Hot Toys - Iron Man 3 - Mark XXXIX / Starboost

[Motuxmen]

Uhm... Or you can just buy a glass case and light it with the right lights like from ikea.

Idk where you heard that you need "special film" to cover glass or window tint, but glass absorbs the UV light that damages your stuff, like how you get sunburn.

Even artificial light, granted it is low heat, won't give off a high enough wave frequency to damage your figures because what are light bulbs encased in? Glass.

That's not entirely true my friend. Items can still become sun faded or damaged even thru multiple panes of glass, and regular light bulbs can also wash out color. If u don't believe me, and don't want to believe the info on the internet, take a detlof case and put it directly in the path of a window in your home. Take a blank white paper and color it red. Fold it in half, and tape it to the inside of the case. Within two weeks you will see a difference in the color red that is in light, and the color that is not.

If glass alone stopped sun rays you would never be able to get a tan in a tanning booth, as the bulbs themselves are glass. You would never see sun bleached car interiors, or get sun tan in a car with window up. And almost nothing would ever be sun faded or damaged....as almost everything is stored inside not left outside in the sun. Normal glass has little to no effect on sun fade. In fact it can actually increase it because of refraction. Why do you think there are things like museum(uv) glass offered in photo frames? Or uv protected sport card cases? Both photos(or other art) and sport cards are stored inside. If just glass stopped the sun there would be no need for special uv protection(because there would be house windows and the frame glass).

I'm not sure who told you that you DON'T need special protection from the sun, and that normal glass blocks the suns damage, but you where mislead.


Edit-here is a link so you can see a good break down of what I am talking about. This has to do with how sun will effect your skin, but that ideas the same. Except that things like plastic and paper don't have an immune system or skin to protect them, so we can handle infinitely more sun then a toy.

https://www.smartskincare.com/skinprotection/uv-indoors.html

 

[bransen2099]

glass doesn't absorb all UV light. There is UV-A and UV-B, and I believe glass filters UV-B from coming through. So UV-A still can come through and fade items.

Ahhh you're right UVA is at a frequency of 400 - 320 nm and glass absorbs anything at 320 and lower. Haha my bad

That's not entirely true my friend. Items can still become sun faded or damaged even thru multiple panes of glass, and regular light bulbs can also wash out color. If u don't believe me, and don't want to believe the info on the internet, take a detlof case and put it directly in the path of a window in your home. Take a blank white paper and color it red. Fold it in half, and tape it to the inside of the case. Within two weeks you will see a difference in the color red that is in light, and the color that is not.

If glass alone stopped sun rays you would never be able to get a tan in a tanning booth, as the bulbs themselves are glass. You would never see sun bleached car interiors, or get sun tan in a car with window up. And almost nothing would ever be sun faded or damaged....as almost everything is stored inside not left outside in the sun. Normal glass has little to no effect on sun fade. In fact it can actually increase it because of refraction. Why do you think there are things like museum(uv) glass offered in photo frames? Or uv protected sport card cases? Both photos(or other art) and sport cards are stored inside. If just glass stopped the sun there would be no need for special uv protection(because there would be house windows and the frame glass).

I'm not sure who told you that you DON'T need special protection from the sun, and that normal glass blocks the suns damage, but you where mislead.


Edit-here is a link so you can see a good break down of what I am talking about. This has to do with how sun will effect your skin, but that ideas the same. Except that things like plastic and paper don't have an immune system or skin to protect them, so we can handle infinitely more sun then a toy.

https://www.smartskincare.com/skinprotection/uv-indoors.html

I didn't hear it from anyone, its from my personal experience.

The last 2 semesters at college I've had to build a spectrometer for a CubeSat payload, rofl wtf is that right

Anyways, I've had to do test runs with it and anything at higher frequencies 320nm and up weren't readable, it just wasnt there. Glass absorbs it. Now anything at lower than 320 and you get stuff thats causes serious damage, like skin cancer, which is why I was building a spectrometer, to detect this range of the spectrum.

