Incandescent that avoids upcoming ban

I have seen a few retail establishments with 6500K.

I remember recently seeing one that still does. Now, doggone it, I
can't remember who/what/where! But I'm pretty sure it was T8 6500K.

Then there are two others that I remember better as to who they were and
where they were. One was a copy shop using 6500K "Daylight"
(halophosphor) lamps. They moved to a nearby location and did not take
6500K with them; now they use 4100K. The other is a jewelry store that
used 6500K triphosphor (uncertain about bulb diameter however), but they
recently went out of business - my speculation is the owner(s) retiring.

All of these places appeared to me icy and at least slightly "stark",
and the one with the halophosphors also had some "dreary gray effect".

In my experience, 6500K lamps are more bluish than most overcast sky,
even though that is widely said to be 6500K. I seem to think that
overcast sky should be close to the color temperature of sunlight in
space, and I see varying numbers for that - with 5780K appearing to me to
make a good case there.

- Don Klipstein (don@misty.com)

Posted by Paul M. Eldridge on May 5, 2008, 1:52 pm

On Mon, 5 May 2008 04:32:48 +0000 (UTC), don@manx.misty.com (Don
Klipstein) wrote:

>>Hi Don,

>>Our firm is pretty much using 5,000K exclusively now; mostly Osram

>>Sylvania XPS. I wasn't initially convinced it was appropriate beyond

>>the shop floor, but it's been very well received right across the

>>board -- at the risk of making this sound like a laundry detergent ad,

>>everything looks "fresher", "cleaner" and "brighter".

>>I use 6,500K in outdoor applications (they, in turn, makes the 5,000K

>>lamps look somewhat dingy) and I'd be curious to see how they'd look

>>in a commercial setting. I'd also like to try out the new 8,000Ks

>>too, but my partners are not as keen on the idea.

>>FWIW, I use SPX30s in my own home (living areas) and SPX50s in the

>>utility room.

> I have seen a few retail establishments with 6500K.

> I remember recently seeing one that still does. Now, doggone it, I

>can't remember who/what/where! But I'm pretty sure it was T8 6500K.

> Then there are two others that I remember better as to who they were and

>where they were. One was a copy shop using 6500K "Daylight"

>(halophosphor) lamps. They moved to a nearby location and did not take

>6500K with them; now they use 4100K. The other is a jewelry store that

>used 6500K triphosphor (uncertain about bulb diameter however), but they

>recently went out of business - my speculation is the owner(s) retiring.

> All of these places appeared to me icy and at least slightly "stark",

>and the one with the halophosphors also had some "dreary gray effect".

> In my experience, 6500K lamps are more bluish than most overcast sky,

>even though that is widely said to be 6500K. I seem to think that

>overcast sky should be close to the color temperature of sunlight in

>space, and I see varying numbers for that - with 5780K appearing to me to

>make a good case there.

> - Don Klipstein (don@misty.com)

Hi Don,

I would be less inclined to go with high colour temperature lamps if
the general colour scheme is warm or if a lot of wood surfaces are
used, but if neutral or cool colours dominate, I would definitely opt
for 5,000K and, quite possibly, 6,500K. Obviously, as you know, the
intended use of the space pretty much dictates this choice. If you
want to convey a warm, relaxed and casual atmosphere, 3,000K is the
way to go. If, on the other hand, you want foster a no-nonsense,
business-like, get-out-of-my-way-I've-got-important-things-to-do mind
set, the higher the better. And I agree with you that you must have
sufficient raw lumens to make this work.

Few of us realize just how much lighting and, more specifically, light
colour influences our mood. In a high-end retail environment warm
colours tell us to relax, slow down and dream, whereas in a grocery or
hardware store, say, cool colours help keep our minds focused on the
business at hand, direct us to the cash registers and then quickly out
the door (no loitering please). If I saw 3,000K lamps lighting-up a
Walmart or Target I'd literally crap my pants. Ditto 5,000K or 6,500K
lamps in a Victoria's Secret or Neiman Marcus.

Cheers,
Paul

Posted by Don Klipstein on May 5, 2008, 8:34 pm

>Hi Don,

>I would be less inclined to go with high colour temperature lamps if

>the general colour scheme is warm or if a lot of wood surfaces are

>used, but if neutral or cool colours dominate, I would definitely opt

>for 5,000K and, quite possibly, 6,500K. Obviously, as you know, the

>intended use of the space pretty much dictates this choice. If you

>want to convey a warm, relaxed and casual atmosphere, 3,000K is the

>way to go. If, on the other hand, you want foster a no-nonsense,

>business-like, get-out-of-my-way-I've-got-important-things-to-do mind

>set, the higher the better. And I agree with you that you must have

>sufficient raw lumens to make this work.

>Few of us realize just how much lighting and, more specifically, light

>colour influences our mood. In a high-end retail environment warm

>colours tell us to relax, slow down and dream, whereas in a grocery or

>hardware store, say, cool colours help keep our minds focused on the

>business at hand, direct us to the cash registers and then quickly out

>the door (no loitering please). If I saw 3,000K lamps lighting-up a

>Walmart or Target I'd literally crap my pants. Ditto 5,000K or 6,500K

>lamps in a Victoria's Secret or Neiman Marcus.

As it turns out, as I said, the Targets in my area use 3,000K lamps. I
think that Target is actually trying for a more casual, less rushed
atmosphere. But I find 3,000K, especially 3,000K fluorescent, "stuffy"
at usual retail illumination levels.

Walmart, K-Mart, supermarkets and offices in my experience traditionally
used and still use 4,100K. I find that a "neutral white",
go-do-your-business sort of lighting. Maybe a slight touch on the warmish
side of this, and easily appearing "dingy" by being white rather than warm
while being on the "low color temperature end" of "white rather than
warm".

