# What's the benefit of incandescent over LED?



## sbebenelli (Sep 12, 2005)

KevinL's thread on his new Surefire A2 has got me wanting one now. All I have is LED lights U2, McluxII-PD, Peak AAA, and E2L. Can someone explain to me if I'm missing out on not having a good incandescent light? 

I want to thank Kevin on this problem he's caused me.


----------



## Bravo25 (Sep 12, 2005)

Color, and defintion. The best way I can convey the meaning is this. 
If you were to go into a heavily wooded area with an LED, and Incan of same out put you would be able to see further with the incan. I am not sure if the wave length allows more reflection of from surrounding objects or what, but that is what I have found. The will both light up the first perpendicular row of trees easily, but the Incan to me allows more "depth of field" if you will. 

That should make it clear as mud for you!

Perhaps someone else can explain it better than I.


----------



## MoonRise (Sep 12, 2005)

Color and power.

Incans have more red in their beam and have a different spectral blend to their light. Our eyes and brains are pretty used to the light from a flame or white-hot filament.

Power. Incans can have much higher power outputs (and inputs) than most LED lights. Cranking more than 100 lumens out of an LED light is not common and usually takes multiple high-flux emitters. With an incan, you just get a bulb that is designed for more power and you get more light. Want 200+ lumens? No problem for a bulb. Wnat 500 lumens? Still no problem for a bulb. Want 1000+ lumens? Still no problem for a bulb. The cells or battery pack for that are getting bigger and bigger, but it still really isn't a problem. Want 2000 lumens? You run an automotive 100 watt H4 bulb in a spotlight and that's the general output range you are in.

Oh, incans also put out lots of IR out the front end. You can cook or burn things with the higher powered incans at close range.

The A2 is a regulated incan light. No dimming of the output as the cells are used. The circuit keeps the light level steady until the end of the cells useful life.


----------



## daloosh (Sep 12, 2005)

Throw throw throw, and depends on what color rendition you find more accurate. I feel incan, even tho it's very yellow, is more accurate to me (it is more like sunlight than LED).

Oh, and the pleasure of dropping $25 for lamp assemblies from Surefire, too!

daloosh


----------



## WDR65 (Sep 12, 2005)

For me incandescents give more depth and detail at longer range. Even my KL1 & 3's and my Dorcy 1watt 3D don't allow me to make out much detail beyond 100-150 feet or so. Sure I can see things that far and make out shapes, but I can't tell what color it is or other things. When I'm bullfrogging I use incandescents for spotting and checking under my feet as it seems to be harder to spot snakes with Led's. Not impossible, but just harder and.......considering how close I get to them the less liability the better. Also at least in coastal waters with all the mist at night incandescents cut through the mist better and shine a lot farther. Led's don't seem to allow you to see into the water as well either.


----------



## David_Campen (Sep 12, 2005)

Just to agree with what has already been said: incans give better throw, better depth perception and better color rendition.


----------



## Flash_Gordon (Sep 12, 2005)

With any impediment to vision in the air such as fog, haze or smoke, incandescents are far superior IMO and in my experience. 

They cut through better and the color rendition of an incan just seems to work better. A bright LED can be like driving a car with high beams in the fog.

Mark


----------



## NelsonFlashlites (Sep 12, 2005)

I'm still an incan believer, too. I'll probably be called old fashioned...oh, well :shrug:


----------



## 357 (Sep 12, 2005)

David_Campen said:


> Just to agree with what has already been said: incans give better throw, better depth perception and better color rendition.



Agreed. For outdoor uses, where color rendition, range, and depth perception are needed, incandescents rule. I do prefer LEDs for indoor use, because to me the beam seems brighter and whiter at close range under indoor conditions. The problem with LEDs outdoors is that nearly all of them are slightly tinted blue: which makes everything outdoors look ghostly or as if moon light is being used (even though it might appear snow-white, to my eyes most are actually on the blue side), and they also lack the reds of incandescents.


If only they made more REGULATED incandescents, the flashlight world would be nearly perfect my opinion says.

The A2 is the only fairly common regulated incandescent (actually a hybrid), but I want more.

Surefire should offer the M6, M4, C3, and C2 with regulation options my opinion says. This way, they don't begin to yellow with 15 minutes of use (as my LOLA 2 cell and 3 cell Surefire bulbs typically do). This is my big dislike about most incandescents, I can see most yellow within a few minutes of being on, and they just get worst as the batteries die: yellow-amber-orange-brown/orange, etc....

I'd like to see incandescents that are fully regulated, and have a tiny red LED light near the switch that turns on around 5 minutes before the regulator fails. This way you could run the batteries down and change them right before it gets out of regulation (this could extend bulb life since my understanding is that it is bad on an incandescent bulb to run at less than full power).


----------



## Big_Ed (Sep 12, 2005)

I agree with everyone so far, plus I like the fact that if (when) the bulb goes out, I can simply put a new one in, no problem. If an LED goes out (and it has happened to me) I'm just out of luck. Sometimes simpler is better.


----------



## wasBlinded (Sep 12, 2005)

I would have to agree with just about everything said above, especially the comments of 357. The yellower light of incans doesn't backscatter as much in the atmosphere, and the warmer colors of the outdoors (foliage particularly) reflect the warmer light of the incan better. This trend can also be seen with LEDs, when comparing a warmer (say V1) bin to a cooler (say YO) bin.


And I definitely prefer the Luxeon LED indoors and for close-up work - it seems cleaner and sharper to my eyes.


----------



## Ilikeshinythings (Sep 13, 2005)

I believe that incan's give better throw on the whole, but as far as color rendition goes (and correct me if I am off topic with what you guys are implying) a nice white LED will display all colors far better than a yellow/ish incandescent. But through my experiences with (cheaper) incandescents, on the whole they seem to be brighter. Even with similar LUX readings and such. One thing I am taken with by incandescents is the virtually endless possibilities of making them INSANELY POWERFUL...like the USL or Surefire Beast...they are entirely superior in every aspect to anything even the best LED can create. But I aim to challenge my cheap incandescent by making my rechargeable 1 "D" mag with U bin luxeon. I am hoping this light will be brighter with better clarity than my 4 "D" mag on fresh batts and a fresh bulb. I will try and put up pictures when it's done so you guys can decide for yourselves. Maybe some day LED's will rival incandescents on all levels....wouldn't that be awesome?


----------



## NikolaTesla (Sep 13, 2005)

A 6 LED Mag with T-Bins or 3 or 4 LED Mag With U bins can rival the Incans if Multi bins are used. Single bin LED lights a limited spectrum which Incans are WHITE light (All Colors). Never seen a single LED light that can take on a Mag85 and I got them all. The RT-4 BAM! at 480 lumens, multi bin can get close.

LED benifit: They don't QUIT working suddenly especially when dropped.
Real superlights have high replacement cost for bulbs on regular basis.

LED lights can be run dim at multi power levels. Try cutting the power to an Incan. Like redish brown light? I don't.


----------



## SJACKAL (Sep 14, 2005)

Guess you got a basic idea.

Throw. Colour rendition. Better definition of smaller items or things hidden in shadows.

And I would like to add, better ability to cut through smoke, fog and rain.

And the cost of a really good LED light to rival the output of incandescent? Much more expensive than that of an incandescent light.

Perhaps these are the reasons why most LEOs, Firemen, and the military men still prefers incandescents over LEDs, not that they disregard the benefits of LEDs nonethelessly, nor are they ignorant of the LED technology or unwilling to spend the bucks, but incandescents are still better in some situations.


----------



## SJACKAL (Sep 14, 2005)

Ilikeshinythings said:


> I believe that incan's give better throw on the whole, but as far as color rendition goes (and correct me if I am off topic with what you guys are implying) a nice white LED will display all colors far better than a yellow/ish incandescent.



Ginseng's Polaris will change your views, with a colour temp of 6500K, the beam is as white as LED, without the Luxeon lottery issues and the Polaris is easily one of the hottest incandescents mods around.


----------



## js (Sep 14, 2005)

You can't roast a marshmallow using an LED beam. You need an incan for that!:devil:


----------



## andrewwynn (Oct 3, 2005)

having jumped full-hog into incan.. making some major headway... 

First.. figured out the worst enemy of incan is resistance.. holy cow... one exact example i came up with showed a 45% drop in output using a stock mag switch vs a KIU switch, all else being equal!

As far as the color rendition etc goes.. here is a real 'shocker' for the incan world:

here is a beamshot of the EXACT light shown above from NikolaTesla:





here is a beamshot of a 'mag 85' from the same distance with the same exposure:





and HERE is a beamshot of the RT4 BAM! prototype 'mark 2':





you can see the rest of the beamshots here (most useful for doing a/b comparisons.. and there are some really neat comparisons of the tesla-6 vs the BAM.. example:






That picture shows the left half being illuminated by the tesla-6 which clealy shows the limitations described above.. lack of 3D and looks 'hazy'.. that we see when using LEDs outside.. on the right side of the picture, however the BAM.. shows far more 3D detail, and very much in-fact like the mag85, which is really something since the mag85 has 3-4x the lumen output than the BAM.. you definitely still can see farther with it.. but that particular BAM has a 3-level switch that lets you run it roughly 1, 2, or 10 hrs!

The interesting thing about that Tesla/BAM shootout.. the Tesla actually has more lumen output! 

Yes.. the really mega-high power 1185 will still best the best of the LED in throw.. but actually if you look closely at those pictures.. for things closer than 50-60feet.. the BAM beat the mag85.. because the mag85 had such a hot spot in the middle it blows out the details of anything in the direct line-of-fire.. notice in the pics above you can't even SEE the emblem that we were using as the target! 

Basically we have come up with a way to compensate for that 'haziness' in LEDs and get them to appear more like Incan.. some more neat beamshots showing this are here

here are two examples from that page:

my 10,000 lux/450lumen RT4... 4 overdriven UX1Ls.. 





the light we call the BAM+.. maybe 7500 lux, 350 lumen.. 





The tree in the picture is about 40-50' away.. notice how much nicer the colors of the browns and the greens are.. really noticable in the foreground with the brown picnic table, but also in the log on the ground.. the sticks in the trees are AMAZINGLY more defined.. it's impossible to see clearly in a 2D picture just how much more clear the image is as far as 3D rendition but it's exactly what people are describing above as when incans kick LEDs butt. 

