The B+W 420, a UV cut-off filter, is necessary to stop the UV reflected from the subject. A modified full spectrum camera becomes even more sensitive to UV light and therefore UV reflected must be shielded otherwise the images will be dominated by the purple color due to UV light. So far the B+W 420 filter works fine and there would be no need to replace it. It has been used by CHSOS in a number of art examination studies [2, 3] and for the workflow method for pigments identification  and it works fine in the panoramic photography set up . The limits of the B+W 420 filter become obvious when it is necessary to take a close up UVF image of the subject. B+W 420 has a comparable transmittance curve as the interferential UV/IR filter. The difference is that the B+W 420 is fluorescent itself under UV light. If the picture is taken from a distance and the UV lamp are at a close angle, the reflected UV light that hits the filter is a fraction of the UV fluorescence and the excited fluorescence of the filter doesn’t affect the image. On the other hand, if a close up UVF photo is taken the amount of UV hitting the filter could affect considerable the image quality.
No posts could be found that matched the specified criteria.
 Luis Bravo Pereira “UV Fluorescence photography of works of art: replacing the traditional UV cut filters with interference filters” International Journal of Conservation Science, 1, 3, 2010, pp. 161-166.  A. Cosentino, S. Stout, R di Mauro, C. Perondi “The Crucifix Chapel of Aci Sant’Antonio: Newly Discovered Frescoes” Archeomatica, 2, 36–42, 2014.  A. Cosentino, M.C. Caggiani, G. Ruggiero, F. Salvemini “Panoramic Multispectral Imaging: Training and Case studies” Belgian Association of conservators Bulletin, 2nd Trimester, pp 7–11, 2014  A. Cosentino “Identification of pigments by multispectral imaging a flowchart method” Heritage Science, 2:8, 2014.  A. Cosentino “A practical guide to Panoramic Multispectral Imaging” e-conservation Magazine, 25, pp 64–73, 2013. [ws_table id=”4″]