# Cool White vs Neutral white



## berry580

Hey guys, I think I'm still pretty new to these things. Can someone help me? What are the pros and cons of a cool tint and a warm tint?

I just don't get it. Some people to just seems just crazy over warm tints even though they know it won't be as efficient in terms of output/runtime compared to LEDs with cool tint.

Whats the deal here?

Thank you in advance


----------



## hyperloop

berry580 said:


> Hey guys, I think I'm still pretty new to these things. Can someone help me? What are the pros and cons of a cool tint and a warm tint?
> 
> I just don't get it. Some people to just seems just crazy over warm tints even though they know it won't be as efficient in terms of output/runtime compared to LEDs with cool tint.
> 
> Whats the deal here?
> 
> Thank you in advance



i just got the new Romisen RC N3 warm white, take a look at the beamshots in comparision with the Romisen RC N3 II Q5


----------



## kramer5150

Its a matter of preference... what color tint do you prefer to look at? I have always preferred Incan and warmer tints, but I can get by with just about anything, so long as its not blue/purple.


----------



## Burgess

and just FYI . . . .


Runtimes are usually identical, regardless of which "tint-bin" you choose.



Dont' put *all* yer' emphasis on "ultimate number of Lumens".


Often, a "nicer tint" can make for a MUCH more pleasant viewing experience.



_


----------



## berry580

In what way would it improve your viewing experience?
I think I heard that certain colors can be hard on your eyes etc. But if its too harsh, then you can always lower the output... can't you? I tend to use lights with continuous variable modes.

Is there something I haven't accounted for? :S

Oh, and so far all the lights that i've had has a cool white tint.


----------



## qip

its just like having a stock incan mag but instead its led and efficient but color is same , yellow


----------



## [email protected]

Cool white LEDs makes outdoor colours and skin tones dull and grey. How bright a light is is dependent on how much light is reflected. Outdoors a warm white will appear to be brighter. The bin difference isn't visible anyway. Get that RC-N3 warm. You'll see what I mean once you get it.

Incan and warm tint is different. The difference being CRI. How evenly distributed across the spectrem. The warm white LEDs aren't as good as incan or sunlight in this regard. It's as bad as cool LED's in Cree's case but the light falls into a more useful range. For example warm CFLs might be just as warm as incan but look at reds and browns under it and it looks weird.


----------



## xenonk

berry580 said:


> What are the pros and cons of a cool tint and a warm tint?
> In what way would it improve your viewing experience?


Caveat: When most people talk about their warm tints, they actually mean neutral according to the manufacturer (around 4000-4500K CCT). We just call them warm by habit because they're warmer than the cool tints. There are even warmer tints as well, though IMO those go too far in the other direction.

Your typical white LED is actually a blue LED covered in yellow-green phosphor. It has gaps in the colour spectrum it emits and an uneven distribution overall. This causes colours to appear unnatural under the light and makes it more difficult to distinguish boundaries and colours than it would be under sunlight.

For cool white there's a gigantic spike at blue, a gap at cyan, and then a spike at yellow-green with a rapid falloff to a gap towards red. Neutral white slops on more phosphor to convert more of the blue, which reduces efficiency but gives better red coverage.

Reds and browns are very common in nature so the colour distribution of warmer tints can be more useful than getting fractionally more lumens from using a cool tint. Especially outdoors.
Increasing red light and reducing blue also has the added benefit of cutting through fog and smoke better, since blue tends to scatter easily.

There's a thread dedicated to analyzing the spectral distribution of all kinds of things here:
https://www.candlepowerforums.com/threads/220118

eg: Cool white LED


----------



## glockboy

If you want see the things you shine the light to, get the cool white, white and bright, like HID.
If you want to look at the color of the trees and sidewalk and skin tones, get the neutral white, yellow and dim, like [email protected]


----------



## lolzertank

Neutral white is awesome! You won't notice the brightness difference, but you WILL notice the tint. 



glockboy said:


> If you want see the things you shine the light to, get the cool white, white and bright, like HID.
> If you want to look at the color of the trees and sidewalk and skin tones, get the neutral white, yellow and dim, like [email protected]



A lot of HID lights are 4300K now. Neutral white doesn't have to be dim either. Just build a triple MC-E Mag in neutral white. :thumbsup:


----------



## maxilux

In my opinion cool white looks brighter as neutral white, this is for most people so, because of the human eye.
Much people told me that they see better colour difference with neutral white, i cant see it. So take that what you like.


----------



## Illum

Cool White
ad in: alot of light
ad out: Limited useability due to limited color rendition ability

Neutral White
ad in: Very useable, sufficient output for most tasks
ad out: somewhat insufficient as accent lighting due to adequate [but not superb] color rendition

Warm white
ad in: Very high CRI compared to cool white, wonderful light out in the woods or areas with alot of green vegetation.
ad out: Not the brightest LEDs [in XRE form] compared to NW or CW

To give you a good idea of the different variations from an observational standpoint, consider these pictures and the amount of yellow phosphor in each

Neutral White


 



Warm White


 

 



W100 "Q4" cool white


 

 

 



Generally, cool white is used in flashlights more often than not...so there's not really much preference in selecting tints. I personally use Neutral White and Warm whites in combinations for household fixed lighting. 

I have a L4 modded with an [M bin?] 5A tinted MC-E and outdoors it is amazing. It rivals the tint of an incandescent and really breaks the long rigid perspective about the cold CCT nature of LEDs. Its pretty hard to describe the feeling, as if warm white LEDs aren't LEDs and fit in their own category. Since the beginning when McGizmo spoon fed us with details on the Nichia 083 parties of the forum has been raging on CRI for many months now...specifically in the effects of observing the world around us through improved color rendition.

Consider these series of shots 
[1: CW on top, WW on bottom], Lights used: two MCE modified L4s on 17670s




[2: Surefire A2 on top, WW on bottom], Lights used: Surefire A2-WH, MCE modified L4




[3: CW on top, A2 on bottom]




the wall is very light green [there are no white walls in this house, or at least vacant white walls] and the cameras daylight balance may have distorted the tints. But you should be able to tell that the WW CREE is at least comparable with the A2's xenon with the absence of a central hotspot. In the picture where the WW is taken with the A2 the A2s beam came out very realistic due to the fact that the camera is not being flooded by the CW's intensity. _What the WC fail in color rendition is compensated by increase in intensity relative to WWs, so for many it doesn't seem that big of a change. _

This example kind of reinforces the sentence in italics. The CW just gave out so much light that using a fully automatic camera its impossible to gauge rendition readings without the camera stepping back to protect its CCD chip. From left to right [Control][CW][WW][A2]


 

 

 



Then try saabluster's shots mentioned in his DEFT thread


saabluster said:


> R2 WH----------------- Q2 5A----------------- MCE 6C


Note the color rendition differences as you proceed to warmer LEDs?


I hope someone with a manual camera can take shots outdoors, because thats where it really matters


----------



## Tekno_Cowboy

You all seem to be forgetting about SSC and Nichia neutral whites when it comes to CRI. Both rate mid-90's for CRI, and render colors head and shoulders above the Cree Neutral whites. (especially the Nichias)

In my experience with neutral white LED's, the shift of the color into a typically more useful range is fairly effective compensation for the loss in output. This is especially noticeable outdoors. In many cases, a Neutral LED binned 1-2 bins (dependant on brand) lower than it's cool counterpart will appear to be comparatively bright to the human eye when the LED's are driven at the same current.

I have links to several discussion threads on the topic in my mod thread. (Linked in my sig) They're a pretty good read.


----------



## fixitman

berry580 said:


> Hey guys, I think I'm still pretty new to these things. Can someone help me? What are the pros and cons of a cool tint and a warm tint?
> 
> I just don't get it. Some people to just seems just crazy over warm tints even though they know it won't be as efficient in terms of output/runtime compared to LEDs with cool tint.
> 
> Whats the deal here?
> 
> Thank you in advance



First off, while lumens are important, they arent everything.
Really, the if you compare a Q5 cool tint, to a Q3 neutral tint, you really wont see that much brightness difference. White wall hunting, the cool tint will likely look better, and slightly brigher (only very slightly), the cool tint will most likely look "whiter".

Take both lights outside, and check out dirt, rocks, trees, flowers, and wildlife. The warm tint will most likely look MUCH better, give better depth perception, and better contrast. The pictures available in various posts on the subject give some idea of this, but seeing it for real the difference is HUGE.

Ive compared 2 pretty much identical lights, eagletac P10A2's, one cool, one warm, in an outdoor test.
The cool tended to make everything a bit gray, harder to distinguish details. Also, colors tended to be way off. Red flowers were purple, yellow flowers were very pale. There was very little difference between the colors of rock, dirt, twigs, and dead leaves. Everything was a bit washed out looking.
The warm tint was much better at color. Red flowers were red, yellow flowers were yellow. Much better contrast between rocks, twigs, dirt, and dead leaves.

The most notable difference between cool and warm came when spotting a rabbit.
With the cool, the rabbit was gray, and hard to make out against the background. I could barely see it.
With the warm, the rabbit was actually more brown, and stood out well against the background, and was easy to see.

I guess it comes down to what you do with the light, and how your eyes are.
White wall hunting, Cool wins
Indoors, both are ok, but for me the warm is slightly better
In nature: warm wins, bigtime for me anyway

overall, the brightness difference between a warm and a cool isnt that much, usually 15% or so. Most people cant see the difference.


----------



## Illum

fixitman said:


> overall, the brightness difference between a warm and a cool isnt that much, usually 15% or so. Most people cant see the difference.



