4 ms·
I was going to say the same thing. People are confusing "continuous spectrum" with "solar spectrum". Try comparing a "daylight" bulb with a normal incandescent.
by lutorm 10y ago
I was going to say the same thing. People are confusing "continuous spectrum" with "solar spectrum". Try comparing a "daylight" bulb with a normal incandescent. The color temperature of the sun is ~5500K. The daylight one will look insanely blue, very much like a "cool white" LED or fluorescent.
The people that are claiming that incandescent light is "natural" are out to lunch, imho. Maybe it appeals to the cave man inside them, because it's closer to the color of fire?
- cmurf 10y agoYes, the spectral power distribution is smooth for any approximate black body radiator. That low temperature (2700K) incandescent and high temperature (5000K-6500K) daylight have a range of "color temperatures" doesn't negate the smoothness of the distribution. Human chromatic adaptation accounts for this difference automatically very nicely. I guarantee you it's very straightforward to reproduce color mismatches with 5000K "daylight" fluorescents that have CRI 90 and higher, compared to actual daylight. The CRI is just short of complete utter nonsense. It's very useful in specific comparison contexts, but requires qualification. It's almost like having your kid come up with a report card that says B+ and you think, yeah OK not bad kid! But then realist they got A's in everything except they got a D in history. Oops.
- robbrown451 10y agoOur eyes can adapt pretty readily to differences in color temperature. What is harder to adapt to (or maybe theoretically impossible) is the non-continuous spectrum. Even if some things look "natural" under such lighting, other things won't, it will shift colors in weird ways. It depends on the pigment etc.
- deleted 10y ago[deleted]