Цитата:
Сообщение от knjaz
Пожалсте: [Только зарегистрированные пользователи могут видеть ссылки. Регистрация!] |
Раза в 4 больше чем русский аналог =0)
И естественно ни о каком UV разговора в ней нет =))...
Просто мощное излучение в области чувствительности этой несчастной краски.
Как всегда - используйте с умом и не парьте мозг.
Цитата:
Pat Sapinsley • 8 hours ago
−
I have read the original research. It says;
That
the most likely cause of degradation is a varnish that Van Gogh applied.
That
UV and Blue spectrum below wavelengths of 450 nanometers can harm this
particular pigment
The
experiments were conducted under Xenon
(not LED) light sources
The Telegraph got it all wrong, blaming LEDS.
·
Although white LEDs are made by converting blue LEDs thru the use
of phosphors, the resulting "white" spectrum used in high quality
museum quality LEDs , has no more blue than halogen and less UV than halogen.
The
degradation was likely caused over the last few decades under halogen
museum lighting, which possess large amounts of UV.
The
primary cause of degradation would be too much light, unstable pigments
and bad reactions with the varnish. The same degradation would likely have
happened unless the paintings were kept under a blanket.
Kindly check your facts and write a retraction.
LEDS are now at a point where many of the products are excellent. There is now
an excellent testing protocol, developed by the DOE in the US. When specified
correctly, good quality LEDS can provide excellent lighting at a fraction of
the energy use. Your irresponsible reporting could foolishly drive end users to
specify halogen products that not only burn up electrons needlessly, but
deliver far more heat and damaging UV to
the artwork.
Pat Sapinsley, Watt-Not, LLC
|