:huh2: I guess I'm just more sensitive


----------



## Outdoors Fanatic

Illum said:


> Cool White
> ad in: alot of light
> ad out: Limited useability due to limited color rendition ability
> 
> Neutral White
> ad in: Very useable, sufficient output for most tasks
> ad out: somewhat insufficient as accent lighting due to adequate [but not superb] color rendition
> 
> Warm white
> ad in: Very high CRI compared to cool white, wonderful light out in the woods or areas with alot of green vegetation.
> ad out: Not the brightest LEDs [in XRE form] compared to NW or CW
> 
> To give you a good idea of the different variations from an observational standpoint, consider these pictures and the amount of yellow phosphor in each
> 
> Neutral White
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Warm White
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> W100 "Q4" cool white
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Generally, cool white is used in flashlights more often than not...so there's not really much preference in selecting tints. I personally use Neutral White and Warm whites in combinations for household fixed lighting.
> 
> I have a L4 modded with an [M bin?] 5A tinted MC-E and outdoors it is amazing. It rivals the tint of an incandescent and really breaks the long rigid perspective about the cold CCT nature of LEDs. Its pretty hard to describe the feeling, as if warm white LEDs aren't LEDs and fit in their own category. Since the beginning when McGizmo spoon fed us with details on the Nichia 083 parties of the forum has been raging on CRI for many months now...specifically in the effects of observing the world around us through improved color rendition.
> 
> Consider these series of shots
> [1: CW on top, WW on bottom], Lights used: two MCE modified L4s on 17670s
> 
> 
> 
> 
> [2: Surefire A2 on top, WW on bottom], Lights used: Surefire A2-WH, MCE modified L4
> 
> 
> 
> 
> [3: CW on top, A2 on bottom]
> 
> 
> 
> 
> the wall is very light green [there are no white walls in this house, or at least vacant white walls] and the cameras daylight balance may have distorted the tints. But you should be able to tell that the WW CREE is at least comparable with the A2's xenon with the absence of a central hotspot. In the picture where the WW is taken with the A2 the A2s beam came out very realistic due to the fact that the camera is not being flooded by the CW's intensity. _What the WC fail in color rendition is compensated by increase in intensity relative to WWs, so for many it doesn't seem that big of a change. _
> 
> This example kind of reinforces the sentence in italics. The CW just gave out so much light that using a fully automatic camera its impossible to gauge rendition readings without the camera stepping back to protect its CCD chip. From left to right [Control][CW][WW][A2]
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I hope someone with a manual camera can take shots outdoors, because thats where it really matters


Tint is not the same thing as CRI, so saying that warm white = high CRI is totally incorrect. The LED with the highest CRI on the market only reaches 83 on the color rendering index, incandescent are a full *100* CRI. A "warm" LED is just another low CRI emitter with a lower color temperature. Kelvins degrees is not the same as CRI.


----------



## Swedpat

We can now see how the neutral white more and more becomes popular, and soon this tint likely will be available for every light. I even suspect it may be the main tint and be more popular than cool tints. Some people dislike it because they mean it's much dimmer than the cool. I don't agree, because the around 20% less output is a moderate difference. Though the difference under some circumstances, like when shining at white and blue objects appears bigger than so, the usefulness of the warmer tint is to prefer in the most cases I think. 
Also I understand many people experience a warmer tint to be much more relaxing for the eyes in the long run.
Well, the time will show if I am foreseeing right...

Regards, Patric


----------



## Tekno_Cowboy

Outdoors Fanatic said:


> ...The LED with the highest CRI on the market only reaches 83 on the color rendering index, incandescent are a full *100* CRI...



Nichia High-CRI LED's are rated at 92CRI, and are tested by McGizmo at closer to 96CRI.

SSC P4 High-CRI emitters are rated and tested at 93CRI.

Both are much better than the 83CRI you're talking about. IIRC the Cree Neutral LED's are 83CRI :shrug:


----------



## lebox97

My take is that for indoor/urban use - the cool (6000K+) seems (and might be 10-15%) brighter, but for rural/outdoor use you "see" more with neutral (4300K+).

My whole household is lit using 5500K+ CFL and I love it, but not for outdoors use. My old eyes get "annoyed"/irritated after a while of looking at browns and greens with a cool LED say in a forest as everything looks blue-grey...

There is a simliar thread here somewhere here where someone talked about color sensitivity with age as well. 
ie. as our eyes age - certain colors will look better, or worse depending on the tint - so that needs to be factored in as well. What looks good for my 50YO eyes won't necessarily look good for 20YO eyes, and vice versa.

take a look at my outdoor vs indoor pics of cool/6000K vs neutral/4300K light comparison in my sig below... 
(specially focus on the color targets, and which are easier to "identify" quickly)

.


----------



## EngrPaul

Here's a comparison of three tints in an equal host.

All were (and maybe still are) the best flux bin within the given tint bin that I could get my hands on.

All are Cree XP-E emitters in a Fenix E1 (which originally used a Nichia surface mount power led) with a freshly charged NiMH AAA.

*Left is a cool white, flux bin R2, tint bin WG*

*Bottom Right is a neutral white, flux bin Q2, tint bin 5A*

*Top Right is a warm white, flux bin P3, tint bin 7A*

Enjoy!











Now for people (not in this thread) calling cool white WD and WH LED's "neutral" *PLEASE STOP*.


----------



## Moonshadow

> Take both lights outside, and check out dirt, rocks, trees, flowers, and wildlife. The warm tint will most likely look MUCH better, give better depth perception, and better contrast. The pictures available in various posts on the subject give some idea of this, but seeing it for real the difference is HUGE.
> 
> Ive compared 2 pretty much identical lights, eagletac P10A2's, one cool, one warm, in an outdoor test.
> The cool tended to make everything a bit gray, harder to distinguish details. Also, colors tended to be way off. Red flowers were purple, yellow flowers were very pale. There was very little difference between the colors of rock, dirt, twigs, and dead leaves. Everything was a bit washed out looking.
> The warm tint was much better at color. Red flowers were red, yellow flowers were yellow. Much better contrast between rocks, twigs, dirt, and dead leaves.


Sorry, but that's not my experience at all. 

In order to inject some balance, I use primarily cool WC tinted lights (Q5 Nitecores) outside, and find that colours are rendered just fine thank you.

I have completely normal colour vision and simply do not see this 'washed out' effect.

For me, the cool tints are a crisp, pure white (whereas the warm ones look yellow) and they show outdoor objects such as vegetation, leaves, rocks, flowers and so on perfectly well: good contrast and accurate colour - as they appear in daylight. As a test of artificially coloured objects, I've just shone two different cool tinted lights at our two cars (one red, one metallic blue) and - guess what? - yup, they too, appear exactly the same colour as they do in daylight.

The so-called 'warmer' tints do appeal to some people, but I suspect that what they actually do is to exaggerate the warmer tones like reds and yellows. Very aesthetic, maybe, but I'd rather have my colours accurately rendered.

Now I know how individual and subjective colour perception can be, so if that's not your experience, fine. But I'd rather have a crisp clear pure white light than the yellow or orange ones in the picture above.


----------



## hoongern

I think I mentioned somewhere - again a lot of it comes from what lights you grew up with. For me, growing up with fluorescent lighting, I am used to seeing all objects in that tint, and so anything but cool white looks weird - and I can't figure out what colors it is because my color reference point is with cool white. 

For someone who grew up with incans, on the other hand, warm would be what they're used to.

Of course, a cool white high CRI would be what I want =)

So - imo it mainly comes down to preference and what you grew up with. I would recommend warms to those who are used to incans, and cools to those who are used to fluorescent... or to try both anyway.


----------



## Black Rose

I really like cool white LEDs, but I am goint to test the neutral white waters.

I have some parts on order to build a couple of neutral white (Cree XR-E Q3-5C) P60 drop-ins for some of my lights and try out neutral white LEDs for myself.
While the various beamshots give you an idea, the only way to know is to try it yourself.

Now I just need to wait a week or so for all the goodies to arrive and then I can start building...


----------



## DHart

One great way to view the subject attractiveness of a flashlight's LED is to illuminate a well printed photograph of people (portrait)... you can use magazine ads for this purpose. You will see very quicky how scenes are rendered this way.

And just for some wide ranging comparisons of tint... here's a chart I made using some of my own lights...


----------



## jtr1962

Moonshadow said:


> In order to inject some balance, I use primarily cool WC tinted lights (Q5 Nitecores) outside, and find that colours are rendered just fine thank you.
> 
> I have completely normal colour vision and simply do not see this 'washed out' effect.
> 
> For me, the cool tints are a crisp, pure white (whereas the warm ones look yellow) and they show outdoor objects such as vegetation, leaves, rocks, flowers and so on perfectly well: good contrast and accurate colour - as they appear in daylight. As a test of artificially coloured objects, I've just shone two different cool tinted lights at our two cars (one red, one metallic blue) and - guess what? - yup, they too, appear exactly the same colour as they do in daylight.
> 
> The so-called 'warmer' tints do appeal to some people, but I suspect that what they actually do is to exaggerate the warmer tones like reds and yellows. Very aesthetic, maybe, but I'd rather have my colours accurately rendered.
> 
> Now I know how individual and subjective colour perception can be, so if that's not your experience, fine. But I'd rather have a crisp clear pure white light than the yellow or orange ones in the picture above.


Pretty much my experience as well. I find that deep reds are slightly subdued under today's cool white LEDs relative to how they appear under sunlight, but other than that to me they render colors pretty well. But in a scene heavy with warm colors, you might want a light source which exaggerates those colors for greater constrast. Sure, the colors may not be accurate as defined as appearing the way they do under sunlight, but you'll be able to see better nevertheless.

Also, it bears mentioning that "cool white" and "high CRI" are NOT physically mutually exclusive. A casual reader of this thread might get the impression otherwise. There don't happen to be any cool white, high-CRI LEDs being made now that I'm aware of, but that is likely due to the need to formulate a suitable phosphor, not because it can't physically be done. So yes, based on the LEDs currently made, you need warm or neutral white if you want high-CRI, but that won't be the case forever.


----------



## Tekno_Cowboy

jtr1962 said:


> Also, it bears mentioning that "cool white" and "high CRI" are NOT physically mutually exclusive. A casual reader of this thread might get the impression otherwise. There don't happen to be any cool white, high-CRI LEDs being made now that I'm aware of, but that is likely due to the need to formulate a suitable phosphor, not because it can't physically be done. So yes, based on the LEDs currently made, you need warm or neutral white if you want high-CRI, but that won't be the case forever.



This is a point I wish more people would remember before posting on the subject.


----------



## [email protected]

Time for Eva Green or Megan Fox to clear this up


----------



## Outdoors Fanatic

[email protected] said:


> Time for Eva Green or Megan Fox to clear this up


Great post!!


----------



## Black Rose

[email protected] said:


> Time for Eva Green or Megan Fox to clear this up


I thought you were referring to the tree...then I scrolled down :devil:


----------



## Illum

Outdoors Fanatic said:


> Tint is not the same thing as CRI, so saying that warm white = high CRI is totally incorrect. The LED with the highest CRI on the market only reaches 83 on the color rendering index, incandescent are a full *100* CRI. A "warm" LED is just another low CRI emitter with a lower color temperature. Kelvins degrees is not the same as CRI.



very well, then how your you explain the dramatic increase in color rendition due to warmer tints?


----------



## Tekno_Cowboy

Illum said:


> very well, then how your you explain the dramatic increase in color rendition due to warmer tints?



Even without the increase in CRI, a warm led can seem like it renders color better due to _which_ colors it renders well. To make matters even more complicated, between your eyes and your brain, a large amount of compensation can take place. The amount of compensation varies from person to person, so it's awfully difficult to create a standard for it.

While CRI is a good base measure, it doesn't account for how people perceive light. IIRC, to achieve the full 100 CRI, there must be included wavelengths of light that human eyes can't even see. I've read that there's a better system in the works, but who knows when/if it will ever be put into use. :shrug:


----------



## EngrPaul

Even with compensation, your eyes still work better under the right lighting conditions.

In bright light, cool light works fine, and it's similar to daylight. But in low lighting, neutral tints are better on the eyes.

