It [seems|appears} that after spending so much for a work of art such as a watercolor, for instancemany people simply stop thinking of what is best for it right afterwards, beyond hanging it in the wall. Displaying and art lighting the art with picture frame lights turns out to be the be-all of the venture and nothing more is there but to admire the painting. It may not be incorrect, but such is certainly lacking, in that with the mistaken lighting system, the painting will not endure as it should, nor be viewed itself in the best, well, light. All art lights are not the same.

Natural light?

Natural light —sunshine- is the best for vision, but not all the time for paintings and other [works|pieces} of art. For one, natural light is difficult to control. It can be bright one hour and cloudy the next, according to the movements of the heavens. For another, its ultraviolet and infrared rays can wreak substantial damage to artworks, especially watercolors, pastels and photos, and fabrics. The ultraviolet rays diminish the colors in a short time, quicker with unhindered sunlight, called bleaching which all of us are familiar with. It is thus not good for all art.

Radiant light?

It has its upsides and negatives as well. Incandescent lighting or those with strands that emit the light augment the hot tones yellow, orange, brown and red, but [renders|makes} the cooler colors rather dull. If the paintings or artworks are predominantly warm in color tones, incandescent light could be appropriate. Another negative is its greater levels of heat emission compared with other lighting systems because of the glowing filament. The heat would, comparatively sooner than later, damage the artwork.

What about phosphor lighting?

Fluorescents produce light by making phosphors inside a glass tube glimmer with ultraviolet radiation from an inert gas and some evaporated mercury that are atomized with electricity. Because it is ultraviolet energy that creates the initial power, fluorescent lighting favors the cooler hues of the color spectrum: the blues and violets and greens, thus minimizing the other tones in comparison. Fluorescents understandably also radiate high amounts of ultraviolet light which can damage paintings so like sunlight. Last, it does not emit all colors of the spectrum, so that poses a different problem for the showcase.

Is halogen lighting the most appropriate?

Halogen lighting is simply a variation of incandescent lighting and uses halogen gas to make the tungsten emanation of the filament adhere back to the filament, extending lamp usability. The action however needs higher heat amounts, so a halogen lamp is comparatively hotter than different light sources. This can damage the art by drying the oil and making it crack, so museums use movement detectors to switch lights off and on as necessary.

So what is over-all most apt?

Until recently, light emitting diodes (LED) emit light only in primary colors. Chinese scientists some years ago mixed blue and yellow in the correct amounts to generate white, and white LEDs created a phenomenal explosion of applications, including illuminating art pieces. It is white, low emission, has long life, no heat and radiation to damage art, and is inexpensive. It being new, it is not as yet widespread and as yet untested over time. Still, it seems to be the best system for everyone and all.

If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!