• When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.

Fun with sun (and a luxmeter): How to protect art from fading
1 1

10 posts in this topic

Maybe the first part of the headline sounded a bit wrong hm - but you'll soon get the idea ;)

 

First of all, all light exposure will - with time - fade your art, anti-UV glass protected or not. Light intensity is usually measured in lux ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lux ) and these guidelines seem to represent opinions among professionals (conservators):

 

"Most collection materials can be on exhibit for three to four months at 50 to 150 lux and show no fading. A level of 50 lux is similar to the lighting in a home living room in the evening. For comparison, standard office lighting is around 400 lux and direct sunlight measures 30,000 lux. Lower light levels are necessary for light-sensitive materials such as watercolors, photographs, leather, textiles, and prints. Materials without color (printed text, black and white photographs, carbon black ink manuscripts, etc.) can be exhibited at up to 150 lux.

 

[...]

 

If the light levels are to be higher than 50-150 lux, the length of time on exhibit needs to be decreased accordingly. When making the decision about time on exhibit and light levels, be aware that low light levels for extended periods of time cause as much damage as high light levels for short periods. We can measure the damage to materials in direct proportion to the light level multiplied by the time of exposure, measured in lux hours (lx h). For example, an object lit for 10 hours a day at 50 lux for 100 days would have a light dosage of 50,000 lx h. Ideally, light-sensitive materials would only have an annual exposure of 50,000 lx h, regardless of whether they will be displayed annually or not. When considering how much and how often an item is to be on display, always keep in mind that light damage is cumulative and irreversible."

 

https://www.nedcc.org/free-resources/pre...om-light-damage

 

So 50k lx hours a year (corresponding to exposing a piece to 50,000 lux for one hour) as a rule of thumb... In my living room this painting can get that amount of light in just 5 hours :ohnoez: I just measured this:

 

photo 040920155576_zpsrf1e2msj.jpg

 

So that's about 10,000 lux in the living room on a sunny day. Fortunately it's not a painting I care much about - and it's an oil painting, so I do not consider light exposure a big problem with this piece. But what about the more light sensitive comic art? The living room gets much more sun, but the sun also hits the ground floor (high basement with reduced sun light), where some of my comic art is placed, here she is:

 

photo sun_zpsaqdsyjy9.jpg

 

I've already coated the windows with some film, and first measurement is with open blinds (oak, so light will not penetrate):

 

photo open_zpspkcolpjd.jpg

 

And got these results next to the art (just an inexpensive luxmeter from EBay, but it seems to work perfectly):

 

photo 040920155573_zpsiftkhwgc.jpg

 

So 274 lux, and actually up to 600 lux with blinds completely removed (but with the transparent window film still on). I do have more windows in the room, but only this window provides direct sunlight. Now with semi-closed blinds - which still is providing a decent amount of daylight (I'd get problems with the wife otherwise, sigh):

 

photo 040920155572_zpsjrg4frgj.jpg

 

(As part of the balance of terror at home, my wife gets to decorate the window boards)

 

The result (tried to angle the luxmeter to get the highest possible readings):

 

photo semi-closed_zpss1s2zy3q.jpg

 

Placing your art in the right room and maybe taking further steps to lower the light (lux) may be a great way to protect the art - and still be able to enjoy it every day. At least the above illustrates how to get from 10,000 lux to 30 - without creating a totally dark room.

This info is just as important to persons, who like to display comic books, where covers may easily fade due to light exposure.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Night-vision goggles are the way of the future for OA collectors!

 

No worries about harmful UV lighting effects . . . just display your art in a totally blacked-out room!

 

Photo shows a collector of G.I. Joe art admiring his collection . . .

 

Night_Vision_GTAO.jpg

 

:jokealert:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

:roflmao: Amazing photo lol

 

AdamStrange encouraged me to post the info below in a new thread, but maybe it's nice to have here - I have posted it twice before, and if all have read it, I'd be happy to delete this post from the thread. The post is about how benefits of anti-UV protection may be exaggerated and provide a false sense of protection:

 

 

As to museum glass... I am a bit confused. I've never seen museum glass not 99% UV filter. The below picture shows the different kinds of glass and what you "get" from each

 

 

I can see that "Museum Glass" is now a registered trademark of Tru Vue; I believe a common understanding of museum glass is that it's just glass with UV protection and high clarity (reduced reflections) used by museums.

