I'm done with Cool White!

[fyrstormer]

I don't think there's anything to be gained by rationalizing personal preferences using sciencey-sounding explanations. People prefer light that allows them to see clearly, suits their mood and the task at-hand, and doesn't give them a headache. There is no way to quantify personal preference.

- - -

Almost all of my home lighting has been LED for the past 8 years. A couple years ago I replaced all of my 2700K Philips LED bulbs with newer Sylvania LED bulbs in two different tints: 2700K and 3500K. I put the 3500K bulbs in places where I want to remain alert, such as my study and our living room, and I put the 2700K bulbs in places where I want to relax, such as the bedrooms. In the bathrooms I use a mixture of 3500K LED (for power savings) and halogen bulbs (for full-spectrum lighting). That way my girlfriend can put on her makeup (on the rare occasion she does so) with a good idea of what it will look like when we go out for the evening (assuming we make it that far).

I use a program on my computers called F.Lux to adjust the apparent color temperature of the screens from 6500K during the day to 4300K at night. I tried ~4500K lightbulbs at one point but I found them to be too stark for home lighting at night, though strangely the same tint works great for the large fluorescent bulbs in my kitchen. However, I prefer at least 4500K, all the way up to 6500K, for spotlighting objects with my flashlights at night; for whatever reason, I can discern colors more clearly at a distance, at night, with neutral-to-cool tinted light than I can with warm-tinted light. (calling 6500K "cool tint" is a bit of a misnomer, since it's the color of the sun itself, but it's definitely "cool tint" compared to old-fashioned incandescent heatbulbs.)

However, there is one caveat I've noticed: I bought two Makai flashlights recently, one with a cool-white Cree XM-L and the other with a neutral-warm-white Cree XP-L, and in some cases I can actually see better with the warmer-tinted XP-L. I think this is because the Makai is a thrower, so it's most useful for illuminating objects at a much longer distance than I normally do, and over such a long distance the brighter atmospheric backscatter from the cooler-tinted XM-L becomes a problem. (this is not a sciencey-sounding explanation like I mentioned above; I actually observed the additional backscatter in side-by-side tests.) Basically it's the same reason why automotive foglights are supposed to be yellow. However, it's only a minor nitpick, because within the brightest part of the hotspot I can still see more detail using the cooler-tinted XM-L. The corona and spill are more glaring than they are with the warmer-tinted XP-L, but let's be honest, with any thrower you're going to be paying attention to the objects in the brightest part of the hotspot anyway, because the corona doesn't reach very far, and the spill doesn't reach at all.

In general, it's been my observation that deviating from one's preferred tint is less problematic when the light is brighter overall. I think this is why the 4500K fluorescent bulbs in my kitchen don't bother me while the dimmer lighting in the rest of my house looked stark and depressing at the same tint. I think this is because brighter light ensures your retinas get an adequate amount of light to discern image detail even in the darkest parts of the image, and your retinas can compensate for a little too much light in some places better than they can compensate for too little light in other places. It's the lack of perceived detail caused by inadequate lighting that causes the most frustration -- people just blame the tint instead, because the tint is easier to be consciously aware of. Your eyes and brain don't auto-correct for the tint as effectively as they auto-correct for overall brightness, and when you're standing in the dark, it's cognitively difficult to blame inadequate lighting for your inability to see clearly when the alternative is to have no light at all.

 

[LeanBurn]

Other than my blue tint Fenix E01(an icon in itself), all my lights are at least neutral white or warm white. I don't even consider buying a cool white light an option.

 

[Rockjunkie15]

Mountain biking is what led me to NW in the first place. My eyes used to get so exhausted with 6500k, once I switched to 5000k that problem was gone and I've never gone back except for my stock s2r baton which lives in the bottom of a drawer.

 

[ma tumba]

Until very recently, I'd been in the same boat. But when I had the chance to behold nichia e21a and optisolis at 6500k everything changed. They are perfect daylight tints and I am in the process of building a few lights based on these fantastic cw leds

 

[18650]

I find that I can see details and depth outdoors much better with warm tint. Cool tints make everything appear blueish-grey an flat.

The road and utility construction crews I see operating at night use cool white flood lighting on site. It's too difficult to see details with warm white because everything turns into a uniform shade of mud.

 

[Chauncey Gardiner]

To each his own. Me own each.

~ Chance

 

[Philip A.]

In my experience, Cool Daylight bulbs give a blinding light, while not showing any details - and give me a headache as a bonus.

with "cool" LED bulbs indoors, I have to step out of the room after a couple of minutes...

4000K or less energy-saving or LED bulbs work great for me: of course they skew color perception, but they give a much better general vision, a balance between light intensity and perception.