I can only stand to read for a few minutes using cool white LED light. But if I use warm LED light, I can read for an hour or more without sore eyes or a headache.

This is why the majority of lighting for residential use is warm/soft white. It's what works best with the human eye when the pupil is dialated at moderate lighting levels.


----------



## Illum

Tekno_Cowboy said:


> Even without the increase in CRI, a warm led can seem like it renders color better due to _which_ colors it renders well. *To make matters even more complicated, between your eyes and your brain, a large amount of compensation can take place. The amount of compensation varies from person to person, so it's awfully difficult to create a standard for it.*
> 
> While CRI is a good base measure, it doesn't account for how people perceive light. IIRC, to achieve the full 100 CRI, there must be included wavelengths of light that human eyes can't even see. I've read that there's a better system in the works, but who knows when/if it will ever be put into use. :shrug:



hmm, I certainly agree with this


----------



## xenonk

EngrPaul said:


> Here's a comparison of three tints in an equal host.


*Very* nice pictures! Especially the one looking down the barrels. The reflection off the reflector really shows off the differences in phosphor application between emitters.



Illum said:


> very well, then how your you explain the dramatic increase in color rendition due to warmer tints?


There's a little gain in CRI from the additional phosphorescent conversion, though it's not the driving factor.

The output spectrum is shifted towards generally more "useful" colours even though it remains unevenly distributed. Chiefly important are the reds and browns, which are very common in every day objects (especially outdoors). Green output remains good on warmer emitters and your eyes are especially sensitive to that wavelength anyway. Blue drops off a bit, but since the LED naturally has a gigantic spike of that wavelength this isn't necessarily a bad thing.


----------



## jtr1962

EngrPaul said:


> Even with compensation, your eyes still work better under the right lighting conditions.
> 
> In bright light, cool light works fine, and it's similar to daylight. But in low lighting, neutral tints are better on the eyes.
> 
> I can only stand to read for a few minutes using cool white LED light. But if I use warm LED light, I can read for an hour or more without sore eyes or a headache.
> 
> This is why the majority of lighting for residential use is warm/soft white. It's what works best with the human eye when the pupil is dialated at moderate lighting levels.


Everything is pretty much true here except the last part. At typical residential lighting levels in the 100 to 500 lux area 3500K to 4100K is the sweet spot for most people according to the Kruithof curve. This is more or less where most neutral LED tints fall.


----------



## jtr1962

Illum said:


> very well, then how your you explain the dramatic increase in color rendition due to warmer tints?


To add to what a few others said, a warmer tinted LED basically increases contrast if you're viewing a scene heavy in warm colors. And contrast is actually what our vision is based on to a large extent. That doesn't necessarily mean it has better color rendering overall, or that the colors are more accurate. It just means you can distinguish between subtle shades of warmer colors more easily than with a cooler LED. In a scene heavy with neutrals or cooler colors, the warm LED would actually be _worse_. What it all boils down to is to use the right tool for the job. If you're viewing a typical cityscape, a cool LED works best. If you're looking at nature, a warm or neutral one would. If you're looking at something in between, it probably boils down to your preferences.

Now if only someone would make high-CRI cool LEDs.....


----------



## fareast

jtr1962 said:


> Everything is pretty much true here except the last part. At typical residential lighting levels in the 100 to 500 lux area 3500K to 4100K is the sweet spot for most people according to the Kruithof curve. This is more or less where most neutral LED tints fall.




That Kruithof curve is very interesting to read about. :thumbsup:


----------



## Swedpat

*CRI difference?*

Last week I received my two purple Maglites, a 2D and a 3D. These are not really the same colour, because Maglite has at least two different shades of purple, and I got one of each. When looking at them under cool LED-light they appear as very identical. But under incandescent light like the home light bulbs and MagCharger the difference is significant. Look at these two photos and you will see it clearly. 
Also I later compared with my EagleTac M2XC4 neutral white, and the difference was significant compared to P7 LED, but not that significant as with MagCharger.
I understand this remarkable difference is an example of the difference of CRI? 
*
Edit: at request I also took a picture with EagleTac M2XC4 neutral white as light source. This actually made me surprised. The difference of the photo is much less than what I actually experience with my eyes.* *According to the photo it's closer to the cool white LED, but according to my LIVE view it's closer to the incan...* 
*Anyway; incandescent light is superior when it comes to true colour rendition!*

*Upper picture: Maglite 3D/Malkoff P7
Middle picture: **EagleTac M2XC4* *neutral white*
*Lower picture: Maglite MagCharger*











Regards, Patric


----------



## zipplet

*Re: CRI difference?*

Very interesting/informative pictures swedpat! Please post a pic under a neutral LED too 
Somewhere I have a pic of cool vs neutral LED with my Raw NS/Raw AL and the difference is also quite noticeable like this, I will try to find it.


----------



## Outdoors Fanatic

*Re: CRI difference?*



Swedpat said:


> Last week I received my two purple Maglites, a 2D and a 3D. These are not really the same colour, because Maglite has at least two different shades of purple, and I got one of each. When looking at them under cool LED-light they appear as very identical. But under incandescent light like the home light bulbs and MagCharger the difference is significant. Look at these two photos and you will see it clearly.
> Also I later compared with my EagleTac M2XC4 neutral white, and the difference was significant compared to P7 LED, but not that significant as with MagCharger.
> I understand this remarkable difference is an example of the difference of CRI?
> 
> *Upper picture: Maglite 3D/Malkoff P7
> Lower picture: Maglite MagCharger*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Regards, Patric


Its impossible to perceive real colors under LEDs illumination, they both look ghostly blue. Now just look at those Mags under the incandescent perfect color rendering light.. WOW!

Great post!


----------



## Swedpat

Many thanks for the replies! 
I have edited my post and placed in a photo with EagleTac M2XC4 neutral white as light source as well.

Regards, Patric


----------



## lebox97

*Re: CRI difference?*

very nice pics!
:thumbsup:
and, your comment below intrigues me...

what camera settings did you use?
perhaps the settings needs to be tweaked further to get a closer representation in pic to what your eye sees? (this is same battle I am fighting to create the pics for the comparision link in my sig below - I think I have it close now with a custom setting, but it could certainly always be improved upon) 
:thinking:
cheers




Swedpat said:


> *...
> Edit: at request I also took a picture with EagleTac M2XC4 neutral white as light source. This actually made me surprised. The difference of the photo is much less than what I actually experience with my eyes.* *According to the photo it's closer to the cool white LED, but according to my LIVE view it's closer to the incan...*
> *Anyway; incandescent light is superior when it comes to true colour rendition!*
> ...


----------



## Swedpat

Thanks lebox97,

If you with setting mean white balance, the setting was on AUTO when I took these pictures. It's also another setting which calls "colour level(or position, don't know what is the best word)" (directly translated from swedish) and this is on NORMAL. 

Regards, Paric


----------



## gunga

Just a note. Auto white balance tends to try and correct things to daylight standard. If you want the picture to be a better match to what you see, try setting to daylight white balance. THis will show you the differences in colour for each beam.


----------



## lebox97

+1
when camera is set for auto - it makes adjustments for light, focus, ISO everything based on the light output - so for our purposes the results will be skewed...

I have not tried daylight balance though - I'll give it a "shot"



QUOTE=gunga;3094230]Just a note. Auto white balance tends to try and correct things to daylight standard. If you want the picture to be a better match to what you see, try setting to daylight white balance. THis will show you the differences in colour for each beam.[/QUOTE]


----------



## berry580

*Re: CRI difference?*

WOW... the difference is astonishing to say the least....


Swedpat said:


> Last week I received my two purple Maglites, a 2D and a 3D. These are not really the same colour, because Maglite has at least two different shades of purple, and I got one of each. When looking at them under cool LED-light they appear as very identical. But under incandescent light like the home light bulbs and MagCharger the difference is significant. Look at these two photos and you will see it clearly.
> Also I later compared with my EagleTac M2XC4 neutral white, and the difference was significant compared to P7 LED, but not that significant as with MagCharger.
> I understand this remarkable difference is an example of the difference of CRI?
> *
> Edit: at request I also took a picture with EagleTac M2XC4 neutral white as light source. This actually made me surprised. The difference of the photo is much less than what I actually experience with my eyes.* *According to the photo it's closer to the cool white LED, but according to my LIVE view it's closer to the incan...*
> *Anyway; incandescent light is superior when it comes to true colour rendition!*
> 
> *Upper picture: Maglite 3D/Malkoff P7
> Middle picture: **EagleTac M2XC4* *neutral white*
> *Lower picture: Maglite MagCharger*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Regards, Patric


----------



## lebox97

ok, here is a couple of sets with white balance set to "daylight" all other "auto" settings off.


































































H60 / H60W / SF M6 / ET M2C4 CW / ET M2SC4 NW (last 3 using diffuser lens/filter)


:devil:


----------



## xenonk

Looks like a substantial improvement with the warm/neutral emitters.
That M2C4 CW, though... :green:


----------



## lebox97

yah, that one is another "doesn't look like that in person" pics

not sure what is going on, why that one came out so different, and or wonder if the diffuser skews thing a bit as the M6 HO doesn't look that yellow either (new cells) compared to the others - I'll recheck settings... 
try again later...

in search of ... the holy grail... 




xenonk said:


> Looks like a substantial improvement with the warm/neutral emitters.
> That M2C4 CW, though... :green:


----------



## lebox97

ok, redo on the previous pics - *the good the bad the ugly
*(guess my camera doesn't like Cool to much - it's not quite that pronounced a blue/green color in person) :ironic:

added some outdoor comparisons

am really liking the M2SC4 NW though!


----------



## Moonshadow

Very interesting. The H60 (first column) looks by far the most natural to me, and the three warm ones seem to have a very orangey colour cast. Looks like I'll be sticking to cool tints.

Are the walls in that corridor _really_ painted a light orange ?


----------



## jtr1962

Moonshadow said:


> Very interesting. The H60 (first column) looks by far the most natural to me, and the three warm ones seem to have a very orangey colour cast.


Another vote for the H60. I like the way the warm/neutral tints bring out the reds in the magazine, but I'm not thrilled about their off-white color balance. If you could combine their red rendition with the color balance of the H60, IMO that would be perfect.


----------



## kramer5150

fascinating thread!!! thanks for all who have contributed

FWIW, the wiki page has a ton of information on it as well.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Color_rendering_index


----------



## lebox97

yikes! 



kramer5150 said:


> ...
> FWIW, the wiki page has a ton of information on it as well.
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Color_rendering_index




um, no that's the problem... between my camera and the color output from the different LED (plus of course your and my monitor color settings, and when it was last calibrated - mine has never been calibrated) - what you see is what I got (no image manipulation).
my wall paint color (ivory white) is closer to what is seen in column 5 (on my monitor).