So.. this particular light for things closer than 20-40' is truly the best of both worlds.. it's a high-power mult-level LED light with the 'look' and advantage of incandescent when it comes to color rendition and beaming through fogginess including pollen and smoke. 

There is only ONE of those lights in the world.. but we will be making many more.. hopefully as soon as nov/dec time frame. 

The pictures don't lie and they don't even cover 1/2 the truth of just how much better the color rendition is.. it's just stunning!

OK.,. now that i 'sold ya' on the BAM!+ .. i should say that i absolutely apreciate when an ican just blows away ANY LED!... I'm working on a regulated driver for hotwire that will be a 'drop in' swap of the magswitch.. the specs are phenominal.. probably less than 10miliohms total resistance and full regulation.. no more blowing bulbs because the batteries are too fresh.. no more dimming... and the bulbs last a lot longer... we are also working on some really high output incans.. as much as 1600 lumen (bulb).. from a 2 1/2D size light.. and making a 'pomans' version of the USL.. 100W osram bulb but with 12 cells vs 11 and using regulation to keep the light full power the whole time no dimming.. lumen output.. God only knows.. 4000? just a guess.. practical, shmaktical.. that one is for fun!

So.. in the end.. i would not want to have only one or the other anymore.. but if i had to choose.. i would pick the likes of the BAM+ if i didn't need multi-hundred-ft throw since the VAAASST majority of flashlight illuminating is done at ranges less than 50' and the BAM!+ does a better job as you can see from the pics than even the mag85 (because it fills in better and no blown-out hot spot).. and 50,000+hr emitter life.. maybe 20,000 if you factor in to 70% of lumen retention... runtime of up to 10 hrs.. yadda yadda.\

I will be aiming to produce the very best high-power LED lights ever made and now the very best incan bang-for-buck lights incorporating the technology that makes LEDs so nice.. regulation! 

the thread talking about the hotwire driver is here: http://hotdriver.rouse.com I will be starting new threads as it makes sense to show off the new projects as we make headway..

there might be a pretty big 'pause' in development as i produce the nanos finally. 

-awr


----------



## bigpicture (Oct 5, 2005)

For someone who knows absolutely nothing about light, what is the best (read that simplest) way to compare output between LEDs an Incandescent lights? If I have a configuration of 1000 MCD LEDs, how many do I need to equal the output of a 60 Watt incandescent?


----------



## andrewwynn (Oct 5, 2005)

whoa .. I think that cd in the rating of LEDs really boils down to 'lumen'.. a 1000 mCD LED i think ends up being 1 lumen.. an incan bulb will say right on it how many lumen it has (probably in the high 100s).. so... many many many LEDs.. however.. the 60W incan has no optics or focus.. so to get a spot that is brighter does not take nearly as many lumen, so it does get tricky to answer that question.. the other thing is.. 90% of the time you do not need as much light, so 30-50 lumen could be plenty of light for your needs. 

incan or flourescent lights will have a LOT more light than an LED even a luxeon. 

-awr


----------



## Phaserburn (Oct 6, 2005)

To revisit this argument in my own mind, I went out last night and used comparable power led and incans on a variety of targets. On just about anything except pavement, the incan returned superior clarity and color, no question. Leds are and will be my EDC for all their advantages in size and power, but for when you know you're going outdoors, incans still rule the night. It's not even close. Leds will allow decent color for greens, but when mixed with the other earthy colors, it looks totally washed out. Alot of the world is brown...


----------



## David_Campen (Oct 6, 2005)

> It's not even close. Leds will allow decent color for greens, but when mixed with the other earthy colors, it looks totally washed out. Alot of the world is brown...


Or last weekend, grilling a thick steak over a campfire and then cutting it open to see if it was done. I couldn't tell from the illumination of my Petzl DUO LEDs or the UK4AA LED - I had to get an incandescent to see colors well enough in the red to tell if the steak was cooked.


----------



## Phaserburn (Oct 6, 2005)

David_Campen said:


> I had to get an incandescent to see colors well enough in the red to tell if the steak was cooked.


 
I too have had this experience! I was keeping a 26kmcd keychain light by the stove inside for this purpose, but even my wife, who knows nothing of this, stated she couldn't clearly tell what color the meat was using the led. That, to me, is telling when a non-flashaholic (re: a "Normal") notices without being prompted.


----------



## jhereg (Oct 6, 2005)

sbebenelli said:


> KevinL's thread on his new Surefire A2 has got me wanting one now. All I have is LED lights U2, McluxII-PD, Peak AAA, and E2L. Can someone explain to me if I'm missing out on not having a good incandescent light?
> 
> I want to thank Kevin on this problem he's caused me.



For me its mostly color. I have/use several Luxeon flashlights. I carry an E2E & a Q3 with me most of the time. I use the LED when I want light, but the E2E when I want good light & accurate colors. I love the runtime of LEDs, but the colors are off & everything seems rather 2 dimensional with them. My eyes prefer the output of the incandescents.


----------



## js (Oct 6, 2005)

NikolaTesla said:


> . . .
> 
> LED benifit: They don't QUIT working suddenly especially when dropped.
> Real superlights have high replacement cost for bulbs on regular basis.



I wish people would *STOP FRIGGING SAYING THIS!*

To wit:

NT, just how many superlight lamps have you replaced at what cost? Do tell. And on what basis?

For myself and for all of the other hotwire guys I know (and I mean ALL OF THEM) this is such a *NON-ISSUE*

I have never replaced the lamp on my EDC, the SF A2. It's still going strong after I don't know how many sets of 123's.

I have only ever blown or instaflashed *FOUR* lamps over two intensive years of hotwire use, modding, and testing. Total dollar value? Something under $20.

And I have never had an incan die on me while out in the field.

So, look, would you please, please, please, as a personal favor to me if for no other reason, stop spreading this notion that incans are so expensive to run and dangerous and unreliable to use, because of lamp breakage and short life.

IT,

IS,

SIMPLY,

NOT TRUE.

In my case, if I were an LED modder, I would have $100's of dollars if not thousands tied up in Luxeon LED's. And if I fried or ruined just one of them, I would already have been most of the way towards what I have fried or ruined in the way of incan lamps.

OK?

Is it too much to ask for people to be FAIR towards incans? They have so many admitted and obvious disadvantages compared to LED's that we needn't cook the books to put them at an even greater disadvantage.


----------



## SJACKAL (Oct 6, 2005)

Doing Jim a favor,

I like to add that I feel what Jim feel. I got a 6P EDC, there's a P90 LA in it powered by unprotected R123s. Daily used and carried, its my work light, never fail. Badly beaten, badly scratched up, dropped, bounced down a flight of stairs, but still torching and scorching the night.

I guess if the light is well built to withstand a occasion shock, we shouldnt be over worried about the lamp busting.

And one more advantage for Incandescent not mentioned: It seems to cut through tinted glass better than LEDs, I guess intensity is the key here. I think this is important for a security guard or a LEO, if their light needs to cut through a tinted vehicle or house window to illuminate the room behind the glass.


----------



## andrewwynn (Oct 7, 2005)

phaser: there is a turning of a page coming... look again at the comparison of the mag85 vs the BAM+ ... there is more similarity than difference.. the likes of a 300-400 lumen light it would be hard to tell the difference.

That is the only LED light i've personally witnessed to compare with incan though.. so i'll have to make more like it.. 'best of both worlds' is our immediate reaction to the first tests. That light was born about 10 minutes before those photos. 

LEDs 'light up' greens but in a bad way.. it makes them completely 2D.. take any decent LED light and point at the grass.. now follow with incan.. it's a very simple way to compare the difference.. now.. just take an LED light with tint of V1 and one of W0 and compare the difference... same thing will happen. 

meat is a very good example.. grilling under LED.. not a good idea.

re: JS's friggin sayin this.. 

there is some overstatement and some understatement in this concept... .

example.. my 400+ lumen 10,000 lux superLED light.. cost about $400 to make.. my mag85.. 1200 lumen.. 45,000lux light cost about $140... so.. for the difference of $260 i can buy almost 30 bulbs.. there is some truth to that an incan is far more likely to just 'give out' on you when you could very likely need it, but the odds of it happening.. pretty small on a percent of #times using it or even MTBF in hours, though with the likes of high-power lights like 1331 or 1166.. with bulb lifetimes in the single digits maximum.. i think that is what N.T. was talking about 'regular basis'. Replacing a $9 bulb every 9 hrs is $1/hr operating costs.. running my super led.. runs about 1 to 10 hrs on a charge which costs about 0.25 cents (literally)... means 1/4th to 1/40th of a cent per hour operating costs.

N.T. was talking about the likes of the 1185 bulb when talking about the 'regular basis' and not the A2 and such.. the A2 being regulated i'm sure is a lot longer bulb life expectancy than a typical hotwire light, and AFAIK, quite an 'exception to the rule'. 

on the other side of the spectrum.. in 'real world' use of hotwire i blew two 1331s in the first week (it's a finicky bulb on 9 AAs).. and melted at least 1 1166 since then, so 3 or 4 bulbs within the first month... $27-36.. about the cost of ONE U-bin emitter.. (seeing a 'trend' here?).. i've melted a couple U-bins in the process of building the RT4s.. 

I have had incan bulbs burn out on me at least 10x in my life... at least twice when they were in-use (i.e. just blew in the middle of running).. and the other times mostly when first turning on... i have had at least 4 or 5 occurrences of dropping a flashlight and having the bulb break.. and iv'e dropped an LED light very hard at least 15x with no ill effect other than dinging the finish on the light.

Soo... incans aren't either 'expensive to run' necessarily unless you are talking about the likes of a mag85 which is close to $1/hr... when you amortize that out... it takes a LOOOOTT of hours to be 'more expensive' than an LED that is 1/4 the brightness..

So.. bang for the $Buck$... even 'expensive to use' hotwire lights like 1185 are still a better value than high-end LED lights.. 

All that said... need a light for close-up constant illumination i will grab the RT4 5:1 ratio over a hotwire... need something to spot animals at night... 5:1 i'll take a Mag85 or the likes. 

I know that if i had only a hotwire light i would have a spare bulb, just like i always have since the advent of maglite where it has the patented foam donut holding the spare bulb in it's cozy nook. 