5,000K is something I find good for workplaces, provided (as you agreed)
that enough light is provided to make this high a color temperature look
good. I think it will work well at supermarkets, provided sufficient
light is used to make it look good - now I wonder how many lux that is,
gottry try and see - maybe a thousand lux is enough, may need 2,000 lux to
look nice and good to me.
With that color and sufficient illumination level, the pure white color
looks a bit "futuristic", makes me think of a starship where there is a
lot of work and much less play, and a lot of what little play is towards
getting work done.

But 6,500K? Sorry, I find that usually goes too far, and I usually have
trouble seeing that high a color temperature looking good until
illumination levels in lux get into the 5 figures.
I am aware of exceptions: Light sources manage to appear "clean" rather
than "dreary" with such high color temp. at surface brightness nowhere
near 5 figures of lux - such as my computer monitor's screen. That thing
is over 6,500K, maybe 7,000K, and a bit greenish, and my vision manages to
make me see that thing as a "crisp icy-in-a-good-way white", hardly bluish
or cyanish, also not "dreary".

As for lighting at Victoria's Secret: I find halogen/incandescent at
3,000-3,400 K ideal there. I also have memories of layout of clothing
items and background, as well as light distribution patterns and
diffuseness of the light.
For one thing, when something is being illuminated by an accent light or
something that is effectively an accent light, so that illumination on
that object/area is mainly from one luminaire and also above average for
the room, I find the more-pinkish-less-greenish usual practice of warm
color fluorescents to be detrimental. Also, illumination of an object or
a small area from a single luminaire as opposed to from multiple
luminaires or a "wide diffuse source" has some accentuating effects, such
as on visual sensation of texture.
This is where I find incandescents/halogens working well. I do see
ability to produce CFL luminaires that can get closer to this than I have
seen, but I seem to think that requires reflectors just a little too large
to easily sell! Also, have lamp color not pinkish there - easily achieved
by having CFLs mildly overheat (2700K CFLs in my experience not only have
color temp. increase but also drift a bit towards green, away from pink
when overheated - and I see this effect being useful when carried out to a
mild extent). Making CFLs heat up more is easily enough achievable in
downlights!
As for more-dimly-illuminated areas of a retail space illuminated
unevenly by warmer color light - I see incandescent/halogen getting a
slight boost there by having higher scotopic/photopic ratio than
fluorescents of closest color. How such areas appear in peripheral vision
appears to me to count for something. I suspect that deploying
fluorescent lighting with all of these factors being considered can
do well for both energy efficiency and making fluorescent lighting
looking good to others that are considering various lighting options!

- Don Klipstein (don@misty.com)

Posted by S. Barker on April 29, 2008, 10:49 pm

funny you would say that to him. I was thinking about doing just that
(buying cases of bulbs, not keeping them with the eight tracks) My 8-tracks
are in a controlled environment due to the foam pressers and the plastic.
The bulbs will not need this specialized attention.

s

> Why don't you just buy a couple cases of incandescants and keep them

> with your 8 tracks. You seem to have missed the spiraling energy costs and

> don't seem to care about waste. Well, it's been a great 7 1/2 years for

> you hasn't it?

> Jeff

Posted by S. Barker on April 29, 2008, 10:47 pm

thanks for the info. sounds hoaky to me though.

s

> wrote:

>>What's this bs about a ban? I've not kept up with the messages.

> A recently enacted piece of USA Federal legislation bans manufacture,

> sale and importation of certain incandescent lamps, starting in 2012.

> "General purpose" incandescent lamps of a certain range of light output

> and failing to achieve some specific standard of energy efficiency will be

> banned in 2012. This will include 100 and 75 watt "regular"

> incandescents. In 2014, this will expand to include 60 and 40 watt

> "regular" incandescents that fail to meet that level of energy efficiency.

> The "usual regular" incandescents of 75-100 watts will be banned in 2012

> and the "usual regular" incandescents of 40-60 watts will be banned in

> 2014.

> The improved incandescents that Paul Eldridge and I mentioned have

> sufficient energy efficiency to not be affected until 2020 according to

> this law.

> GE is planning to put similar ones on the market in 2010.

> "Specialty" incandescents are largely not affected. Paul Eldridge

> posted a list of unaffected ones in the "candlelight thread" in

> alt.home.repair on April 20 in article

> That one can be viewed via Google (along with 24 other articles in the

> "candlelight thread" of at least 104 articles) by going to:

> http://groups.google.com/group/alt.home.repair/browse_thread/thread/

> 695cb5879218f939/b9f8c930e2f6a64e?hl=en&

> That article also mentions availability at Home Depot of incandescents

> that have sufficient energy efficiency to not be banned in 2012-2014.

> - Don Klipstein (don@misty.com)

Page 11 of 12 < 1 2 3 > last >>

Similar Threads	Posted
Re: Are you prepared for the upcoming depression?	May 3, 2008, 9:13 pm
Re: Are you prepared for the upcoming depression?	May 4, 2008, 1:53 am
Upcoming international student seminar	April 7, 2006, 5:43 am
CFL vs Incandescent	April 27, 2008, 5:11 pm
halogen or incandescent	March 3, 2007, 12:57 pm
What is the highest wattage incandescent	January 9, 2007, 9:57 am
CFL vs incandescent bulb: Brightness	April 28, 2008, 2:45 pm
Non-incandescent freezer light bulb	November 23, 2006, 2:28 am
Goodbye 100w, 75w Incandescent Lamps	December 23, 2007, 4:28 am
Re: Goodbye 100w, 75w Incandescent Lamps	December 25, 2007, 4:04 pm

XML Sitemap