Talk:Neon sign/Archives/2012

History

My father Al Miller, from N.C., in WWII, was a Bell Labs engineer, who downtown Manhattan, worked on the development of ships radar magnetrons. Dad said in WWII N.Y.C., he knew another N. Carolinian who had a patent on something that made neon signs possible. My guess is it was a gradual transition plug glass that was 99% soft lead glass on one end, and 99% hard glass, on the higher-heat, igniter end? The hard glass was not bendable, but lead glass could not long handle the ignition heat? If this is correct; then the man who patented this, and what it was, and how it worked, might be mentioned? In theory, 100% soft lead glass rejects attachment to 100% hard quartz glass; but glasses only 1% different, will attach? How this plug was made, might be interesting, too? ∞ focusoninfinity 22:10, 14 August 2011 (UTC)

Who was "The Jew that lit-up Broadway" with signs; presumably neon? The father of my N.C. kin was Sol Yeager/Yaeger; presumably his father, the Broadway sign maker, had the same last name. In the context of signs, who was: "The Jew that lit-up Broadway"? If neon, he might fit in here? ∞ focusoninfinity 22:10, 14 August 2011 (UTC)

See the Neon lighting article. It mentions "O. J. Gude and, in particular, Douglas Leigh" for lighting up Broadway. I have no idea if these gents were Jewish or not. Cheers, Easchiff (talk) 17:40, 21 October 2011 (UTC)

Paris Expo - 1910?

There was no Expo in Paris in 1910. Maybe the writer had in mind the Brussels International Exposition of the same year?

If only the writer has cited a *reference* - then we could figure out what he meant to write. --Wtshymanski (talk) 20:13, 10 October 2008 (UTC)

It was the Paris Motor Show at which neon lighting was presented in its current form. I think it's referenced adequately now. Easchiff (talk) 15:10, 21 January 2011 (UTC)

This page is a duplicate of Neon tube

I probably should be deleted, and the facts are quite wrong, The highest power neon tubes and transformers are 120mA and the most common is 30mA not 45mA, they don't even make 45 and 80mA transformers for neon tubes —Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.49.134.4 (talk) 07:53, 15 February 2009 (UTC)

The main image is also inaccurate - as mentioned in the Neon article, sins which use this gas are reddish-orange. All the other colours, including the blue in the image, are made by mixing neon with other noble gases. --90.206.122.228 (talk) 20:51, 28 June 2009 (UTC)

There seems to be confusion as to whether this article is about 'neon signs' which is a generic term for bright gas discharge advertising type signs (regardless of exact gas used), or about just neon tubes (which redirects here). Clearly all neon signs are not orange/red even though neon gas discharge tubes are. I suggest either this page be just about neon gas discharge signs and we create one about generic gas discharge signs (if one doesn't exist), or the 'neon tubes' article is revived as a seperate article and this one be kept as being about the generic signs. --Tony Wills (talk) 11:08, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

The question of verifiable sources is a knotty one here since the writing and correction source of the main part of this article is at least one technically knowledgeable source himself who has worked hands on in the neon industry for over 10 years. The article is a source. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.187.179.111 (talk) 08:03, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

I know it is desirable to quote factual external sources, but in this case the source is an author with firsthand technical and practical knowledge in the field formed from 12 years in the trade, and there are few equivalent sources, and there should be very little factual dispute among professional practitioners. Here, the source is the contributor himself. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jeffgolin (talk • contribs) 22:34, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

Note that "Neon tube" now redirects to "Neon lighting". I added mutual cross references between "Neon sign" and "Neon lighting" articles to improve reader and editorial awareness of closely-related and partially-overlapping coverage. Perhaps all the historical info and some external references should be consolidated into the "Neon lighting" article, and this "Neon sign" article should be refocussed on fabrication, technical details, and industry insider perspectives. The "Fabrication" section located here contains much technical information of value, which should not be lost or buried. As a newcomer, I am not yet up to doing this kind of major re-structuring, but I'm willing to make a modest contribution to any such effort.Reify-tech (talk) 18:02, 8 March 2011 (UTC)

Unsourced fabrication section

I've reorganized the headers in the article to place the extensive fabrication discussion into a separate section. This material is close to a textbook discussion of fabrication, and it is unsourced. It is thus not encyclopedic material (see What Wikipedia is not and also Wikipedia:Verifiability). I think it could make an interesting Wikibook, but I'm not a Wikibooks contributor myself. Please comment here if you have an opinion about this section. Easchiff (talk) 07:42, 4 December 2010 (UTC)

OK - no responses yet. I've arranged for this article to be copied (in its present state) to the Wikibook Making Neon Signs. I'm about to cut the fabrication section down substantially; there's already a link to the Wikibook, which preserves the good material about fabrication. I hope knowledgeable editors will improve the Wikibook itself (now that it's in existence). Easchiff (talk) 22:25, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

Please do trim it. 69.105.110.187 (talk) 04:25, 21 January 2011 (UTC)

I added some external links and cleaned up the writing in the first paragraph of the "Fabrication" section. I did that before noticing this discussion, an oversight I don't intend to repeat. Please be patient with me, I'm new at this. I wanted a chance to make a modest contribution, hopefully without breaking anything too badly. 8^) I agree that the content of the "Fabrication" section is of value, and should not be lost or buried; I am still forming an opinion about where it should be placed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Reify-tech (talk • contribs) 17:22, 8 March 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for your work. As noted above, I'd copied the fabrication section in its entirety to Wikibooks, and done some light-duty editing to it there. I think the fabrication section in the present article needs to be trimmed down now (see above), but I haven't had time to tackle it. I'd like to see more treatment in the present article of the efforts to preserve and restore neon signage.

Regarding the neon lighting article, I think of it as the overarching article discussing neon signs, neon glow lamps (and their modern progeny plasma displays), and neon lighting in buildings and art. This is why the link to the neon sign article was not (previously) at the top of the neon lighting article; it's down in the section on neon signs. I think some overlap between articles is just fine; articles should be reasonably self-contained. Cheers Easchiff (talk) 18:49, 8 March 2011 (UTC)

Where to buy the Ar- and Xe-Tubes

Does anyone know where I can buy those awesome Neon-Signs shaped like the chemical elements? Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by PhilippDavid (talk • contribs) 10:42, 27 July 2011 (UTC)

Any reputable neon glass shop. Look for Cold Cathode manufacturers or Neon Sign manufacturers. They are hand made and therefore will be quite expensive. Fishyghost (talk) 14:19, 15 September 2011 (UTC)

LED's are longer lifed and use less power??

I have done small scale tests which indicate the opposite, also not taken into account is cold cathode's emit light 360' around the tube and not ~50' degrees out the front which creates extra reflected light.

This section needs scientific citations with specific evidence for it.

Also, proof that LED use less power for the same light output.

E.g. 1000mm x 20mm Cold Cathode Produces x lumens/watt

vs

1000mm x 20mm LED Strip produces y lumens/wattFishyghost (talk) 14:08, 15 September 2011 (UTC)

File:DSpizzawingexp.jpg Nominated for Deletion

An image used in this article, File:DSpizzawingexp.jpg, has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Deletion requests October 2011 What should I do? Don't panic; a discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion, although please review Commons guidelines before doing so. If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use) If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used. This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 18:20, 29 October 2011 (UTC)