# Lumens to Lumens



## jso902 (Mar 15, 2014)

Why does an incandescent 100 lumen look brighter than 100 lumen led light? 
is it because of the color index? is it because led tends to diffuse light more?


----------



## Lynx_Arc (Mar 15, 2014)

jso902 said:


> Why does an incandescent 100 lumen look brighter than 100 lumen led light?
> is it because of the color index? is it because led tends to diffuse light more?



It could be many things including fudging on the lumens ratings on the LED light also it could be the difference in reflectors and optics on the two if there are any. You can also think one light is brighter till you try and light up a room with both and find out that there is just a more intense hot spot or your eyes are more sensitive to tints looking more directly at it pointing it at something that the tint color renders differently.


----------



## Swedpat (Mar 15, 2014)

I have noticed that I usually need less lumens with an incandescent than an LED to perveive the same brightness, so my experience seems to be same as yours. I guess it pretty much has to do with the color rendition which makes it easier for the eyes to see details and shades.


----------



## ven (Mar 15, 2014)

Cant add to whats been said,for me cool white appears brighter,the reflector plays a part along with the hot spot size as obv concentrated.

500lm thrower(hot spot) on a wall 20m away looks far brighter than a 3000lm flooder(wide spread)


----------



## Swedpat (Mar 16, 2014)

ven said:


> Cant add to whats been said,for me cool white appears brighter,the reflector plays a part along with the hot spot size as obv concentrated.
> 
> 500lm thrower(hot spot) on a wall 20m away looks far brighter than a 3000lm flooder(wide spread)



Yes, a 500lm thrower could be perceived as brighter than a 3000lm flood even at 20m if the total coverage of the flood light is much wider, and if you illuminate a small object. Otherwise it's only the hotspot which then is brighter on a very small area, which is only a disadvantage because it blinds. The advantage of a flood light is the absence of a blinding hotspot(which at short distance is wasted lumens). So for me the thrower usually is good only for long distances.


----------



## fivemega (Mar 16, 2014)

jso902 said:


> Why does an incandescent 100 lumen look brighter than 100 lumen led light?



*Few years back I bought TK35 to replace my ROP assuming they both have similar output but I was wrong and finally sold it here.

Until now, I haven't found any LED to replace any of my halogens in quality of light.*


----------



## robert.t (Mar 16, 2014)

I've never noticed this myself, having only ever had LED lights that are significantly brighter than incandescent ones. I'm just hypothesising, but perhaps part of the difference is because an incandescent bulb puts out a much wider spectrum of light than an LED? That could lead to a discrepancy in the measurements, especially if measurements are taken only at specific frequencies rather than the integral across the entire frequency range.


----------



## jso902 (Mar 24, 2014)

robert.t said:


> I've never noticed this myself, having only ever had LED lights that are significantly brighter than incandescent ones. I'm just hypothesising, but perhaps part of the difference is because an incandescent bulb puts out a much wider spectrum of light than an LED? That could lead to a discrepancy in the measurements, especially if measurements are taken only at specific frequencies rather than the integral across the entire frequency range.



That's a reasonable thought. There is definitely a nice warmth to incandescent lighting.


----------



## cenz (Mar 24, 2014)

I have 2 D26 LED modules for EDC, which are brighter than P90 in spec, at a short distance (~30cm), which are really blind and brighter than P90; However,which are weak at 3+ meter, the colors of illuminated object is flat and not "feel" brighter than incan.


----------



## groutboy_1 (Apr 13, 2014)

I think someone's wearing incandescent tinted sunglasses. Lol...


----------



## yellow (Apr 13, 2014)

maybe, because our eyes still "notice" the power converted into light ...


--> for 100 lumen incan one needs SOME more power going into the light, than with led


----------



## dc38 (Apr 13, 2014)

jso902 said:


> That's a reasonable thought. There is definitely a nice warmth to incandescent lighting.



Our eyeballs aren't designed to utilize light higher up the temperature scale...maybe in a couple centuries/millenia, our eyes might evolve to see higher kelvin lights more effectively taking into account current LED tech. Also, maybe LED tech will evolve to match the color output of incandescents...all speculation


----------



## groutboy_1 (Apr 13, 2014)

yellow said:


> maybe, because our eyes still "notice" the power converted into light ...
> 
> 
> --> for 100 lumen incan one needs SOME more power going into the light, than with led



You mean you had to fill your incandescent with kerosene, and lit the wick!? An example of old musty tech, vs New bright shiny tech. (Lol)

[Old brinkmann lx with its candle lit. About 120 yellow-Orange glow lumens vs 139ish- old batteries. New Bright lumens !]


----------



## TEEJ (Apr 13, 2014)

From what I see/measure....the main reason the incans look brighter sometimes is due to the generally tighter beam profile. Essentially, its the same reason people will look at the beam from a 900 lumen SC600 against a wall next to a 131 lumen mag, and state the 131 L mag is brighter...the tighter beam causes more glare, which the eye tells the brain is "bright".

