Talk:Vantablack

Request
I'm not sure I have enough experience to do this yet, but if someone could add a picture of Vantablack to this article, I feel that it would make the material much more graspable. Thanks, Berry Time  (talk • contribs) 18:12, 18 July 2014‎  (UTC)
 * The issue is finding a picture which is available under an open licence. Do you know of one? Meanwhile I'll add an external link. Andy Mabbett ( Pigsonthewing ); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 18:09, 20 July 2014 (UTC)
 * I'll write to the company. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 01:44, 21 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Done. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 01:54, 21 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Ben Jensen very kindly replied to my email. He provided two images which I have added to the article. Perhaps only one is needed with the linked with commonscat. I'll let others decide.
 * He also provided a pdf of the brochure. I'd like to add that to the external links section, but can't find the source url. I've asked him about that.
 * Finally, he provided this url. It is a "recent publication link for material used in the IR spectrum". He suggests it as a reference as it is about the "qualifications of the material for space applications". Anna Frodesiak (talk) 20:32, 21 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Splendid work, thank you! Andy Mabbett ( Pigsonthewing ); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 18:48, 22 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Happy to help. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 21:56, 22 July 2014 (UTC)

Proposed merge
I proposed a merge with Super black. Please see the talk page there for further discussion. Roches (talk) 01:23, 29 April 2015 (UTC)

"One of" the blackest
Right now, the lead-in to the article describes Vantablack as "one of" the blackest artificial substances known, yet I can't find mention on Wiki or elsewhere of anything that absorbs more of the visible light spectrum.

If there is such a substance, let's find a citation and put it in the article, and if there isn't such a susbstance, let's find a citation and put in the article. 172.56.10.35 (talk) 05:35, 30 March 2017 (UTC)


 * Interesting point. I found this Wired article which mentions Japanese scientists and a Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences article, neither of which are mentioned in the Vantablack article. This appears to be the article they are referring to.
 * Interestingly, the URL says "ultrablack", but I'm not finding anything on that. = paul2520 21:00, 30 March 2017 (UTC)


 * I suggest immediately removing "one of" per all the sources unless good sources emerge that say otherwise. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 21:18, 30 March 2017 (UTC)


 * Done. = paul2520 21:32, 30 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Ten times blacker than Vantablack: https://gizmodo.com/mit-engineers-have-created-the-blackest-black-to-ever-b-1838092883 Unfortunately, the substance doesn't seem to have a name: https://nypost.com/2019/09/13/worlds-darkest-material-is-blackest-black-ever-created/ .  The structure seems to be similar to that of Vantablack. Kdammers (talk) 02:07, 14 September 2019 (UTC)

Another quibble: Are vantablack, utrablack, and that unnamed thing mentioned above, substances (as in: "one of the blackest artificial substances known")? They are surfaces that can be applied, grown, or whatever, onto objects. They have a thickness which of course makes them substantial, but you couldn't have a bucket full of vantablack (like paint), or create a vase entirely of vantablack (I think).--Nø (talk) 10:23, 14 September 2019 (UTC)

Does it melt or sublimate?
I'm curious about the physical states of Vantablack. Can it be made into a liquid or vapor—or just a solid? And if it can be made into a gas, then at what temperature does it evaporate?

Thank You. Pine (talk) 03:17, 19 May 2017 (UTC)

Chemical substance?
Is it proper to call it a "chemical substance". The chemical substance here seems to be carbon nanotubes, it is the vertical alignment the makes it Ventablack. Seems like calling snow a chemical substance. PoiZaN (talk) 05:33, 7 June 2018 (UTC)

Company link for Vantablack
I skimmed twice, and didn't see a link in the article for Vantablack itself or its company Surrey NanoSystems. Is there a reason for this? Misty MH (talk) 02:55, 21 March 2019 (UTC)

At the time?
The sentence "Vantablack was an improvement over similar substances developed at the time." seems a bit odd, as no points of time have yet been mentioned at this point in the article. Maybe it should say something like "Vantablack is an improvement over similar substances developed before it"? JoaCHIP (talk) 10:39, 8 June 2019 (UTC)

Anish Kapoor
It seems very odd that the fact that Anish Kapoor somehow licensed the sole artistic use of this substance is not in the article whatsoever. The feud between him and Stuart Semple is likely the way many people learned of Vantablack, and is therefore of cultural importance the understanding of the substance.

Applications
thanks for your contributions to the page. Could you please add a citation to your source for the misreported applications?&#32;-- Fyrael (talk) 14:13, 15 September 2021 (UTC)

Singularity Black and Amish Kapoor
Why are both not mentioned in this article? 109.233.47.171 (talk) 19:32, 25 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Both are.&#32;-- Fyrael (talk) 21:27, 25 February 2022 (UTC)

Wiki Education assignment: A History of Color
— Assignment last updated by Colorresearcher (talk) 19:45, 26 January 2023 (UTC)

Singularity Black Article
Why does Singularity black not have an article but Vantablack does? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 1.21.49.169 (talk) 12:37, 25 July 2023 (UTC)

Export controls
I'm not sure why the article says that the "Manufacturer claims" that Vantablack is subject to export controls. Strikes me that it's casting unnecessary doubt. If it's actually relevant, maybe it's better to cite the actual export-control list? Item 1C001a explicitly lists materials for absorbing radiation from 200 MHz - 3 THz. Papa November (talk) 16:36, 27 November 2023 (UTC)