Now I'm saying it isn't necessary, since glass absorbs the gnarly UVB and UVC but it doesn't absorb UVA, 320nm and up. You can put the film but I don't think it is a must.

And the red paper thing, I have done it before, for about 6 months and it was with my Mark IV Iron Man nothing faded except the underwear and that can't be isolated to the sun, figs kept in their boxes have faded. I had just started collecting and didnt realize that my mark IV was right next to a window getting blasted everyday

 

[Y4NK33 PL4N3T]

Zzzzz

 

[bransen2099]

Zzzzz

 

[hokietwo]

And the red paper thing, I have done it before, for about 6 months and it was with my Mark IV Iron Man

Ok that was funny.

 

[Motuxmen]

Ahhh you're right UVA is at a frequency of 400 - 320 nm and glass absorbs anything at 320 and lower. Haha my bad



I didn't hear it from anyone, its from my personal experience.

The last 2 semesters at college I've had to build a spectrometer for a CubeSat payload, rofl wtf is that right

Anyways, I've had to do test runs with it and anything at higher frequencies 320nm and up weren't readable, it just wasnt there. Glass absorbs it. Now anything at lower than 320 and you get stuff thats causes serious damage, like skin cancer, which is why I was building a spectrometer, to detect this range of the spectrum.

Now I'm saying it isn't necessary, since glass absorbs the gnarly UVB and UVC but it doesn't absorb UVA, 320nm and up. You can put the film but I don't think it is a must.

And the red paper thing, I have done it before, for about 6 months and it was with my Mark IV Iron Man nothing faded except the underwear and that can't be isolated to the sun, figs kept in their boxes have faded. I had just started collecting and didnt realize that my mark IV was right next to a window getting blasted everyday

The most authoritative research on quantifying fading damage was done in the early 1950s by the United States National Bureau of Standards. The U.S. Library of Congress undertook this research, in order to design a glass filter to protect the original copies of the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution. 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.

Several products are moderately effective at blocking ultraviolet radiation. Low-emissivity coatings on glass provide additional protection from UV. However, even the best of these coatings still transmits 26% of the UV radiation incident upon them. One PVB interlayer supplier states that laminated architectural glass made with clear or tinted interlayer is essentially opaque to UV radiation.


For a while, the straight integrated spectral transmittance from 300 to 380 nm was used, given the symbol T-UV. More recently, the spectrum of interest has been extended beyond the UV portion to cover the range from 300 to 700 nm, and a different weighting function was selected for use. With this system, the human photopic visibility function, often given the symbol V(λ) and called the V-lambda weighting function, is replaced by another function purported to better represent the damaging portions of the solar spectrum.

The damage-weighting function most often used is:



The resulting damage-weighted transmittance has the symbol T-dw. The methodology is based on the work of Jurgen Krochmann in Germany and stems from his studies of the damaging affects of radiation on paintings and other museum artifacts. The Krochmann damage weighting function was incorporated into ISO/CIE publication 89/3 “On the deterioration of exhibited museum objects by optical radiation” and is referenced by NFRC [National Fenestration Rating Council] optical properties standard NFRC 300 in computing the damage-weighted transmittance T-dw.


So, as smart as your explanation sounded, it isn't supported by the facts.

And outside of all the scientific gibberish i included above, which supports my argument that normal window glass and an ikea detlof won't prevent sun damage...use normal life experience. Why are some items in a museum not allowed to be photographed with flash, even in the "magical protection" of glass? Because the flash can damage them over time. Why do things left in store windows fade, they are behind glass? Why do the display candy bars and sodas in vending machines fade over time, they are often behind glass. Why do the carpets in your car/truth fade? They are behind glass.

Simple glass may block some spectrums/wave lengths of light, but your things will still fade.

And the device you where attempting to build can be bought fairly cheap. You can get a simple light meter from a photography store. Check the light level outside, then check it inside. When it reads nearly the same, kinda shows that glass is a poor light blocker. In fact, it's whole design is to allow light penetration. It's a window. Lol that's what it's for. If it was bad at allowing light thru it would be a wall.