It is safe to say.. that i will likely never catch up to the dollar value i've blown in luxeon with hotwire bulbs... i blew up 1 or 2 in testing.. 1 or 2 in use and in a week i'll have the hotwire driver running, so no more 'testing' and the bulbs will most likely last twice as long.. i can probably go the rest of my life before i blow enough bulbs to match the R&D losses in luxeons. 

I will admit openly that from the onset of my flashlight obsession... i am Mr LED.. in-fact it was funny when it was pointed out to me the first time i made a favorable post about Incans... well.. though the VAST majority of my resources are tied up in LED development... my latest design is an INCAN hotwire light... because in the same form-factor i will be able to crank out FOUR TIMES the amount of light.. 1600 lumens.. 40 minutes runtime... in a 2 1/2D form factor... the best i can hope for in LED is about 400-450 in the same form-factor. 

If "Mr LED" (me) can more than just admit it but jump head-first into incan hotwires... i can't imagine *anybody* who actually thinks things through can really excuse making them out as 'unreliable' or 'expensive' or especially 'dangerous'... and agree with the statements of Jim here. 

There are many pros and cons to BOTH types of lights that i think will keep them BOTH just as useful as the next for many years to come. 

(I hope so.. then i can sell twice as many lights).. "if you like my LED lights.. you really gotta see my hotwires!"

After i built my first kickbutt LED light... 9W 3 emitter.. cost like $300... and compared the output to a 6P surefire... i was like.. daym... that is NOT BAD!... 

There will be a widening 'DMZ' between incan and LED as LEDs become more powerful and better colors... but the melting point of Tungsten will no get lower, and silicon will never come close... so i don't ever see a time tht LED will push incan completely into obsolescence. 

MHO

-awr


----------



## Haesslich (Oct 7, 2005)

Incandescents still have the edge in output and color rendition, sad to say - though I've found some LuxIII's which did decently with reds (my Lionheart is better at rendering them than my Aleph 3, which provides a 'flatter' color), I've found my new favorite light for color rendition is a 4700K Solux lamp in a Polaris. Unfortunately, I've already blown my 50W bulb somewhow, as it turned on and just faded out and died completely... which is the main downside for me and incandescents - the filaments are fragile, and are the 'weakest' point of almost any incandescent I know of, even the well-designed ones from Surefire.

Only HIDs really rival incandescents, from what I've seen, when it comes to rendering colors and penetrating through various lighting conditions with little difficulty; Luxeons at least, and I suspect other LEDs, have problems because of the quality and color of light they produce, as most of the high-flux or low-flux 'white' lights have been lacking in the red and yellow spectra, as seen in various charts as well as normal use. 

Of course, I still carry at least 2 LED-based lights on me at all times, but I've rediscovered the incandescent through the superior works of our hotwire guys. They still have more output than LEDs, and thus there exists a gap that most LEDs have yet to cross. The only other alternative to incandescents when it comes to light output and color, at least for the moment, are the equally 'fragile' HID lamps.


----------



## NewBie (Oct 7, 2005)

andrewwynn said:


> whoa ..
> 
> incan or flourescent lights will have a LOT more light than an LED even a luxeon.
> 
> -awr




Sorry, incandescent have the lowest lumens per watt (chill on the hype/used car sales spin stuff).

There are also the warm white LEDs, that have the incandescent "color tone", but they haven't gotten them very efficient, so they just match an incandescent. Main advantage then boils down to, oops I dropped my incandescent while on, need to change bulb now. A few very spendy lights do have shock mechanisms that reduce the chances of this happening.

There are also some other tricks you can play with LEDs, that I haven't seen done on cpf yet, that you can't do with an incandescent.


I do like the target choice, yellow, putting the LED at a huge disadvantage.

Looks to me that you are sending significantly more lumens in a much more concentrated spot.

Cut the hype, and put the same amounts of watts into the bulbs/LEDs for the comparisions.


Put these side by side:






This is the natural colors in a natural scene.

Now, for comparision, which light draws more power to produce that same result?

I might feel that the overdriven UX1L RT4, renders some colors even better, when looking side by side, and the other light renders other colors better.

Now, if you had used five UWOJ, and not over driven them, so they are considerably more efficient, 2x more light output per watt of energy put into the LED/incandescent, then things would be on a much more level playing field. Another way to look at it is to say, putting out the same amount of light for twice the amount of time, or 2x the light for the same amount of time. Or you could go with 1.5x the light for 1.5x the time.

The X1 color bin is a **** poor example for color rendering test comparisons, as it is strongly green, lacking in the blues and reds, what Craig of LEDMuseum likes to call rotten cat urine green. That X1 bin is one that many have hated for a long time. One of the W0 or especially the V0 bins would have done much better against the incandescent for rendering.

I really would like to see a side by side shot of these two, in the same picture, on a natural scene, using a decent color bin choice for the LEDs.

The drop-in you are talking about that we have covered in another thread, in several cases, produces some considerable waste heat, in and of itself. In a few it is efficient. The soft starting of the bulb, talked about extensively in the Thor boost development thread is a really nice feature though.

One of the massive drawbacks in a light like the MAG85 is the very short lifetime of the bulbs, which aren't cheap to start with. There are plenty of threads discussing this. Yes, the soft start will help, but the bulb isn't a long life bulb to start with.

Curious, will the drop-in thing you were talking about do all the shock absorption so that when the light is dropped while it is on, the filament doesn't break? (one of the really major pain in the derriere things of an incandescent that happens at just the wrong time)

IMHO, best the cut all the hype and sales spin, and cut to the chase, and discuss things on their real actual merits. Way too much like the Mr. Bulk LionHeart and LionCub threads, IMHO. Keep that stuff over there, IMHO.


----------



## andrewwynn (Oct 7, 2005)

re: HID.. the absolute WORST light i've EVER used for the loss of 3D... literally makes anything you light with it look positively TWO dimensional.. also being one of my absolute favorite lights: the Maxabeam...so.. though the color is beautiful.. you can't see any depth at all.. put a spot on a tree and it looks like a painted disc... it's amazing to see. 

A hotwire light will output about 30-35 lumen per watt.. go look at the WA ratings.. 

begin' to differ on the 'incan have the lowest'... yes.. traditional 60W lightbulbs at the house are low enough they are in the luxeon range of lumen/W.. 

when 'we' say 'incan' 'we' mean 'tungsten halogen incandescent'..

see this chart: 





source of the chart is here

'hotwire':15 to 35 lumen/W
flourescent: 40 to 80 lumen/W
not in the list: arc: 20-40 lumen/W
Tbin Lux3: 22 lumen/W
Ubin Lux3: 28 lumen/W
Sbin K2: 40 lumen/W
Vbin K2: 24 lumen/W
HID: around 100 lumen/w

So.. the efficacy of luxeons is approacing that of incan.. i missed an important thing to mention... that where [hotwire] incans really rock is not necessarily in the lumen/watt.. but the lumen/W/volume... 

you can put 20-30-40W into a single bulb with a filament not much larger than the DIE on a lux... so the 3:1 or 4:1 ratio of light output i can produce in the same size head largely comes from that fact, since the efficacy of LEDs is approaching incans quickly. 

Still.. the light output of flourescent is often double to tripple that of the best incan or LED emitter (which means similarly higher than hotwire).. for 'cheap' run costs.. and still having 'white' light flourescent is impoosible to beat. As you can see.. low pressure sodium.. can be upwards of 180 lumen/w.. NINE times a typical Luxeon.. and SIX times a typical 'hotwire'.. but of course.. the color is useless for anything but safety illumination. 

It is interesting to note that the CFLs start at 50 on the chart and the 'next gen' of luxeon class emitters are 40... it would be very neat to see the LED be in the same league as the CFL.. they are FAR more reliable so it would be stunning to see luxeon replace CFL. 

====

I would say by far the main advantage of an LED light in-general is a combination of the reliability of the bulb and the realitivly longer runtime that is usually assosiated with the fact there is usually circuitry involved to really suck a battery bone-dry.. or reduce the power output to what is needed rather than always 110% (but ours go to 11).. 'this is spinal tap'. 

not sure what you were thinking with the pictures.. those are BOTH LED lights... the point of the comparison of those two lights is this:

that with the 10,000 lux, 450 lumen luxeon monster.. the 350lumen model really 'holds its own'.. the reality is.. that I was there when i took the picture.. the 'real world' just happens to LOOK like the picture on the right and NOT like the picture on the left... if you look closely you will notice that the tree trunk looks like you are looking through a pale green filter.. on the right, the tree trunk looks more like a tree.. if you also look in the brush.. on the right.. you can see the sticks and twigs.. on the left, notsomuch. 

The importance of the difference unfortuantely is not nearly as noticable in a 2D picture.. that the BAM+ has 3D rendition that is on-par with an incan light of similar power.. go back to page one and check out the pictures of the grader.. the mag85 on the whole does not do much better than the BAM+ in making detail stand out.. edge definition and clarity is astounding on the BAM+ Virtually indestinguishable from a decent incandescent (400-500 lumens, say). 

Power level of the two lights in the pictures above.. the RT4 consumes about 17W.. and i estimate it's between 420 and 450 lumen.. not sure why i used the 'high side' in this example when i normally say like 420-430.. that is 25 Lum/W. the BAM+ is probably about 14.4W and 24 lumen/W. 

I want to get a direct comparison of direct emitters... like TWOJ vs TV1J, etc, but i really want to do the direct comparison of incan vs BAM+ since that's the point i'm trying to make.. theire is a narrowing gap. 

X1 bin is actually excellent, have no idea where the cat urine example came from.. and though it suffers in the outdoors it's a fantastic color bin for indoors, i prefer it to the blue-white W0 that people love so much (which coincidentally is the dead-worst i've seen outside (W0)).. followeed by the V0. The best i've seen outdoors is the V1 bin. 

re: drop in.. you are talking about the Vreg ckt i'm developing i presume.. if by 'considerable' you mean 10% loss to heat of the FET.. or 2W in the 1160 design or 3.5W in the 1166 design or 1W (3%) in the 1154 design, well yes it's 'considerable'... it actually is not a large percentage at all and is worth more than just the 'soft start' but the fact it will make for constant output for the majority of the battery life.