Being that we have more receptor cones for green and red (which combine to give yellow and "warm" hues), that could be an explanation.

The headache, I don't know. That could be down to the frequency: in the days of CRT monitors I had to adjust the refresh rate above 100Hz to be able to stare at the screen.

So... I've been done with "cool white" from day one

 

[staticx57]

In my experience, Cool Daylight bulbs give a blinding light, while not showing any details - and give me a headache as a bonus.

with "cool" LED bulbs indoors, I have to step out of the room after a couple of minutes...

4000K or less energy-saving or LED bulbs work great for me: of course they skew color perception, but they give a much better general vision, a balance between light intensity and perception.

Being that we have more receptor cones for green and red (which combine to give yellow and "warm" hues), that could be an explanation.

The headache, I don't know. That could be down to the frequency: in the days of CRT monitors I had to adjust the refresh rate above 100Hz to be able to stare at the screen.

So... I've been done with "cool white" from day one

You should look up CRI so you understand why you like what you like. It is a measure of a light's ability to accurately portray color. CRi is calculated against a given color temperature so it is why both the sun and an incandescent bulb both score 100 but colors look widely different. Anyways, not ALL cool white LEDs are low CRI but you will likely not find any high CRI in the consumer space.

 

[ven]

I have many hi cri, or 4000 to 5000k neutrals. But i still need the odd few cool whites, 5500k to 6500k just to break the temps up. I do prefer 4k to 5k generally , but i also like to use 5700k to 6500k now and then. It can feel fresh/clean and white at times. Just for that change or different perspective on things. if i had to pick, yes 4k to 5k for sure,, but a little 6k does not hurt. Although i prefer the neutral flavours, the cool/fresh temps still fit in my collection of tools. I have always liked choices and option, i love many nichia flavours. But for example to have all the same or all 219b and 219c would ear thin fast. I need options and choices for applications, where one surpasses the other, others suit better in some applications.

So although i prefer my 4 to 5k flavours, i am not done with CW options. Mules and closer range flood lighting i prefer neutral(and hi cri ), moderate to long range i find CW perfectly fine as long as no blue/greens or what evers! Choices and variety for me are all key in my flashlight enjoyment, no point in me having 90 flashlight in 219b 9080 for example. I need some 219c, xpl HI, xhp 35 HI etc etc etc in there for options. Maybe like a socket or ratchet set, i dont want 90 x 13mm spanners.....................even though i might not use the 15 or 16mm much.................i still want them

 

[fyrstormer]

In my experience, Cool Daylight bulbs give a blinding light, while not showing any details - and give me a headache as a bonus.

with "cool" LED bulbs indoors, I have to step out of the room after a couple of minutes...

4000K or less energy-saving or LED bulbs work great for me: of course they skew color perception, but they give a much better general vision, a balance between light intensity and perception.

Being that we have more receptor cones for green and red (which combine to give yellow and "warm" hues), that could be an explanation.

The headache, I don't know. That could be down to the frequency: in the days of CRT monitors I had to adjust the refresh rate above 100Hz to be able to stare at the screen.

So... I've been done with "cool white" from day one

The high density of red and green cones just increases the detail of your vision, not your sensitivity to cool or warm light. Blue cones do that. Overall, it only takes the first few days of your life for your brain to compensate for the relative amount of stimulus being generated by each set of color-cones. The reason humans have high densities of red and green cones is not because of the color of sunlight itself, but because we are descended from fruit-eating primates and it used to be a matter of life-or-death for our ancestors to distinguish red ripe fruit (full of life-sustaining sugar) from green unripe fruit (little sugar and lots of poisonous chemicals to prevent being eaten before ripening). We have far fewer blue cones because, in the wild, they are only particularly useful for determining the color balance of your entire visual field, to aid in accurately assessing the redness or greenness of the fruit you're looking at. Primates are the only mammals with highly-developed color vision; early rodent-like mammals lost color vision when they evolved from reptiles, in favor of higher rod-cell density, because being able to see clearly at night was far more important, to avoid being eaten by dinosaurs. (yes, the first mammals evolved while the dinosaurs were still around.) To this day, most mammals still either see greyscale (optimal night vision), redscale (good for seeing fresh meat and females in-heat), or yellowscale (good for distinguishing grass from prey), because they don't operate in a wide range of lighting conditions like primates do and don't determine the safety of food items by their color.

As for why you specifically are so sensitive to cool light...that is mostly because of how your specific brain is wired-up, not because of your eyes. For whatever reason, your brain is highly sensitive to stimulus from your blue cones, while others aren't. Since humans in tribal cultures often separate into diurnal, nocturnal, and crepuscular groups so someone is always awake to do chores and defend the camp while the others sleep, there was probably some natural-selection to favor having a certain number of people who are painfully sensitive to bright blue light.