Moonshadow said:


> Very interesting. The H60 (first column) looks by far the most natural to me, and the three warm ones seem to have a very orangey colour cast. Looks like I'll be sticking to cool tints.
> 
> Are the walls in that corridor _really_ painted a light orange ?


----------



## hoongern

Of late, I have been wondering why I don't seem to see many lights between 5000-6000k since that's where daylight is, and to me since I'm seeing most things in daylight, I'd like to have my flashlights be daylight-like tinted as well. Tints which come to mind would be WJ... or if you like warmer/cooler, either 3A or WD. 

However, I haven't seen to have seen these tints in many flashlights.. and rather only further away from daylight, i.e. WC and 5A (at least it seems to me) 

I wouldn't mind trying out a WJ/3A but I can't seem to find any??


----------



## Outdoors Fanatic

hoongern said:


> Of late, I have been wondering why I don't seem to see many lights between 5000-6000k since that's where daylight is, and to me since I'm seeing most things in daylight, I'd like to have my flashlights be daylight-like tinted as well. Tints which come to mind would be WJ... or if you like warmer/cooler, either 3A or WD.
> 
> However, I haven't seen to have seen these tints in many flashlights.. and rather only further away from daylight, i.e. WC and 5A (at least it seems to me)
> 
> I wouldn't mind trying out a WJ/3A but I can't seem to find any??


Tint, Kelvin degrees and color spectrum are very distinct things. Daylight is full 100 CRI, unlike LEDs...


----------



## hoongern

Outdoors Fanatic said:


> Tint, Kelvin degrees and color spectrum are very distinct things. Daylight is full 100 CRI, unlike LEDs...



Yeah, I know that the LED CRI is going to be way lower, but right now, I'm just talking about tint =) Because even if I don't get as good color rendition, I still like having the same tint.


----------



## bluepilgrim

I'm not quite sure how this relates to falshlights, but I thought was interesting, and was something I should know when thinking about color:

http://www.physorg.com/news173626469.html

*Study shows that color plays musical chairs in the brain (w/ Video)*

*October 1st, 2009 *
*Color is normally thought of as a fundamental attribute of an object: a red Corvette, a blue lake, a pink flamingo. *
*Yet despite this popular notion, new research suggests that our perception of color is malleable, and relies heavily on *
*biological processes of the eye and brain. *

*The brain's neural mechanisms keep straight which color belongs to what object, so one doesn't mistakenly see a blue flamingo *
*in a pink lake. *
*But what happens when a color loses the object to which it is linked? Research at the University of Chicago has demonstrated, *
*for the first **time, that instead of disappearing along with the lost object, the color latches onto a region of some other object in *
*view - a finding **that reveals a new basic property of sight. *
*[...]*


----------



## ColoradoClimber

Great photos. This helps with a question I was about to ask.


----------



## quasar54

Great information in this thread... I've been so convinced that my next AA light purchase will be a Neutral White instead of the Q5.

On that point - where can I learn more about the different LED models, their tint, and the different bins? I suppose a table format would be best!

Sorry if this has already been answered somewhere but my google-fu has failed me this time.


----------



## Illum

*grumble*

I need Neutral Whites in my lights...I have none, either too cool, or too warm.


----------



## bluepilgrim

http://www.cree.com/Products/pdf/XLamp7090XR-E_B&L.pdf will help with that, as will other manufacturer data sheets -- but it may take a little puzzling out to understand how to read them. 
Also see https://www.candlepowerforums.com/threads/245763 for a pretty color chart (post #8). Also https://www.candlepowerforums.com/threads/156772 

'led bins' or led binning' seem to be decent search terms. There is also some information in the FAQ at https://www.candlepowerforums.com/threads/172991.


----------



## mbw_151

Even Color Rendering Index (CRI) is a deceptive measurement because it references a standard. Most of the CRI numbers quoted there reference the Incandescent standard, a perfect match is a CRI of 1.00. I'm not sure of the exact color temperature, its close to 3000K. There is also a "daylight" standard that references cloudless sunlight at very high color temperature of around 6500K. So if you want a light that looks like an incandescent, it's a "warm" light. If you want a light that looks like a bright cloudless day, it's a "cool" light. Lighting is very subjective, Measurements are all about the reference standard.


----------



## berry580

mbw_151 said:


> Lighting is very subjective, Measurements are all about the reference standard.


I agree, lighting is indeed very subjective.

My flashaholicism (new word? lol) pretty much started with LEDs and they've always had a cool white tint until i bought the M2XC4 Neutral which i initially thought was quite warm already. It wasn't until i played around with my sister's Maglite 4D Incad. (now I traded my Fenix L1D for the mag) did I thought how "neutral" my M2XC4's tint is.


----------



## bluepilgrim

One thing I've been wondering about is how the lux/lumens are measured -- assumedly with a photovoltaic cell -- and what the spectral sensitivity of the device is. If the luxmeter is more sensitive to blues than reds then maybe the warmer lights would register as less. Or maybe it's sensitive to infrared and ultraviolet so it would say the light is brighter than the eye could see (and whose eye? would color deficiency mean that the light would seem dimmer than for a person who could see more of the spectrum?). 

I guess they have a fair bit of this worked out for the better equipment, but I don't know how much the 'objective' brightness would be off from what a human would see. I'll bet this would at least create problems with making luxmeters, and maybe require some circuitry for wavelength compensation. It would not be the same frequency sensitivity as for a camera with film or a digital camera, I'll bet.


----------



## Launch Mini

I have a SPY in both the warm white and the cool white.
When they are both on the default settings, the low on the CW is much "brighter" than the WW. This is just my eyes seeing the light on the roof ( very scientific), but level 3 they are about the same. ie what I would call intensity on the ceiling.
However, on 3 and up, the CW seems to have more "reflection" on surfaces than does the WW.

Also on my "mailbox' test in the alley, they both light up the mail box at then end of the street, but the CW seems to provide more "reflection" again. The mail box is one of those super boxes with the "reflective" painted surfaces.

I like them both, but find myself carrying the WW more, as it's not as "harsh" for around the house useage at night.


----------



## Midnight Oil

Illum, 

I'm new to led flashlights. I just received my ET P100A2 NW and I like it very much; it's a great deal for the price. Despite my newly given "enlightened" status, I'm still very much in the dark. I have several questions, after reading your post with the pictures showing different emitters coated with different amount of yellow phosphor.

1. What other parameters beside the amount of yellow phosphor determine the color bin and thus the tint of a led? If the amount of yellow phosphor is the only factor that determines its tint, why are the NW and WW leds usually of a lower flux bin compared to their cool counterparts? Why don't one get say a XP-E R2 NW or WW just by slapping more yellow phosphor onto an otherwise CW led? Or is it that the very process of putting on more phosphor decreases the light output of the led, lowers its efficienty, and thus bump down its flux bin?

2. For mid-range lights (talking about cost) , why are the NW and WW leds usually one or even two flux bins lower than the CW leds? Is it because there is less demand for them as they don't appear to be as bright?

3. What is it about the led manufacturing process that is so variable that there is a color bin lottery? Why don't manufacturers just make and sell them in separate color bin batches?

Thanks for your time.


----------



## bovsbaitboxes

I am setting up a fish tank room you seem to have alot of different light I am looking to use led rope lights to light up tanks which would you use for this a cool white or a pure white thanks sorry to hijack thread John




DHart said:


> One great way to view the subject attractiveness of a flashlight's LED is to illuminate a well printed photograph of people (portrait)... you can use magazine ads for this purpose. You will see very quicky how scenes are rendered this way.
> 
> And just for some wide ranging comparisons of tint... here's a chart I made using some of my own lights...


----------



## benthiccracker

lebox97 said:


> My take is that for indoor/urban use - the cool (6000K+) seems (and might be 10-15%) brighter, but for rural/outdoor use you "see" more with neutral (4300K+).
> 
> My whole household is lit using 5500K+ CFL and I love it, but not for outdoors use. My old eyes get "annoyed"/irritated after a while of looking at browns and greens with a cool LED say in a forest as everything looks blue-grey...
> 
> There is a simliar thread here somewhere here where someone talked about color sensitivity with age as well.
> ie. as our eyes age - certain colors will look better, or worse depending on the tint - so that needs to be factored in as well. What looks good for my 50YO eyes won't necessarily look good for 20YO eyes, and vice versa.
> 
> take a look at my outdoor vs indoor pics of cool/6000K vs neutral/4300K light comparison in my sig below...
> (specially focus on the color targets, and which are easier to "identify" quickly)
> 
> .


very informative website and links sir!


----------



## search_and_rescue

Moonshadow said:


> For me, the cool tints are a crisp, pure white (whereas the warm ones look yellow) and they show outdoor objects such as vegetation, leaves, rocks, flowers and so on perfectly well: good contrast and accurate colour - as they appear in daylight. As a test of artificially coloured objects, I've just shone two different cool tinted lights at our two cars (one red, one metallic blue) and - guess what? - yup, they too, appear exactly the same colour as they do in daylight.
> 
> The so-called 'warmer' tints do appeal to some people, but I suspect that what they actually do is to exaggerate the warmer tones like reds and yellows. Very aesthetic, maybe, but I'd rather have my colours accurately rendered.


That has been my discovery and experience using warm tinted lights during night hikes. I am re-ordering my lights in Cool White version.


----------



## Tachead

search_and_rescue said:


> That has been my discovery and experience using warm tinted lights during night hikes. I am re-ordering my lights in Cool White version.



True neutral white should be 4500-5000K of pure white light guys not yellowish. Warm white is what you describe. Cool white is towards the blue/purplish spectrum and does not accurately reproduce colours due to its generally much lower CRI even though you might think it does. You need to research CRI as it is more applicable to how colours are represented/rendered when selecting an emitter. Low CRI cool white not only greys out colours but, is not as good at penetrating fog/rain/smoke and causes higher reflections off objects. The problem is manufactures like to generalize and/or bend the facts of what NW/WW/CW actually are so it is more important to look for both the CRI rating of the emitter in a light and the CCT of the light. The higher the CRI the closer colours will be to natural sunlight(100 CRI) and the CCT will be personal preference but, clear afternoon sunlight would be in the 5000-5600K range and dusk/dawn about 2000-3000K.


----------



## wildcatter

I have to say when I started using LED lights about 8 or 10 years ago, I had also started wearing glasses around that same time. I blamed my degradation of my vision for also causing night blindness to set in. However I judged this by my lack of being able to read in the same light I did a year or two sooner. Then the first year I used the light hunting, being a bow hunter, I started having trouble seeing blood at night, and tracking my deer. So I responded with brighter LED flashlights,,, *BIG MISTAKE,,,, *all that did was make matters worse. I wrote this off to my ageing vision. 