One of the abosolute favorite things for me that drew me to LED was the constant output.. 100% to 0% of battery life... my lights output almost exactly the same amount of light.. i cant' stand 'constantly dimming' lights, which is what virtually all incans are... a $2 to $7 part to make a $100 to $500 light maintain constant output, at the same time keeping output consistant.. it's extremly short-sighted IMHO to not include that in a design. 

The mag85 does have too short of a life.. burn bright, burn short i guess.. it's also a major reason i dove head-first into hotwire to try to find a better way.. A couple of the options are on the table to make a light that can compete with the 1185 bulb and have better bulb life.. 

Example.. though it won't knock your socks off for bright.. the 1154 bulb re-rates to 500 lumen at 10.7V.. and it'll be pretty warm color at barely over 3K.. however.. 1700 hour estimate bulb life.. the W04424 bulb ([email protected]).. re-rates to about 1000 lumen at 7V (run from a 7.2V source).. 40W.. but the bulb is rated for 2000 hrs.. so would probably be nearly 1000 hr bulb life. 

the 1274 on a 7.2V source is 'at spec' with 40 hr lifespan.. 532 lumen.

the 1166 from a 10.8V source.. 12% under drive is 538 lumen but 45 hrs. 

now.. where i think the 'next level' is comign from.. 14.4 solutions.. 12AAs in a 3D or 4xLion (4x3 or 4x2 or 4x1 depending on bulbs run and battery capability).. 

the 1323.. 430 lumen.. 112 hr.. can run from 4xAA bulbs for 38min that's a screaming mimi!
the 1312.. 775 lumen.. 280 hr! needs more cells.. but 8 AAs (LiON) 44 min..and my 'next favorite host'. the 2 1/2D FiveMega will run it for 66 minutes... it should run 'direct drive' but i'll use my regulator to keep it below nominal Vbat for soft-starting. 
and.. the 1154... well.. i don't think it'll have quite the 'feel' of the 1185 because it's a little lower temperature.. but driven to almost identical brightness.. the re-rater says that the 1185 can output 1300 lumen for 7.9 hrs at 35 lumen/watt.. but the 1154 at 14V re-rates to the same (1300) lumen.. albeit at 47W (27 lumen/W).. but the bulb-life is 68 hours.. considerably longer bulb life. 

The reality in how somebody uses a light is that most will not use up 70 hrs of on-time in 5 yrs, so the incandescent bulb life can be quite a long time.. especially if you have an LED light for 'routine' stuff that is up-close.. not outside, yaddayadda. 

Oh.. runtime estimates on the 1154 at 1300lumen.. 38 minutes.. 97% average efficiency on the driver, since the regulator really is only dropping the 'overvoltage' from a fresh charge. 

Was it me that was talking about shock-isolated drop-in? I believe that would be MINE.. i am considering building that into my 'big hotwire' project. Hope to have the nano production out of the way asap so that i can get on to bigger brighter things, namely my 1600lumen hotwire light. 

I think.. when i was talking about the incan kicks led butt.. is based on that upcoming gem.. basically 'the baddest' LED light i've ever seen is the RT4 aka BAM!.. 3-levels.. up to 10,000 lux. 420 (conservative) lumen.. BAD *** MAG oops did i share that little secret? ... and yet in the same exact size light.. i will be making a 1600 lumen.. nearly 4x the light output light.. and.. to-boot.. 40 minutes runtime!

So.. not exactly sure whree the 'hype' or 'spin' is.. 

My points that may have been missed to bring up that debate: 

RT4, though absolutely baddass.. doesn't hold a candle to a kick-butt incan outside.. but unlike incan can run 10hrs on low.. 2hrs on med, 1 hr on high. 

BAM+.. though LED.. has the same functions of RT4, but is not quite as bright, with the trade-off being that it is nearly indistinguishable from a like-powered incan, with the exception of the hotspot being a little more spread out so it doesn't have quite the throw. 

Incans can absolutely positively kick some serious monkey butt.. if i didn't think they can kick *** i surely wouldn't have spent about 50% of my waking hours over the past month trying to jam in my major deveolpment before nano production.. 

I need to get a fair beamshot of the BAM+ vs. an equivalent lumen hotwire or even equivalent power (so same runtime) incan.. i actually believe it'll kick it's ***.. but it still has 1/3 the lumen output capability of a light that is marginally larger (i.e. mag 85 is typically in a 3D host), so it can't 'beat them all'... but it has narrowed the playing field considerably.. 

here is maybe a better example to show the amazing difference between what we are 'used to' seing with LED vs what we will be seeing with LED (and are USED to seeing with incan):





This shows the incan-looking BAM+ on the left, and the typical color of LED light on the right (6-emitter Tesla 6).. 





Now.. having them reversed so you can see there are 'no tricks'..look at the depth and detail sadly compressed into 2D is only 1/4 as noticable... this is the best head-to-head comparison i have of what this difference being discussed is between incan and LED.. this is 'exactly' what the difference looks like in the real world.. ironically.. both lights in this picture are LED lights. I will get a head-to-head made that 'actually' is incan v LED with both the 'old' and the 'new' LED soon, it needs to be shown, because there is something amazing we discovered in the invention of the BAM+ that as these pictures CLEARLY show there is a MARKED improvement in the color and definition with the BAM+ vs a similarly powered badass LED light.. both in the neighborhood of 400 lumens.. yet one is 'old tech' and one is 'new tech'.

more interesting is to go to the slideshow page.. scroll to the bottom and click on the last image.. then click the 'back' arrow bottom right in the slideshow and hit 'forward' and 'back' to flip between the two images. 

The reality is it is a bigger difference when both eyes are checking it out because the biggest difference is the 3 dimensional look.. it ist jus plain stunning.. 'best of both worlds' was the consensus among the flashlight gurus who have played with the BAM+ so far. 

To me.. when i look at the grader.. with the two LED lights side-by-side.. the side that has the traditional LED looks like i'm looking through foggy glasses or something.. lower contrast.. muddier colors.. and that particular LED light is a monster awesome light.. 6 TYAK emitters direct-drive in IMS17 reflectors.. the side with the BAM+ is just crystal clear... when i first saw it on outside.. i was like 30' away and Tom was lighting up part of the red brick oin our house.. and my jaw just absolutely dropped... i thought it was the mag85 because i'd never seen an LED light 'look like an incan'.

My point is that it can and will be done.. the bam boards and heatsinks are ready to go to press and i hope to have them back to start taking orders around the end of november.. people will be able to order them as the normal BAM or the BAM+ and i believe the wiser will choose the BAM+ especially if they'd like to find a middle ground between the perfect incan hotwire and the perfect indoor LED light, they might be able to get away with one that is right smack dab in the middle of the DMZ.. won't have the throw and lumen of the hot hotwire.. won't have the 'paper white' look of the TWOJ for 'wall hunting' but in the practial world... well just scroll up and look at the pictures.. it's just plain stunning how well it works.

it won't any time soon output the lumen numbers of a really bright hotwire, but it will compete handily with the 400-600 lumen incans. 

Sorry if it sounds like 'hype'.. it's pretty darn exciting and it's reality. If you know of a more exciting LED light to compare/compete with hotwire, please point it out, i need to know where my competition is. 

-awr


----------



## NewBie (Oct 7, 2005)

http://www.walamp.com/lpd/webstore/detail.tpl?partnumber=01160-U&cart=11287004741085331#

The 1160 bulb is 18.94 lumens per watt, look under Efficacy-they did the math already. (17.25 Watts)


http://www.walamp.com/lpd/webstore/detail.tpl?partnumber=01166-U&cart=11287004741085331

1166 bulb is 30.7816 lumens per watt, but only 20 hours lifetime (hint, they are already pushing the filament pretty darn hard) (22.85 Watts)


http://www.walamp.com/lpd/webstore/detail.tpl?partnumber=01154-U&cart=11287004741085331

The 1154 bulb is 20.3896 lumens per watt (36.96 Watts)


http://www.walamp.com/lpd/webstore/detail.tpl?partnumber=01185-U&cart=11287004741085331

1185 bulb 27.01 lumens per watt 30.24 Watts (50 hour lifetime)


http://www.walamp.com/lpd/webstore/detail.tpl?partnumber=01274-U&cart=11287004741085331

1274 bulb 27.72 lumens per watt, 40 hour lifetime


http://www.walamp.com/lpd/webstore/detail.tpl?partnumber=01323-U&cart=11287004741085331

1323 bulb 19.11 lumens per watt



The great thing about Incandescent, is they still rule for lumens per spot size (HID obviously blows them away for that- and by far for efficiency, sitting somewhere in the 70lm/watt range). The other nice thing about Incandescent is that they are very, very cheap compared to other technologies.

One of the big things I see in your photos is the Kelvin color temperature of the LED lights you are showing are different, the BAM and RT4 and such. One is quite a bit warmer than the other, which is alot cooler for Kelvin temperature. So, as we all know, a warmer lamp has alot more red/yellow in it, quite obviously, as in your tractor picture, or your red table reference, those warmer colors will show up much better- obviously there is more red and yellow in the light.

Some of the newer "high-end" lights under development are utilizing RGB sources, which some around here have already had out for years. These can offer substantially better color rendering than an LED, and the sources can be selected for the peak sensitivities for the red, green, blue of the human eye (the eye ball doesn't really have red cones, but it derives red by subtraction of the green cone from the what I'll just call a yellow cone). The problem is getting them to appear as one source, as you typically end up getting color fringing in the shadows off edges. Not impossible to solve though.

I have seen several examples in the past year where folks have taken a white LED, lacking in the red output and assisted it with a red LED, which helps alot. Unfortunately, in most examples I have seen, they suffer from the color fringing effect in the shadows, though not as bad as a RGB, but still distracting. The first examples of red assisted white, and RGB lights, I saw back in 2001. It was a single red Luxeon in the center, assisted by a surrounded by a ring of white Luxeons. They also had an RGB array, but it suffered from more fringing effects. I've also seen a setup where they used the various colored LEDs to light a surface, then focused off that surface.


