Thread: help
View Single Post
Old 06-07-2004, 09:52   #23
SMHarman
Inactive
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Services: Cablevision
Posts: 8,305
SMHarman is cast in bronzeSMHarman is cast in bronzeSMHarman is cast in bronzeSMHarman is cast in bronze
SMHarman is cast in bronzeSMHarman is cast in bronzeSMHarman is cast in bronzeSMHarman is cast in bronzeSMHarman is cast in bronzeSMHarman is cast in bronzeSMHarman is cast in bronzeSMHarman is cast in bronzeSMHarman is cast in bronzeSMHarman is cast in bronzeSMHarman is cast in bronzeSMHarman is cast in bronzeSMHarman is cast in bronzeSMHarman is cast in bronzeSMHarman is cast in bronzeSMHarman is cast in bronzeSMHarman is cast in bronzeSMHarman is cast in bronzeSMHarman is cast in bronze
Re: help
Quote:
Originally Posted by aliferste
If strong light is going to affect it then surely scanning the photo willy nilly is going to make it deterioate faster?
Yes if you were continuously scanning it, but it is a one off exposure to light. Realistically the light from a scanner is likely to be less than the exposure from leaving it in the sun for a week, (or possibly less). I'll work this out if you really want to know.

When a gallery gets a watercolour imaged or photographed, the professional will use flash but this is one day of flash exposure.

Compare to allowing visitors to use flash photography, on a popular image, this could mean 100 flash exposures a day 300 odd days a year. The sort of light level that would cause fading.
SMHarman is offline   Reply With Quote