Now I decided about a few month's ago to update my lights, I started with a new Thrunite Neutron for hunting. I immediately noticed how much easier it was on the eye's!! So I decided to get away from the traditional game light (Prowler pro hunter, spot and headlamp) and try the highly talked about TN-32 for my spotlight needs and long distance capabilities. This neutral light became very obvious finding coon that are dark bands of gray and black hiding in trees that are grey (never brown as people state them) the new TN-32 made trhe huge difference here. I was also very impressed at it's better throw over cool white in the mist and haze or light fog I hunt predators in at night much of the time also. I didn't really notice a loss of distance on clear dry nights. 

But what really proved to me the advantages for my type of use came just about 3 weeks ago. I used it the last two weeks of our season, and finally, January the 29th or 30th, I had to track a deer after taking it at last light. This was when it became obvious that after blaming my sight for loosing my tracking skill's, this whole time it was the Blue Purple cast of the cool white light coupled with trying to use to many Lumens to compensate for not being able to see the red blood I was looking for. This Neutral white LED in the Neutron made it obvious just how detrimental cool white LED's can be to some uses. I even at one point a few years back bought blue filters to try and see blood in the dark, everyone claims that is what blue is for,,,,,,, ya if you are a CSI detective using the chemical spray needed to pick this up under blue light. Trust me Blue only makes detecting the red up in the dark even worse that a plain cool white emitter does.

It is amazing how a flashlight LED can fix 8 or 10 years of vision degradation over night. Being retired for 25 years and an outdoorsman, Camper, Lake Erie licensed fishing guide, and full time bow hunter, puts me outdoors most of my life, and a lot at night. It has become apparent just how important the type of LED can be for different users, since trying this new too me anyways, LED. The neutral white LED's are definitely made for users like me.

I would never suggest any other type of light to a hunter, or outdoor sportsman but a neutral white light. In the city where surroundings are already affected by the reflections of surrounding lights this may be totally different. But on the water and in the woods, fields and swamps the Neutral white Led lights are much better for the needs of the avid outdoorsman that needs to see real life, in real color! JME


----------



## markr6

Tachead said:


> True neutral white should be 4500-5000K of pure white light guys not yellowish. Warm white is what you describe. Cool white is towards the blue/purplish spectrum and does not accurately reproduce colours due to its generally much lower CRI even though you might think it does. You need to research CRI as it is more applicable to how colours are represented/rendered when selecting an emitter. Low CRI cool white not only greys out colours but, is not as good at penetrating fog/rain/smoke and causes higher reflections off objects. The problem is manufactures like to generalize and/or bend the facts of what NW/WW/CW actually are so it is more important to look for both the CRI rating of the emitter in a light and the CCT of the light. The higher the CRI the closer colours will be to natural sunlight(100 CRI) and the CCT will be personal preference but, clear afternoon sunlight would be in the 5000-5600K range and dusk/dawn about 2000-3000K.



I agree with all of this.

Cool white rendering colors accurately? Wow, nothing further from the truth.


----------



## eh4

Imo this is one of the better threads to bring back from the dead. 
I love the neutral and warm side of neutral lights because in addition to letting me see better without as much glare, and seemingly see more with less light, they also seem to disturb wildlife less, the extreme sensitivity to blue light may be something we have in common. 
I can also certainly go from dark or firefly mode to a utility level of light, and then back to dark or firefly much more comfortably with warm side of neutral lights, no absolutes but the degree of night blindness after turning off a cool light is noticeably greater to me.


----------



## wildcatter

eh4 said:


> I love the neutral and warm side of neutral lights because in addition to letting me see better without as much glare, and seemingly see more with less light, they also seem to disturb wildlife less, the extreme sensitivity to blue light may be something we have in common.
> I can also certainly go from dark or firefly mode to a utility level of light, and then back to dark or firefly much more comfortably with warm side of neutral lights, no absolutes but the degree of night blindness after turning off a cool light is noticeably greater to me.



I absolutely have found this to be fact, as Bow hunting deer from January to February am always going in an hour or mor before sunup, and coming out in the evenings an hour or maybe more after sundown. I try not to use any light at this time to not only keep from drawing attention to animals, but where I hunt many will tresspass and hunt or steel stands and cameras where they see hunters active. For me this NW light does just as eh4 mentions. I need far less lumens, and can maintain my night vision without being blinded as I would have been before with my other LED's. This is one thing I think Thrunite does excellent as many others use more lumens than needed for their lowest settings. With the NW, a lot of what I need to see, reading a compass or finding items in my pack I can do much better with 0.4 lumens, and not affect my vision when I'm done with it.


----------



## eh4

Hey wildcatter, thanks for turning me onto the Thrunite Neutron btw, that looks like a great light, and I've currently given away all of my AA lights, past time to remedy that. 
For a battery vampire this might just be the best I've seen yet. ..
"Working Voltage: 0.9 - 5V
Moonlight:0.04 lumens/68 days"
-as per selfbuilt's standard, excellent reviews: http://www.candlepowerforums.com/vb...and-2C-(1xRCR-18650-2xCR123A-RCR)-2014-Review
-that's for two AA batteries, so every possible bit of juice is going to be drained from the two AAs... are there ANY mA left at anywhere close to .45V? 
I wonder how hard it is to elecroplate gold to aluminum for a non corrodable battery compartment, Because that light is Made for popping open old alkaline AAs.


----------



## wildcatter

eh4 said:


> Hey wildcatter, thanks for turning me onto the Thrunite Neutron btw, that looks like a great light, and I've currently given away all of my AA lights, past time to remedy that.
> For a battery vampire this might just be the best I've seen yet. ..
> "Working Voltage: 0.9 - 5V
> Moonlight:0.04 lumens/68 days"
> -as per selfbuilt's standard, excellent reviews: http://www.candlepowerforums.com/vb...and-2C-(1xRCR-18650-2xCR123A-RCR)-2014-Review
> -that's for two AA batteries, so every possible bit of juice is going to be drained from the two AAs... are there ANY mA left at anywhere close to .45V?
> I wonder how hard it is to elecroplate gold to aluminum for a non corrodable battery compartment, Because that light is Made for popping open old alkaline AAs.


Not sure but I have retired all my AA lights and am now either 18350 or 18650 for any of my EDC lights, and anything bigger than EDC or for tactical lights 100% 18650,,, but if I were going to go with the Neutron 2A v2 over the 2c v2, I wouldn't use the alkaline, I would go with a Ni-mh in a 2500 ma or better. But I'm a cheapskate, but demand reliability.


----------



## eh4

..... duplicate post.


----------



## eh4

I'm right there with you, but there's a different standard for SHTF/worst case, where one might need to use any random partially charged AA, and a mostly discharged random AA, or first one, then both. 
We'll do our best to keep these limited to mental exercises of course.

In my current day to day I use a break away AAA Twisty 219 Nichia around my neck, and an 18650 powered ZL Headlamp with an H style clip heat shrink tube augmented to become a permanent clip, clipped in my pocket. 
An AA light or two just makes sense though for so many reasons, though mostly as a generically useful backup these days, loaded with 1.5V lithium AA as a BOB or as a reserve glove compartment light. 

Also the Thrunite Neutron 2 AA model has the voltage compatibility to run a single LiPO4, Li-ion, or primary (disposable) lithium battery, such as CR123, as well. That makes it especially useful for dire circumstances. 
Somebody show me a more versatile light, nevermind one that also has a neutral emitter, and anywhere like such a long running firefly mode. 
Thrunite Neutron, AA with 2AA extention, .9-5V, with .04 lumen firefly, and neutral 4000k+/-?
I'm sold.
Only thing left to do is have a plan to deal with corroded batteries, and a way to pipe in power from lithium cells, failing a proper battery tube adaptor, then you've got an ideal SHTF/all purpose light.


----------



## balane

I just ordered my first Cool White unit, a ThruNite TN12 2016. All of my lights have been natural light before this one. I'm looking forward to receiving so I can compare them in person. Not entirely certain I've ever actually seen a cool white light in my presence.


----------



## kaichu dento

balane said:


> Not entirely certain I've ever actually seen a cool white light in my presence.


You've seen the incandescent equivalent every time you see headlights that a glaringly white or worse yet, blue, coming towards you at night. 

As Wildcatter was pointing out, blue is not good in fog or anything else for that matter, other than looking cool that is.


----------



## Fire/medic

berry580 said:


> Hey guys, I think I'm still pretty new to these things. Can someone help me? What are the pros and cons of a cool tint and a warm tint?
> 
> I just don't get it. Some people to just seems just crazy over warm tints even though they know it won't be as efficient in terms of output/runtime compared to LEDs with cool tint.
> 
> Whats the deal here?
> 
> Thank you in advance



The cool lights just looks blue to me, like those annoying fake HID car headlights you see running around. It is brighter, but gives object unnatural colors. The warm is suppose to be like standard filament bulbs your used to seeing everything in at night. The neutral is like fluorescent light used in shopping stores and seem to me to best choice, but the warm is nice as well


----------



## Modernflame

Nice bump!

What I've learned is that everything has a place in my collection. I've got 3000K, 4000K, 5000K, and 6000K, and CRI ranging from 70 to 90+.

@Fire/Medic. Cool white LED's definitely contain blue, but so does midday sunlight. Color rendition may be the more pertinent issue, though. Some CW LED's can produce CRI above 90, but the most common cool emitters measure about 70 CRI. I recommend the Tint Snob Thread on this forum for more discussion.

:welcome:


----------



## eh4

I really think that over and above CRI, the Kruithof curve affects our impression of cool, neutral, and warm led light. If there's enough thousands of lumens at close enough range, I'll be happy with cool white, but since I'm usually using less lumens for a given range, I prefer neutral, and for very low light levels regarding the distance, warm light is much preferable to me. 
High CRI is another level of quality beyond this more utilitarian aspect. 
Try a cool white moonlight mode light, and then a warm white moonlight, looking at detail is particularly telling, reading for instance. 


https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kruithof_curve


----------



## Boris74

NW for up close carry all day work and CW for hard hitting throw. At 200-300 yards I don’t care about colors, I want to see period and CW does that better. Up close the NW is easier on the eyes, works better at very low lumens you actually use in complete darkness and makes color ID easier. Makes ID of plants and animals easier instead of washing them out in bark or brush or leaves. 

I just got my cyber monday MT40GT and I first off noticed it’s extremly neutral compared to every other CW Nitecore I’ve seen. I thought my streamlights were more neutral and this light makes them look solid CW. Still not “real” NW but it’s not nitecore CW either. This beast throws to the wood line just over 400M from the front door. Works even better in this snow. Still wish it hit a bit harder being more CW but it makes the same lumen HL-X look 40% dimmer. It hits hard for the same lumens, lots more candela though.


----------



## bykfixer

Last night as I entered a local WalMart I encountered one of my photography mentors. He was there looking for a light bulb to use for his photography. 

He started to "school me" on LED's... cool vs warm, CRI, kelvins and all that. My wife quipped to his girlfriend "they're going to be here a while"... knowing he was in WalMart looking for warm curly-fry bulbs for his studio I just listened to him explain, thanked him for his time and commented "I use flashlights for photography for fill lighting". He asked how I can hold it. To his surprise I pulled a 1 cell flashlight from my pocket and demonstrated the cigar hold. 