 

[idleprocess]

The road and utility construction crews I see operating at night use cool white flood lighting on site. It's too difficult to see details with warm white because everything turns into a uniform shade of mud.

Presumably this is because within the bounds of acceptable color accuracy and in a dollars-per-lux sense, metal halide is the best choice. Incandescent is too inefficient, sodium lamps for their astounding efficiency have insufficient color accuracy, and mercury vapor hasn't been an option for decades. LED might start moving into this role - and perhaps has - since it's displacing metal halide in a number of other area-lighting applications such as parking lots, street lights, industrial facility lighting.

 

[AZPops]

Presumably this is because within the bounds of acceptable color accuracy and in a dollars-per-lux sense, metal halide is the best choice. Incandescent is too inefficient, sodium lamps for their astounding efficiency have insufficient color accuracy, and mercury vapor hasn't been an option for decades. LED might start moving into this role - and perhaps has - since it's displacing metal halide in a number of other area-lighting applications such as parking lots, street lights, industrial facility lighting.

Presently there are areas on the property I'm working, as well as the neighboring strip center who changed the overhead lighting to LED's, and, it's become very difficult walking in, or towards thoughs areas as the lights are so dang bright! They must have them set at full power! Place the darn housing in a reflector, point it toward the sky, and I'd bet the space station could pin point the location!

Pops

 

[fyrstormer]

Those lights are installed primarily for security and insurance reasons. They run them at full brightness because bright light deters thieves and vandals. They don't particularly care how law-abiding people feel about it. Maybe if they get hundreds of complaints they'll adjust the brightness -- but if they do, they'll probably use low-frequency PWM that will be even worse, because low-frequency PWM circuits are inexpensive. It's unlikely they would get any complaints at all, though; the vast majority of people are not interesting in preserving their night vision, and would prefer bright light everywhere they go.

 

[Woods Walker]

My number one priority is durability and dependablity within reason. After that beam pattern for application. Then efficiency. Finally tint. All of that said if the tint is really bad that light rarely gets used as have other options. I don't mind CW so long as it's not alien abduction angry blue or squid **** green. I do like warmer tints but if a light has a good CW and fills the necessary tool requirements I am good.

 

[fyrstormer]

LOL "alien abduction blue"

 

[Cosmodragoon]

"... so long as it's not alien abduction angry blue or squid **** green... "

Excellent.

 

[jumpstat]

My edc lights consisted of 3 McGizmos. PD-S, Mule-PD and Haiku XP-G. Out of the 3, I am always drawn to the PD-S which has a Seoul SSC P4 led which is quite old compare to the XP-G and Cree in mule. The PD-S is definitely warmer and without artefacts such as rings etc. Therefore, for me warmer is good, NW & CW much less.

 

[RetroTechie]

This suggests to me that within certain bounds of color accuracy, an individual can condition themselves to a set of cues that may not work for another individual under the same conditions.

Conditioning very much applies: tints that differ from what's normally around you, tend to be perceived as 'off'. Regardless whether it's cool or warm tints you're used to. But there's more:

When (years ago) I switched bicycle light from cool to neutral white, it felt very much like my brain had to 'work less hard' to pick up details that mattered - where sides of the road are, holes, puddles, the odd soda can or hedgehog, :wave: this at similar beam profile & lumens output.

Did some cool / warm white comparisons the other day in a dark, woody area (again, roughly matched lumens output). Some observations:
-Under CW, green grass stood out much better against a concrete background. WW tended to 'brown out' those greens, making it look more like sand/dirt.
-Otoh, a soda can really 'popped' under WW, whereas under CW its colors tended to wash out, making it much less noticeable.
-Jury's still out on already brownish items like branches, fallen leaves etc and black / gray contrasts.
Will do some more field tests soon, including all of cool, neutral & warm tints. And maybe mod my S2+ back to neutral :hairpull: if that gives better results.

So I'd say CW tends to emphasize some colors, whereas WW tends to emphasize other colors. With NW providing a nice middle ground. Obviously what works best for you, given the task(s) at hand, is what matters.

 

[Sos24]

I like neutral white the best. If I had to choose between cool or warm, I would probably choose warm, but to me to far either direction from neutral is unpleasant.

 

[thermal guy]

If I need to see something in the dark, I couldn't care less what the tint is, or the beam pattern/profile. The differences are insignificant to my need at hand.

When National Geographic asks me to travel on down to the Amazon region and catalog Poison Arrow Frogs, or I take up nighttime portrait painting, then maybe those above things will matter.

Chris

You know I'm with you if I step on a lego I don't give a crap if it's red or orange I just want to not step on it in the first place however I just got a M61W in and the tint on this thing is so awesome I don't think I'll use to much cool colors again.