 

[LipSmack]

The most authoritative research on quantifying fading damage was done in the early 1950s by the United States National Bureau of Standards. The U.S. Library of Congress undertook this research, in order to design a glass filter to protect the original copies of the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution. 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.

Several products are moderately effective at blocking ultraviolet radiation. Low-emissivity coatings on glass provide additional protection from UV. However, even the best of these coatings still transmits 26% of the UV radiation incident upon them. One PVB interlayer supplier states that laminated architectural glass made with clear or tinted interlayer is essentially opaque to UV radiation.


For a while, the straight integrated spectral transmittance from 300 to 380 nm was used, given the symbol T-UV. More recently, the spectrum of interest has been extended beyond the UV portion to cover the range from 300 to 700 nm, and a different weighting function was selected for use. With this system, the human photopic visibility function, often given the symbol V(λ) and called the V-lambda weighting function, is replaced by another function purported to better represent the damaging portions of the solar spectrum.

The damage-weighting function most often used is:



The resulting damage-weighted transmittance has the symbol T-dw. The methodology is based on the work of Jurgen Krochmann in Germany and stems from his studies of the damaging affects of radiation on paintings and other museum artifacts. The Krochmann damage weighting function was incorporated into ISO/CIE publication 89/3 “On the deterioration of exhibited museum objects by optical radiation” and is referenced by NFRC [National Fenestration Rating Council] optical properties standard NFRC 300 in computing the damage-weighted transmittance T-dw.


So, as smart as your explanation sounded, it isn't supported by the facts.

And outside of all the scientific gibberish i included above, which supports my argument that normal window glass and an ikea detlof won't prevent sun damage...use normal life experience. Why are some items in a museum not allowed to be photographed with flash, even in the "magical protection" of glass? Because the flash can damage them over time. Why do things left in store windows fade, they are behind glass? Why do the display candy bars and sodas in vending machines fade over time, they are often behind glass. Why do the carpets in your car/truth fade? They are behind glass.

Simple glass may block some spectrums/wave lengths of light, but your things will still fade.

And the device you where attempting to build can be bought fairly cheap. You can get a simple light meter from a photography store. Check the light level outside, then check it inside. When it reads nearly the same, kinda shows that glass is a poor light blocker. In fact, it's whole design is to allow light penetration. It's a window. Lol that's what it's for. If it was bad at allowing light thru it would be a wall.

tldr

just quoting for annoyance

 

[bransen2099]

That is some wall of text.

Im not doing this back and forth with you man I already said what I wanted. Its not like I don't know what I'm talking about either, like I said, I've done it first hand

 

[bransen2099]

tldr

just quoting for annoyance

I should find my own meme, feels like im ripping off yank33

 

[hokietwo]

The most authoritative research on quantifying fading damage was done in the early 1950s by the United States National Bureau of Standards. The U.S. Library of Congress undertook this research, in order to design a glass filter to protect the original copies of the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution. 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.

Several products are moderately effective at blocking ultraviolet radiation. Low-emissivity coatings on glass provide additional protection from UV. However, even the best of these coatings still transmits 26% of the UV radiation incident upon them. One PVB interlayer supplier states that laminated architectural glass made with clear or tinted interlayer is essentially opaque to UV radiation.


For a while, the straight integrated spectral transmittance from 300 to 380 nm was used, given the symbol T-UV. More recently, the spectrum of interest has been extended beyond the UV portion to cover the range from 300 to 700 nm, and a different weighting function was selected for use. With this system, the human photopic visibility function, often given the symbol V(λ) and called the V-lambda weighting function, is replaced by another function purported to better represent the damaging portions of the solar spectrum.

The damage-weighting function most often used is:



The resulting damage-weighted transmittance has the symbol T-dw. The methodology is based on the work of Jurgen Krochmann in Germany and stems from his studies of the damaging affects of radiation on paintings and other museum artifacts. The Krochmann damage weighting function was incorporated into ISO/CIE publication 89/3 “On the deterioration of exhibited museum objects by optical radiation” and is referenced by NFRC [National Fenestration Rating Council] optical properties standard NFRC 300 in computing the damage-weighted transmittance T-dw.