I say all of that not to enter into this debate as I believe brightness plays a role in what we perceive along with personal preference.

To say a chart prooves this or that is same as daylight is like saying Tang has the exact vitamin C as an orange. I'll leave it at that. Being my former mentor has recently discovered LED tech I figure it's best to let him learn by trial and error this winter, then next Spring at the arts & crafts show I see him at each year I'll see how much he has learned then perhaps have a real discussion...


----------



## kaichu dento

eh4 said:


> I really think that over and above CRI, the Kruithof curve affects our impression of cool, neutral, and warm led light. If there's enough thousands of lumens at close enough range, I'll be happy with cool white, but since I'm usually using less lumens for a given range, I prefer neutral, and for very low light levels regarding the distance, warm light is much preferable to me.
> High CRI is another level of quality beyond this more utilitarian aspect.
> Try a cool white moonlight mode light, and then a warm white moonlight, looking at detail is particularly telling, reading for instance.
> 
> 
> https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kruithof_curve


Really good food for thought for those who haven't thought much about it yet, that is how preference can change so much dependent on output, application, desired results, distance and surroundings. 

While I've been a warm/neutral warm fan from the start, I still enjoy a smooth, floody cool white at very low levels, and anyone else that has spent much time walking in the moonlight will too. That's the main reason I never had my Titan or my bronze Ion modded.


----------



## eh4

kaichu dento said:


> Really good food for thought for those who haven't thought much about it yet, that is how preference can change so much dependent on output, application, desired results, distance and surroundings.
> 
> While I've been a warm/neutral warm fan from the start, I still enjoy a smooth, floody cool white at very low levels, and anyone else that has spent much time walking in the moonlight will too. That's the main reason I never had my Titan or my bronze Ion modded.



That's interesting, one of the issues that I have with bluish light at low levels is that I can't see high resolution in my center of focus, and there's something about the wavelength of light at higher temps and the ability of the eye to focus on those wavelengths, that's where red leaning, lower color temperature shines (focuses). 
But alternately, dim bluish light should be more effective for peripheral vision, which is how I find myself using actual moonlight anyways, avoiding holes and sticks, branches at eye level, etc. 
My dislike of bluish light at low levels comes from difficulty with central focus, and the feeling of brightness without seeing well. 
That's not a problem for me with peripheral vision.
I'll have to try walking in some woods with a cool, dim , floody light.


----------



## kaichu dento

eh4 said:


> That's interesting, one of the issues that I have with bluish light at low levels is that I can't see high resolution in my center of focus, and there's something about the wavelength of light at higher temps and the ability of the eye to focus on those wavelengths, that's where red leaning, lower color temperature shines.
> But alternately, dim bluish light should be more effective for peripheral vision, which is how I find myself using actual moonlight anyways, avoiding holes and sticks, branches at eye level, etc.
> My dislike of bluish light at low levels comes from difficulty with central focus, and the feeling of brightness without seeing well.
> That's not a problem for me with peripheral vision.
> I'll have to try walking in some woods with a cool, dim , floody light.


I don't know if there are other warm tint fans who enjoy the really low level floody coolish light, but I love moonlight, and if all I'm doing is walking, I love that sort of lighting. Everything else, including painting outside last night and tonight, 3500k all the way.


----------



## MichaelW

I wish that someone in the corrupt Chicago-land governments would have read about the differences between warm/neutral/cool white _before _they spent who knows how much on LED street lights. 5000k (and low CRI) has ruined everything.
I think that a 4000K 80CRI would have been acceptable, if the old style distribution was retained. Nope, now there are areas of over illumination and areas of darkness.


----------



## lumen aeternum

Boris74 said:


> NW for up close carry all day work and CW for hard hitting throw. At 200-300 yards I don’t care about colors, I want to see period and CW does that better. .


 Better how? Does CW require fewer OTF lumens to provide adequte target spotting and thus have less glare from near-field reflected light? Does a "less colorful" image allow better target spotting (vice recognition of "nature" things as opposed to man-made objects)? Seems to me that the cost of CW & NW is going to be the same, for equal lumens. But needing less lumens may be cheaper, and less near field glare can be critical (in woods & brush for example).


----------



## bykfixer

Trying to get an LED to mimic the sun is like trying to get the benefits of brocoli in a pill...
Man aint smart enough to do that. 
Oh, we can place all kinds of data on a piece of paper using all kinds of methods to get people to see what it means, but the fact still remains... man will never reproduce a perfect sunlight tint in an LED. 

So what do we do? Quit trying? No way!! 
We trudge on creating products that create a pleasing experience for the user. And let's face it, no two users are the same.

It's like trying to get a vegetarian to eat a cheeseburger. 
Do some LED's cause colors to look wrong? Yup. And so do some light bulbs. 

It all boils down to what the user prefers, and what _appears_ correct to the user from the various tints offered. 
They're all getting pretty good at casting light into darkness in a realistic looking way. It's how the light maker applies the technology that can make a difference.
If my eyes are overcome by a cool white, a neutral or a warm... my eyes are not going to judge colors correctly. If my eyes see a correct _amount_ of light on a given object they will adapt and understand what they see in more cases then not. 

I own lights with cool, neutral, warm and a ton of variantions between that. I own literally hundreds of flashlights from 1909 to 2017. Yet a 6200 kelvin beam is my personal favorite simply because it's what my eyes prefer regardless of what the charts n graphs... the beam shots and rated CRI say I am supposed to prefer....


----------



## Modernflame

bykfixer said:


> I own lights with cool, neutral, warm and a ton of variantions between that. I own literally hundreds of flashlights from 1909 to 2017. Yet a 6200 kelvin beam is my personal favorite simply because it's what my eyes prefer regardless of what the charts n graphs... the beam shots and rated CRI say I am supposed to prefer....



Hey Byk, can you direct me to a thread with photos of those older lights? I've got a feeling they're posted somewhere around here.


----------



## bykfixer

Modernflame said:


> Hey Byk, can you direct me to a thread with photos of those older lights? I've got a feeling they're posted somewhere around here.



http://www.candlepowerforums.com/vb/showthread.php?166714-Your-Antique-Flashlights-in-Review
Here's one with nearly everybodys photos still intact.

As I discover threads with my pictures gone I repair the links.


----------



## Modernflame

I am an Equal Opportunity Employer of beam tints. I have a dream that one day flashlights will be judged not by the color of their output but by the content of their gadgetry.


----------



## bykfixer

Modernflame said:


> I am an Equal Opportunity Employer of beam tints. I have a dream that one day flashlights will be judged not by the color of their output but by the content of their gadgetry.



You should post that in Chauncey Gardeners "words to live by" thread. :twothumbs

He'll get a kick out of that.


----------



## lumen aeternum

Modernflame said:


> I am an Equal Opportunity Employer of beam tints. I have a dream that one day flashlights will be judged not by the color of their output but by the content of their gadgetry.



OTOH you have that market for affinity tints...
Klan White
Chocolate City Brown
Pride Multi-Color Emitter
Awareness Pink
Stanley Kubrik Ultra V.
Phlebotomist Blue


----------



## shock003

Love this thread. A debate I have had often.

Here is how I boil it down (and keep thinking of making a YouTube video explaining my personal take)

In my living room, where things are cozy with sofas, TV, fireplace, pillows, sleeping dog; I (like most people) love the "warmth" of the typical incandescent. Which is now available in LED household bulbs. So let's call these Neutral White. 

In my laundry room and garage, I am performing tasks. I need bright light. So, I use Cool White LED's in the Laundry room. In the garage I still use the typical fluorescent tubes. Let's refer to these as Cool White.

So for me. It is all about the task at hand when selecting a tint.
I have mostly Cool White lights but I have 'built' some custom Convoys using my favorite NW tint: XP-L v6 3D. It is rated at about 4500K. 
I made another light with a NICHIA 219c. rated about 4000K.
These two are *BEAUTIFUL* NW LEDs. Colors are arguably better looking. No doubt. 
But for my majority of uses, I still prefer CW. NW looks 'dimmer'. I am sure we can all agree on that. 
Look at any spec for a light that offers both. The Lux/Lumens are always less on a NW due to reasons listed on this thread... like the extra coating to kill out the blue-ish tints. 
So if a new LED is out, the CW will always be a bit brighter and will sway my decision so I can have a brighter light. (I like to show off!)
Now, of course reflectors and drivers play into the brightness levels (we can all agree) but apples to apples comparison...there is a difference.
Around the house, I will (almost) always pick up a NW light. Heck, even in the garage at times. But a NW is used when I am working within arms length. Again, depends what I am doing or need.

On reviews I've read through the years... a lot of times people don't clearly explain their uses of the light they love. Which would greatly help others decide 'hmm, that sounds like me and my intended use... I think I'll listen to this person's input'.... So....

Here is what I tell friends.
For close up work (less than 10-20 feet roughly) indoors or even outdoors: NW is amazing. Especially if someone is using indoors or is an electrician or just loves that NW feel. It is easier on the eyes - very noticeable when using in close up work. Like reading a book. That is when lights similar to the Zebralight Floody lights and the ones without reflectors are going to be perfect choices. (again, IMHO). I would never use those for outdoors. EVER. Not for my type of outdoors use that is. CW is what I desire. I know what color trees are and I want everything lit up BRIGHT.

For me; I backpack a ton in the Pacific Northwest. And more times than you would think my friends and I have hiked miles on end in the dead of night. (for many many reasons. Actually, night hikes ROCK!) And a great CW light has always (hands down) been my choice. (again, for me) but here is why. 
First, I use CW in the 5700K range (like the ZL H600) It isn't angry blue like early LEDs. (Note: I tried a NW while on snow at night and it makes it look brown and dirty... CW is much more pleasing in snow.
Second, I want (need?) extreme brightness. So although the colors may not be as pleasant as NW, I LOVE the PURE, white light. I am outdoors, on a mission... doing a task if you will.... Kinda like when I am doing other tasks ... like in the laundry room or garage ... but now the task is outdoors and I need to see a cliff or where the trail goes up ahead 30-60 feet away. (Or if I just want to show off to my friends!)
Now I know, there are some NW lights that throw. But I am not going to backpack with something like the Thrunite TN32 due to size. (That light has been mentioned on this thread as an awesome NW thrower light is why I mention it.) However, I have been VERY tempted to buy the ZL SC600w HI NW (the HI dedomed LED has some throw). I'd use it as a hand held light for 'what's up over there' kinda light. *Very tempted.* Because it is NW and a bit of throw but still some good spill. hmmm.... I am torn. If there was a CW dedomed version - I'd lean more toward buying that to satsify my desire for a flood/throw in one light. 

