Opinions Wanted Ultra Vue White Water Glass

Create a Post
Karen

Karen

CGF, Certified Grumble Framer
Joined
May 14, 2006
Posts
182
Loc
North Carolina
Business
Karen's Custom Frames, LLC
I've already searched the archives and only found one thread on the subject. That thread got into more than the simple question that was asked. I already know that it has less UV protection than CC, CCRC and Museum so taking out that factor, I want to know if anyone likes using it, is it easy to work with, is it worth carrying and using it to replace my regular Reflection Control glass? I am debating on getting a box of it to try but wanted opinions first. Thanks in advance for any insight
 
It is a competing product to basic Artglass product. Haven't tried the TV brand but should be very easy to clean and use. I'm going through 4 cases of Artglass a month since I brought it in back in November because the water white glass looks so good and the price is very good.

The UV propereties fall about half way between standard clear and full UV glass.
 
Thanks alot Jeff!!
 
I've used both Tru Vue Ultra and Claryl picture glass. Customers love it for it non reflective qualities and price as compared to Museum. I wish the wholesale price was less per lite as a case of 32x40 is three lites.

I would love to try Artglass, which I believe is an Aetna glass product.

For those that have used Artglass, who is your source?
 
Omega and AMCI carry it. The price at Omega is 20% below that of my discounted TV Ultra View price.
 
If you are looking for a better alternative to Reflection Control Glass, try AR Glass. Since it is made with the standard 2.5 mm substrate instead of the 2 mm water-white substrate, it probably would cost less than Ultra-Vue from most suppliers. It doesn't have the water-white appearance, but what the heck - it's still much better looking than Reflection Control.

Ultra-Vue, Claryl, and ArtGlass would all look similar, since all of them have 2 mm water-white substrates. If you want the slightly better color characteristics of water-white, shop all three of those brands and see which one your suppliers sell for the best price.
 
The price of AR is still at least 20% higher. Those who are receiving discounts that are less than what I get are paying closer to twice as much. I am not getting any extra discount on Artglass.
 
Thanks for all of the replies!! You've all given me some great options and lots to think about. The only distributor I have that has this type of glass to truck deliver to me is LJ, so I'm going to order a box and give it a try!
 
Of course prices vary, but my local supplier sells AR Glass for about 13% less than Ultra Vue. There are no local sources for Claryl or ArtGlass.
 
I wonder if there is just a simple explanation why no one combines water white with 99% UV filtering. Maybe it's just that the clearer glass inherently passes more UV light.

:popc:
 
Pat Murphey said:
I wonder if there is just a simple explanation why no one combines water white with 99% UV filtering. Maybe it's just that the clearer glass inherently passes more UV light.
Click to expand...
Cost versus benefit is the simple explanation.

Regardless of brands, the optical coatings on the glass improve light transmission significantly, much more than the differences of the glass substrates themselves. For example, Tru Vue optically coated glass transmits about 97% of visible light vs. about 91% for uncoated glass of the same type. 2 mm water-white glass transmits a little more light than the standard 2.5 mm framing glass, but that might be due to the 25% difference of thickness.

Color rendition is supposed to be the main benefit of water-white glass, but in typical display environments, ambient light variations have a great deal more effect on color rendition than any differences of the glass.

Also, the UV coating is color-corrected, so that its color rendition is much better than ordinary glass. That is why the edges of Conservation glass products appear to be more gray/brown than green.

Water-white, 99% UV filtering laminated glass might be available, but if it is, cost would probably keep it out of consumer markets.

Still using Tru Vue glass and consulting with the company.
 
Jim, that dances around the edges of my question. How much more light (UV and visible) does optically coated water white transmit versus optically coated standard glass? Does that affect the relative total filtering of UV with coatings available today (not laminate)?
 
Pat Murphey said:
Jim, that dances around the edges of my question. How much more light (UV and visible) does optically coated water white transmit versus optically coated standard glass? Does that affect the relative total filtering of UV with coatings available today (not laminate)?
Click to expand...

Jim Miller said:
...2 mm water-white glass transmits a little more light than the standard 2.5 mm framing glass, but that might be due to the 25% difference of thickness.
Click to expand...
Actually, that answer was quite direct, Pat. But if you insist on details, here is the published data:
2 mm ArtGlass transmits <98%
2.5 mm Museum Glass transmits <97%

Do you suppose any human being could perceive a difference of 1% of transmitted light? Probably not.
 
Pat Murphey said:
I wonder if there is just a simple explanation why no one combines water white with 99% UV filtering. Maybe it's just that the clearer glass inherently passes more UV light. :popc:
Click to expand...

Dear Pat,

There is a very simple explanation. The Organic UV Absorber required to achieve the 99% light absorption between 300 and 380nm (the TruVue's version of the "UV Spectrum", which in reality extends to 400nm), also absorbs a portion of the Visible Light (>400nm). This can be easily observed by placing a piece of Museum or CC on a white paper (you will see the signature rusted/reddish tint that some would call "color corrected").