As incans can typically emit from a smaller point source, they do tend to have throw more easily in many scenarios. The reflectors can be shallow but wide, and throw well, whereas an LED light requires a proportionally deeper reflector to get throw, while still needing diameter to achieve their best throw.

This can mean that the form factors can lend themselves to incan's, HID, etc, having intrinsic throw advantages.


When sighting targets, the difference in light quality, as far as target acquisition, motion tracking and aim accuracy, is not actually that relevant. The lux on target seems to be far more relevant than the tint or spectrum itself...as long as the spectrum includes yellow/green, where the eye is optimized. Red light was the hardest for fast targeting, especially for people with low red sensitivity. Lux trumps color though, very consistently. 

When incans look dimmer, its where they have a floody beam, reversing the effect, as now their beam is more spread out and diluted, etc. 


As for pattern recognition, the incans are better for spotting things like a dark clothed person in shadows, as the subtleties of close color patterns can stand out better in most cases. The LED can do very well in some cases, but, overall, the incans do have an edge. When the target is wearing camouflage, ironically, the LED can do better under some conditions, as the patterns meant to disrupt the outline of the target can be accentuated, defeating the process. This is akin to when we use different wavelengths in general, as a pattern/textile combination designed to concealing when viewed with night vision, or day light, may be revealing under UV, etc. 


So, lumens are lumens, and if an IS measures 2 lights as 100 lumens, they both emit 100 lumens. If one 100 L light has a cd of 10k, and the other has a cd of 50k, most people will say the 50k cd 100 L is brighter than the 10k 100L.



Lumen measurements INCLUDE a measurement across the visible spectrum, so, if a light's output is MISSING part of the spectrum, its lumen out put is proportionally lower. As an LED's frequency emission is not as evenly distributed as an incan's, the LED will be proportionally lower rated when little or no signal is received in some wavelengths, etc. The LED may emit most of its light in certain wavelengths, with stronger peaks in those wavelengths. If the peaks are tall and broad enough, and include the wavelengths that the lumen measurement is weighting heavily, (The lumen measurements weight the measurement towards what the eye can perceive best), it can result in a beam that is strong where the eye can use it best.

So, overall, in my use, etc, the main advantage to the LED lights are the lower power consumption/smaller form factors relative to output that can be achieved, so a smaller light with a longer run time can accomplish the same task normally reserved for an incan. The quality of light for most functions works fine, and I simply use incan/HID/LED lights where the advantages/disadvantages of each make sense.


----------



## groutboy_1 (Apr 13, 2014)

Incandescents look brighter sometime??? You mean that Dim sick orange- yellowish mess!?! I never thought incandescent bulbs had any good color, tint, or for that matter any form of brightness! It is so awesome we have move away from crude old technology into tech for better living! Long live LEDS !!! Put an end to wasteful bulbs, wires, and wicks!!!


----------



## edeekeos (Apr 14, 2014)

^apparently you have never experienced an overdriven 64623. BLAZING bright, pure white light, at over 4000 lumens with ease! Not even my MTG2 [email protected], running at 6 amps can give me that, and that's one of the most recent LEDs available. Even though I currently own 60+LED 'torches', I still find myself firing up the ole' bi-pin [email protected] mods. While not the most efficient, they rightfully earn the title 'torch', litterally being able to start fires!! Not to mention, the CRI. The only LEDs remotely close IMO are the Nichia's. But as far as LEDs go, they are among the least efficient available, due to such a high forward voltage. Also they MUST be used with a OP reflector only for a smooth beam, so forget about that precious throw.

I could go on forever about this, but I'll leave on this note; Long live incans..


----------



## groutboy_1 (Apr 14, 2014)

Mirrored campfires?


----------



## TEEJ (Apr 14, 2014)

edeekeos said:


> ^apparently you have never experienced an overdriven 64623. BLAZING bright, pure white light, at over 4000 lumens with ease! Not even my MTG2 [email protected], running at 6 amps can give me that, and that's one of the most recent LEDs available. Even though I currently own 60+LED 'torches', I still find myself firing up the ole' bi-pin [email protected] mods. While not the most efficient, they rightfully earn the title 'torch', litterally being able to start fires!! Not to mention, the CRI. The only LEDs remotely close IMO are the Nichia's. But as far as LEDs go, they are among the least efficient available, due to such a high forward voltage. Also they MUST be used with a OP reflector only for a smooth beam, so forget about that precious throw.
> 
> I could go on forever about this, but I'll leave on this note; Long live incans..



Well, no, they now can be had with aspherics too, and throw over a mile...so they can have plenty of throw. Even reflector only lights are out there with over 500,000 cd.

And, they don't waste energy due to high forward voltage, they are FAR more efficient than incans, in that almost all of the incan's out put is heat, not light, whereas almost all of the LED's output is light, not heat. (Hence you being able to start fires with your icans...)

There are more than Nichia 219 LED with high CRI, XML2 for example have high CRI versions.

