoleSmallOneonOne that one is 100W though. Yours is 50W, which only exist in 395nm on Amazon. Anyway, I was watching other videos and found this guy who made his own box using LED strips of 395nm and it works just fine. Maybe your previous light (the one you mention in this video czcams.com/video/E6rnpF61CKY/video.html) was just too weak. I guess 20W is not enough.
@@WesleyAlcoforado I am not sure what to tell you Wesley. Perhaps the 50watt is out of stock as I know it has been selling very well. I bought a second 50watt recently just before the new yearfrom the EXACT LINK that I have shared here.. Did you try sending them a message ?
The mention of the light, sharing of the link to the light and showing that it works is the only thing that I can really help you with Wesley. Any other issues in regards to what they may or may not have in stock, or where the link may lead to now, I unfortunately cannot help there. I have had others who have bought the light source directly from the link I placed here.
I am happy that you found another resource to obtaining the light you seek, and good luck on your UV light build, let me know how that goes.
@@WesleyAlcoforado Just to add, you are right, there are a lot of people who have built their own UV light units, but I did not want to get into that after looking into it.
Hi Wesley, I contacted the company and they have been out of stock of the 50 watt light, that is why the link now directs to the 100watt light. They will re-stock the 50 watt but are not sure of it's arrival.
Uff, they don't ship it to Italy...
Hi Ivan...ahh man, why not?
I am not sure if it will change anything but I sent them a message about it...I will let you know their reply. Let's hope this can be possible!
@@NicoleSmallOneonOne this is unexpected, you're so kind, thank you!
@@ivanr.2339 My fingers are crossed!
@@ivanr.2339 Hi Ivan, I received a reply from them and they said that they will be selling to UK, Europe, and Australia early next year. So not too far away!