The benefit of a water white substrate is pure color transmission (no tint on white paper). TruVue puts its Organic Absorber on Clear Float because the absorption of the coating itself would cancel the benefits of a water white substrate, therefore why spend extra money for non-absorbing substrate when the coating itself is absorbing (it would not pass the White Paper test).

So there is a clear trade-off - the closer the UV Block to the Visible Light, the more Visible Light is sacrificed. If one wants pure color transmission, the UV Block cannot be too close to the visible light. That is the reason why Artglass' UV Block stops at 92% - this is the highest possible UV Block, which does not interfere with color transmission and passes the White Paper test.

BF
 
(This is a joke)... As in I am being funny. :)

Sell your customers 100% UV protection and give them a very thick towel with their picture.

This part isn't a joke.

Technology is pretty cool if they can get 99% uv protection from a spray, but 100% is something very thick that people can't see the picture through.
 
Jim Miller said:
Yes, that's funny. Here's another joke:
Sell your customers 100% light transmission and give them no glass at all.
:o
Click to expand...

:) :thumbsup:

Ill add to this. it is funny, but I get that request a LOT. I always win saying the mats will bow over time if there is no glass. Or... someone might bump into it.
 
BalticFrames said:
...Artglass' UV Block stops at 92% - this is the highest possible UV Block, which does not interfere with color transmission...
Click to expand...

According to the published data, the reflective coating on water-white 2 mm glass transmits only 1 percentage-point more light than the absorptive coating on 2.5 mm framing glass. Since color is carried by light, anything that interferes with light transmission must interfere with color transmission, as well. Right?

Can you explain the difference between the reflective coating and the absorptive coating?
 
Jim, BalticFrames post #16 is the answer that I was looking for. It's at least one explanation why no company has produced waterwhite with 99% UV to date.
 
Now the question is that if the UV spectrum reaches 400 nm what percentage of UV light does the TV product block.
 
Jim Miller said:
According to the published data, the reflective coating on water-white 2 mm glass transmits only 1 percentage-point more light than the absorptive coating on 2.5 mm framing glass. Since color is carried by light, anything that interferes with light transmission must interfere with color transmission, as well. Right?

Can you explain the difference between the reflective coating and the absorptive coating?
Click to expand...

Yes, Jim.

First, the 0.5mm difference in thickness has nothing to do with light transmission in this case. It is the *type* of glass - the 2.5mm used to manufacture Museum and CC is regular float with high iron content, while the 2mm "water white" glass used to manufacture UltraView and Artglass has low iron content. Low Iron glass has a higher melting point, and therefore is more expensive to manufacture. The non-intuitively named "Clear" glass has the green tint due to absorption of iron in the glass. However, the reddish/rusty "color corrected" tint of Museum and CC comes from the absorption in the roll-coated organic UV absorber.

Second, the absolute amount of light Transmission does not directly translate to "color correctness". The overall transmission of a glass may be very high, but if a part of the spectrum is absorbed, then those wavelengths (wavelengths=colors in the Visible Spectrum) are transmitted relatively less than others. Therefore, any amount of localized absorption leads to the distortion of transmitted colors of an artwork. This is the reason that Artglass products prefer to *reflect* the UV Spectrum and not to *absorb* it.

The main driver behind Artglass products is to preserve the color correctness and to come as close as possible to having no glass at all. In that process, GroGlass does not sacrifice the true transmission of colors to eek out a few percentage points of UV Protection. GroGlass' internal research shows that the benefit of True Colors is clearly visible and certainly preferred by all artists and consumers alike, while the benefits of a few extra percentage points of UV Block are esoteric at best, with no existing scientific proof showing that at 97% all is OK, while at 96% the art is toast. Also, due to the fact that the ambient light can be controlled in other ways, and the fact that the "300-380" range is artificially defined to achieve the marketing goal of "almost 100%", GroGlass prefers to give more general classification as opposed to exact numbers - "UV block should be as high as possible as long as it does not distort colors or sacrifice the visible light transmission."

And no, you can't have both at the prices that the picture framing industry is willing to support.

BF
 
BalticFrames said:
... GroGlass' internal research shows that the benefit of True Colors is clearly visible and certainly preferred by all artists and consumers alike...
Click to expand...

It would be interesting to know what "all artists and consumers alike" consider to be "True Colors". What light sources were used in that research?

Of course, nearly all display environments for framed art are illuminated by artificial light sources. Whatever one might consider to be "true colors", they would appear very differently when illuminated by any of the various colors of fluorescent light (cool white, warm white, 3200K, etc.). There are also variations in incandescent light sources. What about CFL or LED light sources? All of these artificial light sources are used in art display areas, but none of them produce the perfect color rendition of sunlight.

Do you suppose artists and consumers realize that variations of artificial light sources make a much greater difference in color rendition than any feature of the glass?
 
BalticFrames said:
...And no, you can't have both at the prices that the picture framing industry is willing to support.

BF
Click to expand...

Hey Jim, that's the final piece of the question that I was asking. I use Museum Glass and will continue to use it for the reasons you outlined in your last post. Maybe I'll look at Artglass UV as an option if it becomes available from my very satisfactory glass supplier, Larson Juhl.
 
Create a Post
Back
Top