So, as smart as your explanation sounded, it isn't supported by the facts.

And outside of all the scientific gibberish i included above, which supports my argument that normal window glass and an ikea detlof won't prevent sun damage...use normal life experience. Why are some items in a museum not allowed to be photographed with flash, even in the "magical protection" of glass? Because the flash can damage them over time. Why do things left in store windows fade, they are behind glass? Why do the display candy bars and sodas in vending machines fade over time, they are often behind glass. Why do the carpets in your car/truth fade? They are behind glass.

Simple glass may block some spectrums/wave lengths of light, but your things will still fade.

And the device you where attempting to build can be bought fairly cheap. You can get a simple light meter from a photography store. Check the light level outside, then check it inside. When it reads nearly the same, kinda shows that glass is a poor light blocker. In fact, it's whole design is to allow light penetration. It's a window. Lol that's what it's for. If it was bad at allowing light thru it would be a wall.

Did not read. One. Word. ZZZZZZZZZZZZZzzzzzzzzzzzzzz..................................

 

[LipSmack]

Did not read. One. Word. ZZZZZZZZZZZZZzzzzzzzzzzzzzz..................................

Funny enough, that brick wall contains way more useful information on how to prevent uv damage

 

[bransen2099]

The most authoritative research on quantifying fading damage was done in the early 1950s by the United States National Bureau of Standards. The U.S. Library of Congress undertook this research, in order to design a glass filter to protect the original copies of the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution. 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.

Several products are moderately effective at blocking ultraviolet radiation. Low-emissivity coatings on glass provide additional protection from UV. However, even the best of these coatings still transmits 26% of the UV radiation incident upon them. One PVB interlayer supplier states that laminated architectural glass made with clear or tinted interlayer is essentially opaque to UV radiation.


For a while, the straight integrated spectral transmittance from 300 to 380 nm was used, given the symbol T-UV. More recently, the spectrum of interest has been extended beyond the UV portion to cover the range from 300 to 700 nm, and a different weighting function was selected for use. With this system, the human photopic visibility function, often given the symbol V(λ) and called the V-lambda weighting function, is replaced by another function purported to better represent the damaging portions of the solar spectrum.

The damage-weighting function most often used is:



The resulting damage-weighted transmittance has the symbol T-dw. The methodology is based on the work of Jurgen Krochmann in Germany and stems from his studies of the damaging affects of radiation on paintings and other museum artifacts. The Krochmann damage weighting function was incorporated into ISO/CIE publication 89/3 “On the deterioration of exhibited museum objects by optical radiation” and is referenced by NFRC [National Fenestration Rating Council] optical properties standard NFRC 300 in computing the damage-weighted transmittance T-dw.

Did you just copy and pasted the first 5 paragraphs???

https://www.fsec.ucf.edu/en/consumer/buildings/basics/windows/fading.htm

 

[hokietwo]

Did you just copy and pasted the first 5 paragraphs???

https://www.fsec.ucf.edu/en/consumer/buildings/basics/windows/fading.htm

OOOOOOOOO somebody GOOGLED..........

 

[LipSmack]

Did you just copy and pasted the first 5 paragraphs???

https://www.fsec.ucf.edu/en/consumer/buildings/basics/windows/fading.htm

 

[Boba Debt]

Motumen: While some people enjoy learning from the type of debate you and bransen2099 momentarily had, others get annoyed by anything that exceeds 140 characters.

You may want to keep it short and to the point in the future.

 

[hokietwo]

I feel a more than 140 character response brewing.

 

[bransen2099]

I feel a more than 140 character response brewing.

Its coming... I just know it

 

[LipSmack]

I feel a more than 140 character response brewing.

does a bear **** in the woods?

 

[Wor-Gar]

... glass absorbs the UV light that damages your stuff, like how you get sunburn.

I believed you. So I left my dog in the car on a hot day. He died. And it's all your fault. Yours. And your stupid glass theory.

 

[bebe13junior]

So who is really excited for this figure!!??