2 ms·

Several things: 1. Ok, 15w or 11w - not a big deal, the difference in energy savings less than 10%. Irrelevant worry. 2. But real issue is spectral content of l

by ilkhd2 17y ago

Several things: 1. Ok, 15w or 11w - not a big deal, the difference in energy savings less than 10%. Irrelevant worry. 2. But real issue is spectral content of light, it is not same, and frankly, I find flourescent light very unpleasant.

anigbrowl 17y ago
You might prefer daylight-balanced tubes then. Alternatively, just hold out for LEDs which offer a wide range of color temperatures. Protip: if you absolutely cannot live without the incandescent look, get the bulbs you want at a photography store and put a dimmer into the power line (because they're typically 200w+). You might get some sticker shock with your next electricity bill, though.
- cameldrv 17y ago
  The color temperature is not the issue in how fluorescents look. The color issue is that there are a only a few phosphors in the bulb, and so all of the light coming out is at just a few discrete wavelengths. An incandescent produces a smooth combination of all wavelengths in the visible range. The light from a fluorescent looks like the right color on a white surface, but many dyes reflect specific wavelengths of light. This means that colors under even good fluorescent lights look different than under incandescent or daylight. LEDs have the exact same problems.
  - zokier 17y ago
    Check out Viva-Lite -lamps. They produce "Full spectrum light", which is quite frankly just awesome. I'm not affiliated with Viva-Lite, just a happy user. Having 26W model here, it's maybe bit cold (5500 K), but still reproduces colors accurately. edit: At least my lamp has quite long warm-up time. I haven't actually measured it, but I think its far longer than 10 minutes used in the article. Thats a major downside in ESL. edit2: I actually forgot to add the link: http://www.viva-lite.com/ http://www.viva-lite.com/

2 ms·

Several things: 1. Ok, 15w or 11w - not a big deal, the difference in energy savings less than 10%. Irrelevant worry. 2. But real issue is spectral content of l

by ilkhd2 17y ago

anigbrowl 17y ago
You might prefer daylight-balanced tubes then. Alternatively, just hold out for LEDs which offer a wide range of color temperatures. Protip: if you absolutely cannot live without the incandescent look, get the bulbs you want at a photography store and put a dimmer into the power line (because they're typically 200w+). You might get some sticker shock with your next electricity bill, though.
- cameldrv 17y ago
  The color temperature is not the issue in how fluorescents look. The color issue is that there are a only a few phosphors in the bulb, and so all of the light coming out is at just a few discrete wavelengths. An incandescent produces a smooth combination of all wavelengths in the visible range. The light from a fluorescent looks like the right color on a white surface, but many dyes reflect specific wavelengths of light. This means that colors under even good fluorescent lights look different than under incandescent or daylight. LEDs have the exact same problems.
  - zokier 17y ago
    Check out Viva-Lite -lamps. They produce "Full spectrum light", which is quite frankly just awesome. I'm not affiliated with Viva-Lite, just a happy user. Having 26W model here, it's maybe bit cold (5500 K), but still reproduces colors accurately. edit: At least my lamp has quite long warm-up time. I haven't actually measured it, but I think its far longer than 10 minutes used in the article. Thats a major downside in ESL. edit2: I actually forgot to add the link: http://www.viva-lite.com/ http://www.viva-lite.com/