Back to LED efficiencies. Looking at the 1W Luxeon, LXHL-BW02, typical output is 45 lumens (not the low or the high, but the average), and in typical use, when properly heatsinked at it's rating, drops to about 42 lumens per watt. It has been out for years. CREE also has their 70 lm/W part that I am assured will be out on the street in under six months. Seoul Semiconductor showed me a 100lm/W part, but it is only development, and they have no ETA last I checked.
LXHL-BW02 datasheet: http://www.luxeon.com/pdfs/DS25.pdf


Personally, I've worn out quite a few Incandescent bulbs over the years, having them go dark in the middle of operation, which really sucks bigtime, as a person is always doing something where they need the flashlight. I've had an even greater number of Incandescent bulbs blink out at turn on, right when I needed to do something, very, very inconvenient. And I've been out on a hike, even running and jumping, going thru obstacles, where I've lost grip on the light, expecially in the rain, and dropped the light, and now you are in black darkness in the middle of a mess, with no light. This can be quite dangerous. So a person has to carry spare bulbs, and the light *HAS* to be designed for very simple and very easy bulb change in the darkness with wet hands and a minimum number of loose parts. So with Incandescent lights it is especially wise to carry a spare incandescent flashlight.

Now for show and tell, shelf/desk queens it probably doesn't make much difference at all, if the bulb goes out. We all know bulbs die, especially high performance bulbs, no secret there.

I also noticed in your pictures, the light sources are offset from the camera, substantially to your right, to emphasize the shadows that are flaring quite a bit to the left. This makes things look quite different, alot more "contrasty" showing alot more shadow, verses when a person is normally holding the light in their hands. Got more tractor shots from straight on? Nice trick, whether on purpose or accident though. This trick also happens to emphasizes the 3D appearance in the photo.






Take note of the angle difference, noting the difference in the shadow angle, shown both with the red angle lines, and also the straight lines.

There are quite a few more differences in the photos, especially angles, if you look at this photo here, look at the shadow on the ground of the ladder and the stake shadows:
http://www.molalla.net/~leeper/andrew3.jpg

Also, in this one, notice the difference in the stake shadow intensities between the two shots, and the bucket shadow intensity, from the two lights.
http://www.molalla.net/~leeper/andrew4.jpg


----------



## andrewwynn (Oct 7, 2005)

talk about being 'under the microscope'  I don't mind at all i think this is a good bit of a debate going on here. 

1160 is 18.94 'til you put 6.5V onto it where it re-rates to 33.
1166 is 30.78 'til you put say 12.5V onto it where it's 37.
1154 is 20.39 'til you put say 14V onto it and get 27.
1185 is 27 'til you put 10.7V on it and get 33
1274 is 28 'til you put 7.2V on it and get 28. (lol.. rated voltage).
(running in a regulated 9.V host at about 8V gets you 33L/W and 800L)
1323 is 19.1 'til you you apply 14.37V and get 27.2

So.. as you can see overdrive is absolutely imperitive if you'd like to see some serious luminus efficiency from hotwire, but the trade off is a serious one.. much more lumen per watt and substantially reduced runtime.. a regulator is absolutely required for some of these solutions or the bulbs will last less than a minute.. 'pushing the envelope' i would say. 

The Kelvin temp is different that is the POINT of the photos.. it's specifically why the BAM+ is really kicking butt.. it simple outputs colors more like an incan. 

Those are some really neat ideas like the the mutiple colors on a surface and focused.. i think that something along those lines is the way to go. 

I can't wait to see LEDs with Efficacies in the 60-100 range.. the problem for a long time will not be the efficacy but the power limitation.. you won't soon be able to put 100W into an LED which you can do in an incan.. that was what i meant by the incan will rule in the output. 

The offset in the pictures has only to do with the fact Tom has two hands.. on opposet sides of his body.. he's about 18' wide and was about 20-30' from the object he was illuminating.. divide and get the arctan of the result and you'll know the angle.. the insignfiigant difference in that shadow angle is an absolutely moot point to the reality of the increased 3D effect.. i wasn't taking measurement i'm talking about what you really see in real life with your real eyes. 

The contrast has everything to do with the color of the light leaving the flashlight and what gets bounced back. 

We definitely could have spend more time making it an exact experiment.. there is no need to 'nitpick' the particulars those photos are a 'macro' scope of intent.. just 'look' at them and ask yourself.. which side looks nicer, the BAM side or the Tesla6 side.. maybe you like the blue look of LED and will even answer the T6... i couldn't tell you.. but i'm saying that to ME (and everybody that has seen it).. the BAM+ has the 'look and feel' of an incan but without the beam artifacts or issues like bulb breakage and wear.. 

The points are valid about the possibility of the increase in the 3D effect but trust me, it's not 3% of what makes the difference... unfortunately you can't take a picture of what it really looks like, so people will have to see one in-person to really get the gist of how awesome it is. That will probably happen around Dec. 

-awr


----------



## NewBie (Oct 7, 2005)

Unfortunately, when you up the voltage on the bulbs, their power consumption goes down, but you can approach 30lm/W with one of those incandescents you mentioned.

The different Kelvin temperature makes a big difference in comparisions, as you can yourself see. Would have been interesting to use a bin much closer to WO or VO for those shots, instead of the X1 left field. You know, an LED that has alot more yellow, red, blue, instead of a lower amount of red, yellow, blue of the X1 bin.

I see a large difference in one of those photos in the green stick shadow that I linked to. Any idea here, was one of them alot brighter in the other shot? Battery change? Battery going dead in one light? Any ideas? 

Any chance you could shoot the photos from straight on, instead of such an exteme offset from the camera and the light source? That way we could see what it would look like if we were holding it ourselves, thus accentuating the shadows much less, and presenting a more realistic scenario?

The "step ladder" to get into the cab. Look at my links:
http://www.molalla.net/~leeper/andrew4.jpg
http://www.molalla.net/~leeper/andrew3.jpg
See how the step ladder shadow on the ground is offset a good foot or two, between the two photos? What happened there, did Tom move around?


----------



## andrewwynn (Oct 7, 2005)

gee you keep making me have to think. 

had a power blink so lost my whole post of 20-30 min but here goes again:

not sure what you mean by voltage up power consumption goes down.. i think you mean the efficacy does down? more voltage will mean more current means more power, i know you didn't mean that. 

I believe that in 2 or 3 of the examples about 30+L/W will be achieved.

It's i think kinda humorous if i'm reading you right... it seems you think the 'Tesla6' (T6) in these examples is the one with X1 color emitters, when the (IMO).. much better looking light is the one with the X1s. The flat, washed out color is the light with the YA or YO bin. 

I will make a 3 or 4 lux light that uses W0 and show the direct comparison to a V1 when i get the chance... W0 is a pointless light source outside, it was the next worst to the maxabeam for loss of 3D and the worst for bouncing back dust and pollen.. just like high beams in the fog. 

I will do a direct comparison and be more scientific the next time with W0, X1, V1 and BAM+ 

I dunno what the difference is for sure but i'm suspecting that there is more or less florescence going on.. that green stick is painted with florescent paint. 

I just happened to snap those shots.. we were excited to have it running and when we saw the amazing difference in the color and contrast we decided we had better take some pictures.. we didn't think ahead enough to be more scientific about it.. we did try to aim the lights at the same place from the same distance, but obviously didn't think about same arm... the reason was that we were 'blinking' back and forth.. tom would swap from T6 to BAM+ over and over.. something you really need to use both hands to do. 

the offset on the ground a foot or two is because that shadow is about as far behind the grader as tom is infront of it.. the trig works out that it should be 14-20" apart which it is.. mystery solved.. 

If you look closer to the ladder, the shadow maybe moved 4" on the front left tire.. 

In the 2D picture.. it can be said that the add' shadow incidence helped make it more 3D.. but in reality it's not 5% of the effect.. the 'fog cutting' lower K color by FAR is the more important thing. 

It is funny though, how perception works, when you don't have all the facts and have no choice but to speculate, it's easy to see where any number of possibilities could be the case. 

double-checking the post above.. you do have something mixedup.. 

the 'warmer' BAM+ is in-fact the light with the X1 bins (UX1L).. where the T6 has either YA or Y0 bin emitters. 

so... now ya don't know what to do do ya? (i'm just joshing).. but seriously.. double-check those photos, knowing that the 'nicer' looking light is X1 powered.. now.. how 'cat-urine-y' are those pictures? I'm not exactly sure why the X1 has such a bad rep, obviously one must have stung you or something, cause you are out to get them it would seem. 

In any event.. I've been VERY happy with my X1 solutions, usually preferring them to W0 in most cases.. X1 is not my favorite for outside.. it just happens to be the BRIGHTEST emitter (other than the K2s that just came in) that i've ever had in my possession... so that's why they are in the BAM! If i had my choice for the emitter in an outdoor light i use V1. 

-awr


----------



## js (Oct 7, 2005)

NewBie said:


> Unfortunately, when you up the voltage on the bulbs, their power consumption goes down, but you can approach 30lm/W with one of those incandescents you mentioned.



Jarhead,

What are you talking about?

Forget it. Don't answer that. Just read this: it is from Osram's "Tungsten Halogen Low Voltage Lamps Photo Optics":

"The higher the luminous efficiacy [of tungsten halogen incandescent lamps], the shorter the life of the lamp because luminous efficacy can only be acheived by increasing the temperature of the filament. The melting point of tungsten forms the natural upper limit, and here the luminous efficacy would be 42 lumens/watt. However, because a lamp must also be capable of being handled mechanically and switched on electrically, the achievable limit is 37 lumens/watt."

So, I'm not sure what you wer talking about, but here is the story:

as voltage goes up, so does power consumption (and thus current draw), but efficiency goes up as well. And of course, lamp life goes down, rather non-linearly.

30 lumens/watt is a very attainable efficiency. Many photographic lighting operates at a CCT of 3400 K. At 3330 K a lamp has an efficiency of 30 lumens/watt.

As for all the rest of the back and forth between you and AWR, I confess that I didn't read it, but you guys seem like you're having fun, so continue on as you were! :green:


----------



## andrewwynn (Oct 7, 2005)

I like a spirited debate.. not sure exactly why there is one, it seems we are trying to say the same thing, but somehow there is confusion.. thanks for the details about the maximums, i didn't know what it was but i knew that some of my solutions were pretty darn close since i've used at least one bulb right up to melting point before. 

(dont try to use an 1166 bulb at 14.4V.. bulb life: 0.05hrs). 

-awr

ps.... bright as HELL. 





1185 on the left.. 1166 on the right (in a ONE D FM host!).