 

And then there's this experiment, although I do not like the exposure to direct sunlight - it may illustrate that visible light in extreme amounts may cause severe damage that any UV protection can't prevent:

 

http://www.ukiyoe-gallery.com/sunfade.htm

 

Results seem to have been reproduced here:

 

picture-004_zpsjflmcgoh.jpg

 

https://ellencarrlee.wordpress.com/tag/uv-filter/

 

So UV protection may be a high-priced joke when it comes to preventing fading :ohnoez:hm Still, just found this - maybe some truth to that...

 

"To reduce the fading of collections due to display lighting, especially the most rapid fading, there is only one option: reduce light exposure. Many museums, private donors, and their framers have assumed that the primary cause of fading is UV, and that a good UV filter would prevent their collections from fading. Some advertisements for UV filters imply the same. For colours that are sensitive to light — the crux of the museum lighting dilemma — UV usually contributes less than half of the fading and often only one tenth; therefore, it does not allow one to think any differently about reducing light exposure. (The exposure scales in the centre of Table 3 quantify this phenomenon.)

 

Why bother, then, with UV control? Because for many artifacts, such as paintings with permanent pigments or monochromatic prints and drawings, the yellowing and disintegration of the media and support by UV is the major form of deterioration suffered during uncontrolled museum lighting."

 

https://www.cci-icc.gc.ca/resources-ressources/agentsofdeterioration-agentsdedeterioration/chap08-eng.aspx

 

And:

 

"Scientists found that blocking all of the ultraviolet radiation portion of the solar spectrum would not eliminate fade damage for most fabrics, but will slow down the rate of fading by a factor of about three.

 

Because so many factors influence fading, finding the effect of one factor is extremely difficult. All parameters except the one being studied must be held constant for the duration of an experiment, which may run for months or even years of testing. That is why there is relatively little research in this area. To study the effect of radiation on fading, it is important to focus on one type of material while keeping the environment constant. Factors in the environment include chemical composition of the atmosphere, temperature, and humidity. The known exposure to radiation, including the known spectrum, and known dose (intensity X time) must be identified. Then there must be sufficient duration to observe the rate of color shift, or fading.

There have been studies like this of the fading and other damage effects of solar radiation but no consensus has yet emerged on which portion of the solar spectrum is most responsible nor on what spectral weighting function is appropriate for assessing in a single “UV transmittance” figure the contribution of different solar UV wavelengths to the damage."

 

It all translates to: expose your OA to as little light as possible :preach:

 

This was fun reading:

 

"There is nothing that does more to give conservators the reputation of kill-joys than the sight of one, with frown and luxmeter, patrolling a new exhibition the day before the opening, telling the technician that he must turn down the lights."

 

And the not so fun but important part too:

 

"Conservators need to understand light, because no one else is interested in the physics and psychology of exhibiting in a dim light. Architects are always trying to increase the brightness of indoor places, making vast atria with enough light to ensure exuberant growth of a miserably limited selection of exotic plants. It was not always so, as many dimly magnificent churches confirm."

 

http://www.conservationphysics.org/fading/light_i.php

 

I need a luxmeter! :idea: (I just love how this OA disease is developing and where it's taking me :cloud9::facepalm: )

 

Unavngivet2_zpsfomr9ups.png

 

(Source: Wikipedia)

 

Again, to repeat the take-home message: treat your art like vampires, and if you need to let them burn, do it as low and slow as possible (thumbs u (like 50 lux or less* - so cheap framing and low lux are probably a much better combo regarding preservation than expensive Museum/Conservation glass and high lux 2c )

 

* "Many dyes, both old and new, are faded perceptibly by 50 years of exposure to 50 lux for eight hours a day. 50 lux is not safe illumination. It is a compromise between deterioration and visibility." (also from http://www.conservationphysics.org/fading/light_i.php )

 

PS. The info above is of course just as relevant when displaying (CGC) comic books :gossip:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sharing & caring :cloud9: - love to pass on the "fear-the-light-and-treat-your-art-like-vampires"-disease :devil:;)

 

Much easier with books, I think my CGC books get less than 50 lx h per year lol (but I have a few books where previous owners seem to have daylight-torched a lot of ink :censored: )

 

Now I wonder, is it really better to burn out than to fade away hm (sorry, bad joke :sorry: )

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
1 1