Actually, if I had DEEP pockets I would buy several ZL to do a video comparison. An Apples - to - Apples comparison. But that means I need to buy several identical models. a CW, a NW, and a NW HI (just because it would be neat to see NW HI compared because it will have some throw to it. But I suspect the CW would win my heart over as always being a tad brighter.) When I go into lava tubs (essentially caves) NW does win my heart over because of the tint and I feel NW works best in a contained envirnoment. The wilderness just seems to swallow up the NW too much for me.

What is my ideal outdoorsy set up at the moment? I selected these for how compact they are.... again... for backpacking or walking the dog during dark winter nights. These are generally my go to lights.

1) For Headlamp: I use a ZL H600 MKIII CW. (AKA: *" My Precious*") LOVE IT! I mean LOVE it. I used to make my own headlamps from scratch for many years. Now, finally something is as bright as my homemade lights. 
2) For Throw: I use the Nitecore MH20GT (came in handy on a recent cave trip to see really deep ahead of us into one of the spur tunnels of the cave)
3) AAA Maratac Titanum keychain light. Always with me and actually used it on a night hike in the Grand Canyon in my hand - which gives much better shadow depth as opposed to having the light on your head and close to eye level. I am glad I bought it when I did... they are stuck on Cooper/Brass versions now. ugh)
4) Fenix CL09 as a lantern. (just bought it a month ago and haven't used it much in the field) Wish it had a button rather than twisty head. A button is easier to activate in a tent rather than using two hands to twist for activation. Fenix fails in that 'user centered design' department on this light. But still, I love it for the tiny size and brightness. Wow! 

Those are my perfect lights. Of course I own a bunch of others and love those also for other uses. But if I listed those other lights here....i'd have to move to the other thread! Hahah.

Well, I hope my opinions help others. 
And honestly... I still to this day struggle at times with which Tints to get and then I have to rein myself in (due to funds) and clearly think about my intended uses for a light.
I'll admit... one day I may find a NW light that will flip all this around for me. Been debating myself recently with the new MKIV ZL's: SC600 MK IV (CW) or SC600w MK IV HI (NW) 
(i know... "get em both!" is what everyone says/does)


----------



## bykfixer

^^ good post.


----------



## Keitho

Very well thought-out and well-written post, shock003. I think you very clearly and convincingly stated my exact opinion of a couple years ago. What prompted me to re-think the outdoors-vs-indoors thinking about color temp was that I started buying and testing out lights that could produce "enough" output for my outdoor uses, even with very nice warm color temp and high CRI, and even while staying ultralight and small. (Specifically, the most recent 2 generations of Zebralights have some very efficient warmer and higher-CRI offerings in side-clicky and headlamp versions. Other manufacturers also have some nearly-comparable offerings suitable for lightweight outdoor applications.)

It is all very personal, as we all are after different things outdoors. But, when I'm on my mountain bike or I'm backpacking, I've really come around to enjoying the effect that the warmer color temp has on my experience. So, I think I'm now at a point where I select a light based on the impact that I want it to have on the "recipient" of my lumens. My emergency car lights that I might use to warn other drivers--I want the message to be "Wake Up!", so they are cool, high-power lights. My "be seen" lights on my bike also are cool, "wake up" kind of lights. The lights I use during the day, at work and in my shop, are as close to sunlight as I can find (color and CRI). 

But, when the sun goes down, my color temp preference drops with the ambient light and air temp. My wandering-in-the-woods-after-dark lights are warm, and as high-CRI as I can find, because that's my personal preference for how I want my light to make me feel when I'm by myself outdoors. I enjoy the artificially-rich reds, browns, and greens--a nighttime version of rose-colored glasses for my tiny little puddle of illumination in a very large, dark universe.


----------



## markr6

I couldn't quite see something with my NW light, so I pulled out the same light with a CW emitter. Bam! Now I could see it.

I situation I've never encountered. I'm sticking with quality over quantity.


----------



## shock003

I 'see' your point markr6... CW isn't going to really reveal something that a NW couldn't. I was being a tad dramatic (if you are referencing my comments).
I take it you are very much in the NW camp and not buying a bunch of different light types. I too like to settle on one light versus a bunch... probably why i struggle at times between which I like better to make a "final decision and stick to it". Hah. (and limited flashlight fund money!)

I suppose I am a tortured soul with regards to 'which light do I spend $89+ on to satisfy my needs and just buy one light". 
Many of you have a very clear idea on your tint of choice.

As part of my debate for CW vs NW; I'll often walk my dog in the neighborhood and wooded area at night with my ZL H600 MKIII (CW) and compare one of my NW flashlights (a Convoy S2+ host). But it is a poor comparison because my NW is not a ZL. Everything is different on the Convoy S2+: the LED (XPL 3D tint), the Reflector, and the Driver. As such, the ZL H600 MKIII CW wins over every time. Albeit, maybe a bit unfairly. But bottom line, I freaking LOVE that light! Hence naming it "My Precious".

For amusement, I have considered building several Convoy hosts (to save money from buying several identical versions of pricey ZL). That way I have an exact comparison to make. 
I would use the follow LED's: XPL 1A (Very Cool White at 6500K), XPL 2A (Cool White dipping into NW at 5700K), my already built XPL 3D (NW at 4500K), and a NICHIA 219c (NW at 4000K).
But with the hosts, LEDs and Drivers...that starts adding up to around $65+ to build the remaining three. Not sure if it would be worth time and money to satisfy my curiosity. It may be an interesting review for others though. hmmm. 

Hah, I am out of control! I really need to get a life.

But I suspect a much better comparison for such a review would be to buy several identical ZL's with CW and NW. Because that is the light I love [right now].
Hey Zebralight: Want to send me some lights for a very thorough review in many different situations? Indoors, Outdoors, Walking the dog, Hiking in the woods, In snow, Backpacking....etc. I can even send them back after the review...maybe.

So I wonder ... if I bought a H600 NW and tried it out in the deep woods if I would switch. And of course I'd buy the updated MKIV version.... so that may help sway me.
Because I do agree; NW is dang nice on the eyes in a lot of situations.

p.s. I should mention the CW I like is the ZL H600 - 5700K. I have many other lights that are super blue cold. like the XM-L or XP-L 1A tint (6300K plus?). Not a horrible cold but is much colder than 5700K. I may make the jump and try out one of the NW Zebralights soon.


----------



## ven

For me part of the fun/interest is having different flavours to use. Be it different applications and/or different times of day/evening/night. Now i love 219b 4000k, the 219c 4000k is getting very very close. I have these in a few lights now , but i dont just want these LED's. It would be boring for me, picking up say a HDS, then a T10s followed by a triple or quad of the same. So i tend to enjoy the 4000k types during the evening when my eyes and brain prefers a hint of warmer colour temp. 5000k and even towards 6500k in the day is fine for me. So my lights vary from around 4000k to around 6500k. If its close up or at distance, also plays a part on which choice i would go for. I like colours to look accurate most of the time, late at night with tired want to sleep eyes...............a little bump in colour is welcome.





Some little lights that range from 4000k up to 6500k. As long as the 6500k is pretty clean white, its fine for some distance uses. Around house come evening, the warmer 4000k temps really work for me. Now if i use 4000k in work, it kind of does not work for me. Being in artificial light, light colours(beige,cream,off white,metals) just dont look good to me depending on LED. So i prefer a little cooler/cleaner in beam, 4500-5000k hits the spot! The 219c 4000k seems to hold up well so far for day time use in work, where as for example, the xp-g2 or xpl HI 4000k, tends to be a little off with the tint in the beam. 
219c 4000k T10s, little pocket work horse




Still after several years, the 4500k 219b triple seems to hold its own............





Its fun to have different flavours to choose from, makes my day much easier to get through and adds some interest. Plus its a good way to find out what works best for what use/area.


----------



## Rifter

I just got back in the flashlight game after a while away. And i can tell you one thing, i used to be all about the most lumens so usually always went CW. Now im all about high CRI so things look like they are supposed to so am all about high CRI 4000-5000k LED's now. Im loving the Nichia 219C's.


----------



## Swedpat

Rifter said:


> I just got back in the flashlight game after a while away. And i can tell you one thing, i used to be all about the most lumens so usually always went CW. Now im all about high CRI so things look like they are supposed to so am all about high CRI 4000-5000k LED's now. Im loving the Nichia 219C's.



I think that's the natural development and maturity in the flashaholism. At first everything is about brightness and throw(like many non-flashaholic ignorant person). Then it goes further to beam character and tint. Followed by the liking of extremely low brightness level! The last likely incomprehensible for the ignorant person...
I think it's similar to comparing stereos. An ignorant person wants as much watts(and bass) as possible but the audiofil wants quality. It's probably not difficult to build a 1000w amplifier, and big speakers. But how it sounds? Is it pleasant for the ears? The same with flashlights. Performance is not always good if it's not combined with quality.


----------



## eh4

I think there might be more variance in how different individuals eyes work than we usually account for, as well as individual differences in how we process visual information. 
It's not something we can easily verify. 
At greater extremes we know there are rare tetrachromes who see extra colors that we don't have names for, and we know there are degrees of color blindness, night blindness, and all manner of imperfections of vision, as well as people who's eyes seem to work in the standard way but who have disabilities (or super abilities) in processing the inputs, Da Vinci drew water droplets accurately centuries before we had the ability to record them falling as oscillating spheres. 

- but for the most part, we take standard vision tests, get a prescription or a diagnosis, and call it good...
20-20 vision btw became a standard because the guy who made the test used his assistant as the standard, the guy had pretty good vision, he figured. 

Myself, I perceive cool tints as brighter, but they seem to make my pupils constrict more, letting in less light, and they seem to make my eyes take longer to recover when going back to partial dark adaptation... 
Note that constricting pupils should also make it easier for eyes to focus sharply, as with pinhole cameras.

I see pretty well with the "dimmer" warm and neutral lights, and experience less tunnel vision effect, where a well lit center comes at the cost of a night blind periphery. 
If there's Enough light, I don't mind cool tints, but alternating from lighting something near or far well enough to see it clearly, and then going back to a lower light level pretty much requires me to use warm -neutral, or invest in and tie myself to bigger and heavier lights, and commit to using more light to see well. 
There's also the aspect of light pollution, cool tints are absolutely more eye catching than warm tints, and while anytime you're shining a light around, you're creating a vivid signal, warm tints don't seem to excite receptors in people's peripheral vision the way that cool tints (with more green to blue) do. 
I feel that I make less of a scene with warmer neutral lights, while still seeing what I need to.


