Flash photography

Stefan Michalski cites Hanlan's article (Hanlan, J.F. The effect of
electronic photographic lamps on the materials of works of art
Museum news, June 1970 pp. 33-41) and the subject has come up so
often in so many guises that I thought I'd risk stressing the fair
use laws enough to share the following AATA abstracts (AATA 8-644)

    Abstract: There is no evidence for any exceptional or unique
    hazard associated with electronic flash lamps. The normal care
    and precautions should be applied and potentially fugitive
    materials should be treated with great caution. -- ICCROM

    Abstract 2: After citing publications on photodegradation and
    the effect of light on susceptible materials from infrared and
    ultraviolet illumination, the author tested the possibilities of
    damage from a studio-type electronic flash lamp. Eight
    vinyl-acrylic co-polymer emulsion paint samples, plus two white
    pigmented linseed oil samples were used for the tests, with 8
    Blue Cloth Standards as reference material. The reflectance
    spectra were obtained at the start of the experiment, after
    15,000 flashes of the G.E. FT 503 high voltage Xenon arc lamp,
    and again at the termination of the experiment after 25,000
    flashes or 336, 000 Lux-hours. Comparison of the data from the
    photoflash experiment with those from the Blue Cloth Standards
    which were exposed (a) to 336,000 Lux-hours fluorescent lamps
    and (b) to 150 hours of ultraviolet illumination showed that the
    electronic flash lamp caused somewhat greater fading. From these
    preliminary tests, however, there is no evidence of any
    exceptional hazard associated with electronic flash lamps
    provided normal care is given to potentially light susceptible
    material.

                                  ***
                  Conservation DistList Instance 10:18
                 Distributed: Tuesday, August 13, 1996
                       Message Id: cdl-10-18-002
                                  ***