----------



## NikolaTesla (Oct 7, 2005)

Sorry if I got you going, JS. No I have not had a lot of superbulbs die and I use them alot. The ones that die the most are those sickly little mini bipins in the minimag. I did bust a WA1185 when I dropped a light while it was on. Big deal. you are right. I spent more on broken LEDs (They cost more). Andrew is better at it then me. He can fry high buck U bins better than anyone,








And no we did not rig or deliberately do anything to those pictures to emphasize anything inaccurately. The point of the BAM! is a multi-Bin multi-color light source more acurately mimics performance of Incan. More different light frequencies are better for human perception than limited spectrum lights. The photos no where do justice what that concept light (Multi-Bin) BAM! does. There sure was no intent to distort that point. It was a few quick shots- we were amazed how well it works.


----------



## wquiles (Oct 7, 2005)

What were the 3 or 4 bins used in the BAM?

Will


----------



## NikolaTesla (Oct 8, 2005)

2


----------



## wquiles (Oct 8, 2005)

OK, which were the two bins used in the BAM? 

Will


----------



## andrewwynn (Oct 8, 2005)

Yes. 

I tease.. The BAM+ has 4 emitters.. the exact composition is still a secret, but the point is we came up with a magic balance that really does 'play with the big boys'... I'd put it up against a 400 lumen incan any day... it's not too fair that the only incan i had was a mag85 at the time, so it wasn't a fair competition and it still did not to poorly against it.


----------



## wquiles (Oct 8, 2005)

:huh2: I guess I don't see the reasoning of keeping the composition a secret given the pages and pages of photos, comparisons, etc. in this thread, but I guess you must have some good reasons for it ...

I guess I will have to wait longer to be "iluminated" :naughty: 

Will


----------



## andrewwynn (Oct 8, 2005)

There is a technical reason it's still a secret but it won't be for long.. not really trying to tease, but pointing out we 'did something special' and AFAIK 'did it first'... We have some neat pictures ready-to-go to share and it'll be fine to have some copy-catting going on but i want to get another prototype running and do another test or three with some more scientific pictures with 'fair' comparison to the likes of 400lumen incan lights... It just happened that it made sense to share in this discussion so it was brought up prematurely. 

The wait won't be too long and it could be 'guessed' it wasn't rocket science it just came up as a thought in a discussion with a co-collaborator and myself trying to solve this problem of white luxeons not working out side and blamo.. idea born.. idea tried.. idea kicks some serious butt. 

-awr


----------



## NewBie (Oct 9, 2005)

js said:


> Jarhead,
> 
> What are you talking about?
> 
> ...




Sorry, had two thoughts running at once in the same sentence, while packing, and checking flights, amongst a few other things.


----------



## NewBie (Oct 9, 2005)

js said:


> Jarhead,
> 
> What are you talking about?
> 
> ...




Sorry, had two thoughts running at once in the same sentence, while packing, and checking flights for a trip, amongst a few other things.

Originally Posted by NewBie
"Unfortunately, when you up the voltage on the bulbs, their power consumption goes down, but you can approach 30lm/W with one of those incandescents you mentioned."


The power consumption goes up, as when you up the voltage, you also up the current draw.

The efficiency lm/w, goes up with the overdrive, as well, along with the color temperature shift to a cooler color temperature.


As far as the differences in the BAM+ "technology" vs. normal, here is what I was referring to:











Shifting of the physical postion of the lights from photo to photo greatly emphasizes 3D, especially the overall shadow position change, as well as the distance between the two light sources, the two lights themselves actually changed in intensity between the two lights, notice the two shadow intensity differences in the photos (light intensity shift), creating even more of a 3D impression difference.

The full side by side photos are here, others have noted many other differences:
http://www.molalla.net/~leeper/andrew4.jpg

BTW, Multi-color LED lights (such as 1 blue, 2 green, 1 red) (or 1 blue, 2 green, 2 red), or even white assisted with red, is nothing new. No, guessing here is needed, it's been done. What would be new is a regular white combined with a warm white Luxeon, haven't seen anyone do that yet.


----------



## 4sevens (Oct 10, 2005)




----------



## andrewwynn (Oct 10, 2005)

you are very close to 'what we did'.. it's humorus to me that you are trying to 'nit pit' about details that really are absolutely insignfigant to what makes the light look more 3D.. the particular picture may have a 10% influence by the things you mention (angle, etc).. the vast majority is the color of the light. 

The ladder angle is just what it is.. about one body's width between the lights.. it really is absolutely infintismal in the real world... it is interesting and does add a tiny bit but neglidgable.

Seems there is still some confusion.. the BAM+ uses X1 bins.. the T6 control uses 6 YA bin emitters. The BAM+ does not use RGB solution... it is a simulation of 'warm white' luxeon, though. 

You keep doing 'scientific' comparisons of 'non-scientific' pictures.. it's definitely a waste of time.. I already said from the beginning they are not qualified for such a comparison they are 'real-world' what does it look like. 'macro' in scope pictures.. they are an accurate representation of what you see with your eyes.. they both have a simliar amount of lumen output, but with different reflectors and emitters, but one is a very typical example of 'normal' high-power LED light, and the other is a high-power LED light that looks more like incan than LED... that's really all i'm stating.. nothing you've been nit-picking goes against that, although it is interesting to see the scientific mind way of pulling apart photographic evidence... it's just you are comparing two things that are not similar enough to use that kind of comparison. 

-awr


----------



## NewBie (Oct 10, 2005)

It isn't just lights switched hands.

The physical angle at which Tom/Tim or whoever, moved quite alot also, look at the ladder shadow.


----------



## andrewwynn (Oct 10, 2005)

dude i was there... there is no 'conspiracy' here.. there is an angle of about 3.5-4 degrees... the shadow on the ground is like 20' behind the ladder.. Tom is about 20' in front.. hence.. same distance (18" or so). Open the EXIFs.. i bet the pictures are like 4 sec. apart.. your point is moot anyhow.. it has very little to do with the difference in the pictures... absolutely negligible in fact. 

You should really correct your posts mentioning which emitters are used, in almost every case you have them backwards or just incorrect.. I don't mind the microscope but people will be reading these and getting very confused if they are backwards, or incorrect.

The BAM! uses UX1L emittesr.. the Tesla 6 uses TYAK or TYOK. 

I realize that it's not the 'perfect' comparison but it's a great 'example' of what a typicaly high-power LED light will look like.. it is a production tesla 6, just like many other people have.. it's also very much like what any modder would make using a slightly blue (V0 X0 YA) bin... very typical. 

Those two lights are not remotely similar lights, that would warrant such an exact comparison... the reality is that the BAM+ just plain looks like an incan, the T6 just plain does not.. They are the perfect example of what *can* be done with LED and what usually is.. and i just happened to have those two photos, to give a VERY good example of what LED illumination usually looks like compared to what we typically would prefer (more natural color of an incan). 

Regardless of *ANY* particulars whatsoever... the lights are about the same power 'goesin' and 'goesout'.. and yet the quality of illumination is not in the same ballpark at all... there are no tricks whatsoever in the beamshots, no matter how hard you might try to find them... once more 'scientific' tests are made that will show, just exactly like these pictures show, that the claims I make are accurate... Is there a *point* you are aiming for with the effort you are going through? I already said the pics are not suitable for such microscopic examination.. sit back from your monitor and compare.. flip back and forth between the two images... they are a very accurate representation of 'what you see' when you actually look at them, albeit with the major difference being that the pictures don't show the extreme difference in the ability to discern details and depth. Don't believe me you'll just have to order one up or come to the next testing .. you're more than welcome. 

The whole POINT of the pictures is:.. does one look like a typical high-power led = yes.. does the other NOT look like a typical high-power LED = YES.. does that same one have a similar appearance to a high-power Ican hotwire.. yes. that's the end of the point, that's the whole purpose and intent of the pictures, not to say it's 'this much' like an incan' or 'better' or 'worse'.. but that it does in-fact have the appearance MORE like an Incan than that of a typical high-power LED light.. whole purpose of the BAM+ prototype. 

It is fun to have a serious debate but how about waiting 'til there is a point to it? You're obviously a smart, clever guy with an attention to detail.. but you keep skipping over important points like there is no real reason to make hypercritical observations about photos that aren't claimed to be very similar. 

Once some scientific pics are taken.. 'go to town'.. i've got no problem with the microscope.. i'm not 'hyping' just stating facts and showing 'evidence' (as opposed to proof).

re: 'relative intensities'.. hand-held lights with different center spots will have different relative intensities... the LUMEN output is about the same.. and actually the 'hot spot' is also very simliar when we tested them both being about 7500 lux. Tom did not aim at exactly the same target for both pictures, not to mention that even if he did, just the fact that the lights were 18" apart would mean that different things, especially a stake in the ground nearer the light source would have a different intensity.. it's just what would be expected, not anything waranting a conspiracy theory. 

re: 'angle'.. you aren't understanding the picture very well.. Tom is about 25' this side of the ladder.. the shadow on the ground is about 25' behind the ladder.. which is why there is on the order of 18" difference.

The green stake is obviously a fair amount closer to tom than the wheel.. you could do some trig and figure out just how far if you tried.

notice.. how the shadow on the opposite tire only moves about 4" between the lights and that is probably 7' away from the ladder.. that's a 2.6 degree angle which works out in-line with 18" at 20-25'. 

So.. how about staying on the topic of Incan VS LED? You have a better picture of an example of a high-power LED to show what 'they look like'.. post it. You have a better example of an LED light that has the appearance of Incan.. likewise.. post it, you are really only pointing out things i've already said.. There are no camera tricks, the reality is that there is MORE difference than shown in the picture so trying to reduce them really is not remotely accurate.. i realize you don't have enough facts to really know this, which means you are just speculating at possibilities of why this could possibily be but the reality is.. the lights really are 'that different' and that the BAM will appear to almost any observer to 'be incandescent'.. which myself and anybody who understands the significance of that find VERY COOL. 

-awr


----------



## SJACKAL (Oct 10, 2005)

Pardon me for saying this guys, but this thread gets boring. Should we don't deviate into a debate?


----------



## andrewwynn (Oct 10, 2005)

I agree i don't know why there was a 'debate'


----------



## NewBie (Oct 10, 2005)

andrewwynn said:


> I agree i don't know why there was a 'debate'









You posted pictures for comparison purposes, and I was just comparing them.