----------



## Modernflame

eh4 said:


> I think there might be more variance in how different individuals eyes work than we usually account for, as well as individual differences in how we process visual information.
> It's not something we can easily verify.
> At greater extremes we know there are rare tetrachromes who see extra colors that we don't have names for, and we know there are degrees of color blindness, night blindness, and all manner of imperfections of vision, as well as people who's eyes seem to work in the standard way but who have disabilities (or super abilities) in processing the inputs, Da Vinci drew water droplets accurately centuries before we had the ability to record them falling as oscillating spheres.
> 
> - but for the most part, we take standard vision tests, get a prescription or a diagnosis, and call it good...
> 20-20 vision btw became a standard because the guy who made the test used his assistant as the standard, the guy had pretty good vision, he figured.
> 
> Myself, I perceive cool tints as brighter, but they seem to make my pupils constrict more, letting in less light, and they seem to make my eyes take longer to recover when going back to partial dark adaptation...
> Note that constricting pupils should also make it easier for eyes to focus sharply, as with pinhole cameras.
> 
> I see pretty well with the "dimmer" warm and neutral lights, and experience less tunnel vision effect, where a well lit center comes at the cost of a night blind periphery.
> If there's Enough light, I don't mind cool tints, but alternating from lighting something near or far well enough to see it clearly, and then going back to a lower light level pretty much requires me to use warm -neutral, or invest in and tie myself to bigger and heavier lights, and commit to using more light to see well.
> There's also the aspect of light pollution, cool tints are absolutely more eye catching than warm tints, and while anytime you're shining a light around, you're creating a vivid signal, warm tints don't seem to excite receptors in people's peripheral vision the way that cool tints (with more green to blue) do.
> I feel that I make less of a scene with warmer neutral lights, while still seeing what I need to.



A thoughtful post and an enjoyable read. I find that I share your impressions, although I've never articulated them so pointedly. This is the reason why I've expanded my collection to include cool white and warm white, whereas my preference leans more toward neutral in the majority of circumstances. My choice for any given task depends on time of day, the amount and color temperature of ambient light, the maximum distance at which I need to see clearly, and, frankly, my mood.


----------



## archimedes

Modernflame said:


> A thoughtful post and an enjoyable read. I find that I share your impressions, although I've never articulated them so pointedly. This is the reason why I've expanded my collection to include cool white and warm white, whereas my preference leans more toward neutral in the majority of circumstances. My choice for any given task depends on time of day, the amount and color temperature of ambient light, the maximum distance at which I need to see clearly, and, frankly, my mood.



I agree with you both, in large part, although probably lean rather more towards the warm spectrum for the bulk of my lights.


----------



## bykfixer

Being a proponent of the incan I get a kick out of this thread. 

My eyes tend to adapt to whatever the tint is, regardless of what charts and graphs say should be taking place.


----------



## tabetha

For myself I much prefer the cool tints as I see much easier with these, I have CW and WW versions of same lights and every time CW is way better to my eyes I just seem to me to be able to see much more detail


----------



## bykfixer

tabetha said:


> For myself I much prefer the cool tints as I see much easier with these, I have CW and WW versions of same lights and every time CW is way better to my eyes I just seem to me to be able to see much more detail



Agreed.
But cool overwhelms my eyes quicker. Intensity matters to me way more than the color.
For lighting items at a distance or when seconds matter for identifying something... yup cool is my favorite.


----------



## lumen aeternum

I'd buy a reasonably priced light that has both a cool & warm emitter. maybe dual reflectors, and make the warm a wide beam and the cool a thrower. Would be convenient to learn to discern the differences in tint by simply toggling the emittor when shining the light on something.


----------



## eh4

lumen aeternum said:


> I'd buy a reasonably priced light that has both a cool & warm emitter. maybe dual reflectors, and make the warm a wide beam and the cool a thrower. Would be convenient to learn to discern the differences in tint by simply toggling the emittor when shining the light on something.



That's a neat idea.


----------



## maukka

bykfixer said:


> My eyes tend to adapt to whatever the tint is, regardless of what charts and graphs say should be taking place.



Mine too. Even some green isn't that bad as long as the tint stays fairly consistent in all parts of the beam, although slight but linear drift to any one direction is fine, and there are no additional light sources of different tint.


----------



## kaichu dento

Swedpat said:


> I think that's the natural development and maturity in the flashaholism. At first everything is about brightness and throw(like many non-flashaholic ignorant person). Then it goes further to beam character and tint. Followed by the liking of extremely low brightness level!


My first desire in a light was *compactness* and *ability to control brightness so that it wouldn't be too bright*, hence my choice of the Fenix LOD and right off I wished for the practicality of the LED light with the color of incan. I'm sure I'm not the only one who didn't care about the bling or showoff factors.
Beam pattern is one of the things that it did take me a while to become aware of, but I hated lights with too much throw right from the start.

Definitely still feel the same way about tint; about 3500k with a late afternoon/early evening rosiness, but I'll accept just about anything that makes people think I'm carrying an incan.


----------



## niraya

Swedpat said:


> Followed by the liking of extremely low brightness level! The last likely incomprehensible for the ignorant person...


 I like to have different color temperatures for different environments activities, but first thing I look for when buying new flashlight is moonlight bellow 0.2 lumen, anything higher is unpleasant and killing all nightvision in house at night. :candle:


----------



## wweiss

Cool white for higher Lux - hi CRI (NW) for natural colors. Zebra light should make one with their current SC600w MK xxx form factor and a (magical ) UI and LED that can switch to either on the fly - @ 1,500 max Lumens. Now, there is a near perfect light...


----------



## bykfixer

maukka said:


> Mine too. Even some green isn't that bad as long as the tint stays fairly consistent in all parts of the beam, although slight but linear drift to any one direction is fine, and there are no additional light sources of different tint.



Now those additional lights sources can really get things confused. Tungston to my left, curly fry to my right... 
But given enough time to adapt to that I won't leave my home with mismatch colored socks.


----------



## Keitho

lumen aeternum said:


> I'd buy a reasonably priced light that has both a cool & warm emitter. maybe dual reflectors, and make the warm a wide beam and the cool a thrower. Would be convenient to learn to discern the differences in tint by simply toggling the emittor when shining the light on something.


Viltrox makes a camera light like that, 95 CRI RA panel that you can dial from 3300 to 5600k color temp. Not a flashlight, but only $36 USD or so. Uses 2 sets of LED to create the effect.


----------



## lumen aeternum

Keitho said:


> Viltrox makes a camera light like that, 95 CRI RA panel that you can dial from 3300 to 5600k color temp. Not a flashlight, but only $36 USD or so. Uses 2 sets of LED to create the effect.



Model number? They seem to make a lot of products.


----------



## maukka

I've got four of the Viltrox lights in a couple different models and love them to bits! I've used their official Aliexpress store and a store called Max-digitaldslr Store. Many of my review photos have been taken using them as light sources.

Here are some measurements for the thinner edge lit L116T: https://imgur.com/a/1fhBU
And the thicker direct lit VL-162T: https://imgur.com/a/sstoi

The VL-162T provides more lux so if you don't mind the form factor or the visibility of the LED array on reflective surfaces, I'd say go for that one.

They both have extremely good color rendering at all CCTs, no PWM and can be used with a simple 7-12V wall wart or a 2-3S lithium ion battery. I also use a a clamping arm like this to hold them in place for desk use.

Here's some more user impressions from Zak on reddit.


----------



## Keitho

lumen aeternum said:


> Model number? They seem to make a lot of products.



Viltrox L132T; the "T" stands for "tint." They might have other models, but that was the one I was thinking of. Amazon USA B01L75TMSM[h=1][/h]


----------



## wimmer21

My beam temp preference has gradually slid down the Kelvin scale ever since I began buying lights. It's to the point now that I've sold all but one light that's above 5000K. Obviously colors look much better when illuminated by warmer temps, but I even prefer my throwers to be between 4000K-5000K. Of course cool white will measure higher in candela but, for me, the beam seems to reflect back at me... so much so that it's difficult to accurately view objects.


----------



## Zak

The 116T is a more compact version of the 132T, and the output isn't much less. The 162T provides more focused light, though it's still extremely diffuse compared to most flashlights (roughly 1cd/lm IIRC at roughly 1000lm). I really like the light these produce, and the variable color temperature means the light can fit a variety of situations and user preferences.

As for color temperature preferences, there isn't necessarily an objective answer for most applications. Polls in other forums have put the vast majority (over 75%) of preferences between 4000K and 5000K. I tend to like around 4500-5000K generally, but CRI matters more. I'd take 5700K and 90 CRI over 4500K and 70 CRI. Efficiency/output barely matters. Losing 15% to get illumination I find more pleasant is always a good trade, as human perception of brightness is roughly logarithmic and 15% is barely visible. There's a trick though: cool white usually makes the fact that an object is being illuminated more noticeable even if it doesn't make it easier to see the object. Focusing your attention on how well you can see the object rather than looking for the illumination itself will usually overcome that effect.

I'll take it farther though and trade a large amount of output to get tint and CRI I like. Swapping a 6V Nichia 144A into a 12V Wizard Pro XHP50 was my first foray in to more extreme trades. It was about a 50% drop in output, but also a reduction in power consumption that made the top mode sustainable instead of a burst mode that gets thermal throttled unless the light is under water. Recently, I tried something more extreme: a shaved 90 CRI XHP50 replacing the cool white XHP70.2 in my Acebeam L30. The output loss was considerable: 3900 lumens down to 2284 (both at 30 seconds). I went from rarely using the L30 to it being one of my favorite lights, so I'm going to call that a good trade. It still makes friends who are already familiar with my flashlight antics say "wow" when I light up an area with it. I think it's a change from "wow, the glare is overwhelming" to "wow, I can see *everything*​".


----------



## Zak

wimmer21 said:


> I even prefer my throwers to be between 4000K-5000K. Of course cool white will measure higher in candela but, for me, the beam seems to reflect back at me... so much so that it's difficult to accurately view objects.



You're not the only one. I go warmer for throwers than general-purpose lights for this reason. I want to see the target, not the beam.


----------



## wimmer21

Zak said:


> ... human perception of brightness is roughly logarithmic and 15% is barely visible. There's a trick though: cool white usually makes the fact that an object is being illuminated more noticeable even if it doesn't make it easier to see the object. *Focusing your attention on how well you can see the object rather than looking for the illumination itself will usually overcome that effect.*



Very well put Zak. ^^^Everyone who insists that they see more clearly at distance with cool white beams might take a minute to let this above message sink in.^^^



Zak said:


> I want to see the target, not the beam.



^I might put this quote in my sig.


----------



## Zak

The one thing I'm not yet certain about is whether CRI matters much at extreme distances. I did just build an 80+ CRI 240+ Kcd light though.


----------



## eh4

Zak said:


> Recently, I tried something more extreme: a shaved 90 CRI XHP50 replacing the cool white XHP70.2 in my Acebeam L30. The output loss was considerable: 3900 lumens down to 2284 (both at 30 seconds). I went from rarely using the L30 to it being one of my favorite lights, so I'm going to call that a good trade. It still makes friends who are already familiar with my flashlight antics say "wow" when I light up an area with it. I think it's a change from "wow, the glare is overwhelming" to "wow, I can see *everything*​".



- Sounds great!


----------