Now, if you only want to limit the issue to the Nichia's throw, sure, its not the best choice....but there's little real world application for a high CRI projection onto a target at long range, given that with night vision, most of us are seeing almost entirely in black and white anyway....and what color vision we have left is in the range that the LEDs DO make.





Incans have their niche, as do LEDs, but lets be honest about each. I have both, and, they all earn their place.


----------



## groutboy_1 (Apr 14, 2014)

Candle through a snow globe!


----------



## TEEJ (Apr 14, 2014)

groutboy_1 said:


> Candle through a snow globe!



Making fun of something because its old fashioned is not always applicable. Aspirin still works great for example, even though we've first used it back a century or two ago.


----------



## groutboy_1 (Apr 14, 2014)

I keep to two sticks In my back pocket if I need a fire...I enjoy listening to vacuum tube radios! I play pong, and a Atari 2600!


----------



## TEEJ (Apr 14, 2014)

groutboy_1 said:


> I keep to two sticks In my back pocket if I need a fire...I enjoy listening to vacuum tube radios! I play pong, and a Atari 2600!



LOL

Take two aspirin and send me a smoke signal in the morning.....


----------



## groutboy_1 (Apr 14, 2014)

"I'm lighting a candle for guys In incandescent land! Lol... If you can't see the smoke signals...I'll use some of my LED Lights to signal!!! LEDs Forever!!!!"


----------



## yellow (Apr 14, 2014)

You have pretty no posts in all those years, and _that_ mass posting is what You want to be be remembered for?
Has that account been highjacked?
:thinking:



PS: no need to convince _ME_ of the led "being better".
If you have _ever in those years _followed what I post, you should know ...


----------



## Kestrel (Apr 14, 2014)

Please respect the OP by writing non-frivolous posts, thanks.
Kestrel


----------



## groutboy_1 (Apr 14, 2014)

All in fun,and jest..though my point is still proven...The old incandescent vs LEDs bias is still alive and well...But, to such a lesser degree...That No-one from the LED side of the forums...They don't even bother to raid the incandescent forum anymore...LOL...Oh, those days were funny...You guys never had so much attention...With back and forth banter from incandescent supports vs LED supports...There was some funny tech pro's-&-con's stuff flying around...


----------



## dc38 (Apr 14, 2014)

groutboy_1 said:


> All in fun,and jest..though my point is still proven...The old incandescent vs LEDs bias is still alive and well...But, to such a lesser degree...That No-one from the LED side of the forums...They don't even bother to raid the incandescent forum anymore...LOL...Oh, those days were funny...You guys never had so much attention...With back and forth banter from incandescent supports vs LED supports...There was some funny tech pro's-&-con's stuff flying around...



Perhaps some background into your profession would help us understand why you may find it enjoyable to spark and fuel such debates? OP asked a somewhat 'leading' question to which many of us have speculated or provided answers to...


----------



## groutboy_1 (Apr 14, 2014)

By all means, you 1st. If you read this thread in its entirety. It could be seen by any none biased persons. The LED bias is here .


----------



## dc38 (Apr 14, 2014)

groutboy_1 said:


> By all means, you 1st. If you read this thread in its entirety. It could be seen by any none biased persons. The LED bias is here .



With a background in Mechanical Engineering, I currently work with/on LED lighting fixtures that sport (In my humble opinion) some of the most beautiful LED tints and color rendition in the world. I'm all for the longevity and technological advance of LED technology, but as stated in another thread, I find that sometimes LEDs are not the solution to every lighting need. It may also be subjective to personal preference and/or engineering standards requirements, etc. Also in my personal opinion, it is within human responsibility to be able to produce efficient technologies such as LEDs while mitigating the detrimental effects of their production on the world we live in. That being said, while LEDs are an immediate patch to energy costs and 'sustainability', it all boils down to how LEDs can generate the most money whether in revenue or cost reduction. If we ignore the negatives that are usually not seen by public eyes, then LED tech is THE lighting tech pioneer of the future. 

Back to the OP's primary concern as TEEJ mentioned, beam shaping is an integral part of how the light is rendered to our perception. An older incan may have greater lux with less lumens because of the bulb/reflector shape, and the color of the light may have something to do with what our eyes can perceive.


----------



## groutboy_1 (Apr 14, 2014)

A healthy employment background in a depressed job market...I always had a fascination for all things about lighting...As my dad would say, light is a reglious or mystical path, as seen throughout ancient history...But, for me the consumer. I haven't seen any new age incandescent flashlights that meet or exceed any current led taclight.


----------



## rojos (Apr 14, 2014)

So no one would argue with you over there, so you came over here to start a fight? The funny thing is that no one here really wants to argue with you either.


----------



## Kestrel (Apr 15, 2014)

If I deleted the off-topic posts there wouldn't be much in the way of recent posts in this thread, so I guess we're done here. 

Just a FYI, petty bickering like this isn't appropriate for a discussion subforum.


----------