I also noticed with the one light, it is setup more like a flood, apparently with each source pointing parallel, so you get more of an even wall of light, where as with the other, all the emitter sources seem to be pointed to a single spot.

Here are some other comparisions:


----------



## NikolaTesla (Oct 10, 2005)

Thats a neat picture effect. Just shows me the multicolor BAM definitely works better than a mono bin even with 6 emitters. Thats about how long it took Andrew to snap those photo's - 5 seconds apart. I was holding both lights and just switched aimpoints- crossed hands. I was about 15- 20 feet from that 'dozer. And that was my light but for the sake of science it got sent off to another tester for more evauation. The next one I get built when the final board/ designed is fermented gets the Multicolor Bin trick. Definite signs of incandescent quality from an LED light. Which Bin is the trick. Thus one of the benifits of incan over LED just became history.:naughty: :wow:


----------



## andrewwynn (Oct 10, 2005)

hey cool, that's neat.. easier than flipping back and forth manually.... a bit fast, but i like it. 

Your observations are 100% correct, just that there seems to be some contentious tone about it, like we are trying to fake something. Adding a lot of complexity to something that really is supposed to be quite simple.. 'does it look better or not'?

I will love to have you do the exact same comparisons on the 'real' test beamshots where we'd put effort into having them line up etc.. I really like the artificial color one where it shows where the hotspots are.... clearly tom aimed better when he had the target spot.. maybe best to use the right side of that blinky photo to compare since the target was much closer.. in any event the blinky picture shows what i wsa trying to show.. a very good example of what to expect with a high-power LED light vs a Medium power hotwire light.. i happend to use a light that was coincidentally also LED as my 'hotwire looking' light because it happens to look like a hotwire light.. not perfectly but it's a perfect example of the basic difference. Anybody that's used both can attest to that is 'basically what the difference looks like' i was not trying to start a big long discussion about anything in particular at all.. wait 'til i have the 'BAM+' thread and go to town. 

In a discussion of 'the difference' between hotwire and hot LED... a reference photo depicting the difference is a good idea i think, and actually this latest flipping photo is perfect, so thanks that will help. lt is not meant to show 'how much precisely' it's different just the general idea of what is the difference, it does that very well job done. 

don't stare at the blinky photo too long.. yikes. 

-awr


----------



## Icebreak (Oct 10, 2005)

Jar -

Absolutely effective gif. I've got a free program on my tower but haven't had the time to learn it. Looks fairly simple. I hope this technique gains traction.

"What's the benefit of incandescent over LED?"

Here's one benefit:

Incans allow those with limited electronics skills (me) to get into the game, experiment and make discoveries. This weekend I put something together I had imagined. Blew one lamp doing it. Now it appears to be stable. I'm going to run several cycles through it before I say much about it. I took it out to the river to run it through some paces and it did exceedingly well. "Dang! I think this dog will hunt." is a neat thought.

HotWires are fun. When you put together something that turns out to be just what you wanted...well, you can't buy that kind of smile/head nodding.

----------------

- Jeff


----------



## NewBie (Oct 10, 2005)

Icebreak said:


> Jar -
> 
> Absolutely effective gif. I've got a free program on my tower but haven't had the time to learn it. Looks fairly simple. I hope this technique gains traction.
> ----------------
> ...




I can't take credit for the "flipping" photos, nor the idea, but if the person that did them, wants to speak up, or tell me it is okay to say, then I'll give the fella the very well deserved credit for his utter brilliance that comes very natural for him.


Andrew:

Contentious? Me? LOL!!!

If you go back about four years, you'll see that I can be blunt upon occasion. If you've been around any time at all, you should know me a bit by now. Not too long ago, when I looked at the ARC4 from the now defunct ARC Flashlights, L.L.C., you should remember some very pointed questions and comments that I asked during the time I was considering purchasing the ARC4 (which I eventually did do).

Andrew, as a young Sailor in the U.S. Navy, I'm sure you remember encountering a few young Marines during your service to our Nation. Consider this when reading my posts.


----------



## andrewwynn (Oct 11, 2005)

all in good faith i believe, jar.. "It's all good"... i was just sayin'.. save your energy for when it really counts 'cause i like the dig deep investigative spirit, just thought it was boderline humorous since it really didn't warrant it. 

I really like the 'brutally simple' of hotwire like icebreak said.. i spent hundreds of hours in research before building a first LED light... i did spend dozens of hours researching which hotwire bulb i'd like to use.. there is a pretty big difference.. there are always tradeoffs.. thanks for the perfectly timed post to bring us back down to reality, ice.

-awr


----------



## beezaur (Oct 11, 2005)

andrewwynn said:


> Your observations are 100% correct, just that there seems to be some contentious tone about it, like we are trying to fake something. Adding a lot of complexity to something that really is supposed to be quite simple.. 'does it look better or not'? . . .



I have mixed feelings about close scrutiny, because it certainly can be unpleasant to have to defend one's self. I have been exposed to 'careful examination' that has been at times rude and unfair for malicious motivations. All the same, legitimate scrutiny is required if claims are to be validated, uncomfortable or not.

That presentation of those pictures to a technically-minded person throws up a whole bunch of red flags. It screams, "attack me!"

Scott


----------



## andrewwynn (Oct 11, 2005)

I agree, other than it was in the wrong place, this was not a thread about the details of that light, it was just an example of what the difference 'looks like' so the end of the evaluation should be does it 'look like' what i said or not, not the technical details of how or why.. when i finally post the BAM+ thread.. def. the right time for scrutny. 

That said, i didn't really mind, just that it put us way off topic, and energy was wasted that could be put to better use. I'd rather go on the defensive when there is something to defend 

-awr


----------



## Icebreak (Oct 11, 2005)

andrewwynn said:


> I really like the 'brutally simple' of hotwire like icebreak said..


I can't quite go with _brutally_ simple. If they were we would all have built that 7", 1000 torch lumen, regulated EDC by now. Maybe comparitively simple?

There are still things about incandescents that are seemingly mysterious. Like how some Superbulbs will giggle at the site of a 2400 mAh battery. Introduce a particular 1200 mAh battery into scene and the Superbulbs rattle and clatter like a box of so many nervous, glass-bottomed insects.

Fun, indeed.

-------------

- Jeff


----------



## beezaur (Oct 11, 2005)

An interesting thing that has come up here is the notion of depth perception not from bonicular vision but from the quality of light.

I have been playing around with bright colored LED lights, mostly red and cyan. A curious thing about the red is that, as the illuminated target gets farther away from the observer, the apparent brightness falls off very rapidly. I think this is because the human eye's response to red is very poor. Essentially, things in the distance are disproportionately dark by red light. To me this gives a very perceptible sense of "3-D" for red over cyan or white that is not related to shadows or binocular vision.

Another aspect relevant to outdoor use is backscatter from haze. The shorter wavelengths have a lot more observable backscatter in very small aerosols like haze. The effect to me seems to be that dark backgrounds are "washed out" by the illuminated suspension. The effect is that you lose contrast because you cannot see the dark parts of your target.

So you put these two together and you have a situation which favors light sources that have less blue to green and more yellow to red. A source heavy in yellows and reds will penetrate haze better and will provide more depth perception from the "falling off" effect of red light -- or so I suspect. However, the depth perception from red does come at the expense of throw, which is reduced by the very process that gives the "dimming with distance" 3-D effect.

I suspect that an RGB source would provide more such depth perception by virtue of throwing out a lot of "sacrificial" red compared to an ordinary blue/phosphor white LED. The red would dim with distance, leaving the more distant background predominantly illuminated by green and blue. This, I would think, would be interpreted by the brain as more distant, since we are used to seeing things in the distance as bluer.

Just some ideas about a tangible way in which incans (and their immitators) have a benefit over normal white LEDs.

Scott


----------



## NikolaTesla (Oct 11, 2005)

You are on the right track Beezur. Deal up the right combination of light frequencies and you have a much closer aproximation of a incan. Some efficiecy in pure lumen power is given up for that much better 3D perception. Suffice to say its not cyan and red but othermulticolor Bins them selves. I have and RGB made 3 LED light and it does not look anything like that or is it useful. I still like incans don't get me wrong- But Andrew and I are somewhat interested in pure research to find and create a really nice source of LED light for a Flashlight in order to get the benifits of both types in 1 light. We also have not by any means stopped building better incans. Niether is perfect.


----------



## Bravo25 (Oct 11, 2005)

I am not the sharpest tool in the shed so this might sound like a dumb question but here goes. Can't you meassure light color in kelvins. Why can't a LED bin be matched to say sunlight? Wouldn't this produce the desired results?


----------



## beezaur (Oct 11, 2005)

Bravo25 said:


> Can't you meassure light color in kelvins. Why can't a LED bin be matched to say sunlight? Wouldn't this produce the desired results?



My understanding is that sunlight and incandescent light follows basically a "blackbody" curve. That is, if you take a something solid (a black body) and heat it up to so many Kelvins, it will give off the same spectrum as some other solid body that is heated to the same temperature. The spectrum you get is a single broad lump with a peak that depends on the temperature. Cooler temps produce spectra that peak in the infrared. As the temperature increases, you move the peak into the visible, through red, yellow, green, blue, and violet. But you always get a single peak and lesser amounts of most other wavelengths.

Hot gasses do something different -- they emit a bunch of discrete, narrow peaks at characteristic wavelengths. There are wavelengths at which no light is emitted. The peaks and "dark spots" don't change with heating like black bodies do.

LEDs give off relatively narrow "pure color" spectra that stay essentially constant regardless of how hard you drive them. You get white (right now) by using a blue LED to excite phosphor which gives off the other colors that add with blue to get white. So you have a blue region, and usually a yellow-green region in the emitted spectra with very little red and cyan.

The LED bins account for variations in where the phosphor spectral "lump" falls, but you still get regions in the spectrum where not much light is emitted. Specifically, you don't get much red at all from today's white LEDs.

The problem that you would have to "fill in" the LED spectrum compared to sunlight. You'd need more cyan and a bunch more red.

Scott


----------



## NewBie (Oct 11, 2005)

beezaur said:


> My understanding is that sunlight and incandescent light follows basically a "blackbody" curve. That is, if you take a something solid (a black body) and heat it up to so many Kelvins, it will give off the same spectrum as some other solid body that is heated to the same temperature. The spectrum you get is a single broad lump with a peak that depends on the temperature. Cooler temps produce spectra that peak in the infrared. As the temperature increases, you move the peak into the visible, through red, yellow, green, blue, and violet. But you always get a single peak and lesser amounts of most other wavelengths.
> 
> Hot gasses do something different -- they emit a bunch of discrete, narrow peaks at characteristic wavelengths. There are wavelengths at which no light is emitted. The peaks and "dark spots" don't change with heating like black bodies do.
> 
> ...




FYI, it is not just the phosphor. I've actually measured Luxeons where the blue LED wavelength has varied from 438nm to 480nm from part to part. I've seen nearly that from parts from the same bin.

One example are these two parts from the same bin:











Other:










Even PWM causes shifts:






The temperature of the LED die, while holding the current absolutely constant, also causes shifts:






The sun compared to a white LED:






Light bulb:






Toyoda-Gosei's TrueWhite-Hi


----------



## beezaur (Oct 12, 2005)

Thanks, NewBie.

My bad, I should have remembered about the LED variation. The spectra are great!

Scott


----------



## andrewwynn (Oct 12, 2005)

Jarhead.. i think i'll have to send you a BAM+ for testing.. you still have the tool you used for that measurement? I would absolutely LOOVE to see just what the spectral lines look like on the BAM+.. esp. compared to the likes of a 400 lumen hotwire. 

-awr


----------



## NewBie (Oct 13, 2005)

andrewwynn said:


> Jarhead.. i think i'll have to send you a BAM+ for testing.. you still have the tool you used for that measurement? I would absolutely LOOVE to see just what the spectral lines look like on the BAM+.. esp. compared to the likes of a 400 lumen hotwire.
> 
> -awr




Sure, I'd test it for you, no problem.

If you want one on the 400 lumen hotwire, I could do that too.


----------



## andrewwynn (Oct 13, 2005)

logically enough i think i'd have to include both.. i will have the dirvered version of the hotwire running very shortly.. the lights would be a 'loaner' :-D but i'd let you play for a while.. i don't think it'll be more than a week before we expose the secret.. i don't mind that people will copy the idea, there is just a technical little thing with the release of the info and the timing of it i'm stuck behind. The 'next' design will likely have more bins... i.e. TV1J for the trees.. TW0J for wall hunting.. TX0J for blues.. etc... it would be exceptionally helpful to know how they overlap to fill in the spectrum. 

-awr


----------



## NewBie (Oct 14, 2005)

The night I opened my eyes, and had my socks rocked off...

I was up on a mountainside at night, last night, rockhounding by flashlight, and discovered something new.

In this task, which is alot more demanding than walking in the woods, as you are looking for things that are different than their surroundings.

At first I was using a Pelican M6, which made things pretty much, all look the same, yellow. Then I fired up the Thor, which was better, due to the large amounts of light. Then I cranked up the Thor's Hammer boost, which makes the beam look *much* whiter. It helped out alot.

So, my wife was finding all sorts of stuff with the White LED Luxeon lights she was using, which got me to thinking. I traded her, and I started easily finding things.

Meanwhile, the cogs and gears start spinning in the 'ole brain-housing group, and I ran back to the truck and grabbed a light I have made from LEDs, but with Red, Green, Blue high power LEDs. The rocks then *really* stood out significantly better than anything else I had. Walking down the trail, back to the spot, was also amazing, I noticed many things I hadn't even noticed before, and it was much easier on the eyes. 

After this simple event, I can say that I've pretty much lost interest in Incandescent/Halogen, unless you need massive amounts of light and throw, White LEDs seem to be a yesterday's technology, and I'm really very impressed and excited over RGB LED lighting.

With the large weak red output in regular white Luxeons, unless you supplement them with red LEDs or warm white, they will always be lacking in the spectrum


----------



## andrewwynn (Oct 14, 2005)

AMEN brother.. the idea we were after was high power 'warm white'.. it won't be long before we show pics of the FRONT of this thing. 

-awr


----------



## NewBie (Oct 14, 2005)

andrewwynn said:


> AMEN brother.. the idea we were after was high power 'warm white'.. it won't be long before we show pics of the FRONT of this thing.
> 
> -awr




Yeah, I mentioned that back on the 9th, and figured as much.

It is still amazing to see the additional difference of the RGB approach.


----------



## Icebreak (Oct 14, 2005)

I need a multi-input de-collimator with a tiny high dome output surface.

Thataway we wouldn't see those RGB stage critters that hide behind every humonoid shaped shrub and boulder.

3 into 1 would be OK.

5 or 6 into one would be nice for those of us that like a little violet in our photonic cocktails.

-----------------

- Jeff


----------



## andrewwynn (Oct 14, 2005)

I should point out again that i've jumped 'head first' into high-end incan production as well.. even with BAM+ it will not 'replace' incan.. you can make for about $80-100 an incan that will output more than a $200-250 4-up BAM+ (rough estimates including batteries and chargers).. when i discovered i could build a special hotwire in a 2D or 3D host that can output 4x a BAM.. 1600-ish lumen... i guess i was 'hooked'.. there are numerous benefits from LED that can't be met with an incan light, like 'dimming'.. when i did a test with a 500W halogen light that had a dimmer on it.. dimming to 10% output it was still pulling 300W out of the wall! and of course it looks like a 'sunset' color. being able to dim and LED and get to extend battery life by doing so is very powerful... high-end LEDs are going to be more expensive for a while yet, but i think that in a year or two when i can make a BAM+ and sell them for under $100 the 'bulk' of the mid-power incans will have some 'splainin to do.

-awr


----------



## Double_A (Oct 15, 2005)

Sorry Newbie, all those photos you show I strongly prefer the color rendering of the Incandescent. To my eyes it looks more natural.

I was recently hiking in the woods at night (Mt Whitney, you have to start in early AM to finish in one day) we missed several trail blazes with LED headlight that would have been "noticed" with Incandescent.

so having said that, I believe that LED is the best choice for a small EDC, but when you need big guns I prefer Incandescent


----------



## andrewwynn (Oct 16, 2005)

I don't think newbie said the color is better with incan.. i think in some example he was able to find things better with an LED, not that it looked nicer.. i think because it DIDN'T look natural made it easier to find things in the dark. 

-awr


----------



## andrewwynn (Nov 1, 2005)

The cat is out of the bag: 






Like i said it's kinda a 'gimmie' but somebody had to do it first in an actual live flashlight and test it and somebody had to first come up with the idea of mix n match in a way that doesn't cause the weird artifacts described above when using RGB to try to make a nice white light. 

A partner in crime and myself while talking on the phone one day had the idea of since lumileds was slow to making an incan-looking emitter that we believe is what is needed to really make good lights for outdoor use, let's try different mixes of emitters in parallel, and with the quad 20IMS solutions being such a 'gimmie' it was the natural host to get a nice mix..

What you see in there is 4 UX1L emitters and 1 amber lux3.

We were concerned with the offset of the amber, and when close up there is a bit of fringing because of it, but farther than 8' away or so, it's actually hard to tell where the amber emitter is. 

The fact that the amber is under-driven at 'only' 1000mA means it's not putting out the rated lumen but it worked great in this test because it is absolutely 'just right'. From the first second i saw it lighting up coincidentally that red brick you see in the background. (which funny tangent.. used to be painted black.. the red and the gray mortar and even the tan speckles on the red are painted on the top of black on black painted bricks).. 









before and after. 

(notice that there are variations in the shade of the bricks just like real bricks.. we intentionally painted some bricks with a thicker coat of the red to have some variance.. as you can see it came out perfect... most people think we sand-blasted the black off.. and at least one person thought we replaced the bricks!). as you can see i fixed the stairs at the same time. 

back from tangent. 

Tom had turned on the BAM+ and was lighting up those red bricks and they looked red vs purple for the first time i've ever seen them lit up from an LED light and my jaw just dropped, i thought he had an incan light lighting up the wall, it just wasn't bright enough 'cause the only incan he had with was the mag85 which as 3x the lumen.. I will get a picture of a 400 lumen BAM+ next to a 400 lumen incan and you will see that it's almost impossible to tell the difference. Just that one is far more reliable, one has a far smoother beam and one is dimmable to extend the runtime by a factor of 2 or 10!

I'm far from anti-incan considering how much time and effort i'm putting into my incan projects, but with the BAM+ and BAM! on the horizon the DMZ is getting a lot narrower. 

-awr


----------



## Phaserburn (Nov 1, 2005)

Double_A said:


> Sorry Newbie, all those photos you show I strongly prefer the color rendering of the Incandescent. To my eyes it looks more natural.
> 
> I was recently hiking in the woods at night (Mt Whitney, you have to start in early AM to finish in one day) we missed several trail blazes with LED headlight that would have been "noticed" with Incandescent.
> 
> so having said that, I believe that LED is the best choice for a small EDC, but when you need big guns I prefer Incandescent


 
Ditto, AA. Another recent trend is dual powered all-led headlamps. I prefer the hybrid ones that have 5mm leds for up close/inside, and a nice incan for distance/outdoors. My Black Diamond Vectra IQ, modded, does a great job and is the best of both worlds.

For color and throw, you can't beat incans. Yet. Andrew's luxeon+amber cluster is a great compromise, though. Just not easy to do/obtain yet.

Andrew, I do the same thing type of thing in concept with an Energizer Folding fluoro lantern. I replaced one of the 6000+ degree tubes with a "warm white" 3000 one. The resulting blend is just right.


----------



## balazer (Nov 1, 2005)

I am intrigued by the idea of mixing colors to make white. What would your recommendations be for mixing three Luxeon IIIs?

white + white + amber? 
white + cyan + red-orange? 

I can use POTs to adjust the relative current to the LEDs, but of course my goal would still be to make the whole thing bright and white.


----------



## andrewwynn (Nov 1, 2005)

If you want very bright you'll be stuck with two whites and amber.. fine tuning the current in the amber to tweak the mix... but the white+cyan+RO is very intriquing.. my next test will use a RO vs amber and 3 whites, after seeing the charts that show how much red comes from incan not so worried about 'over shooting' now, but don't want to leave a hole in the middle either. We also plan on mixing the whites with binning.. IE a TV1J for the greens, a TWOJ for wall hunting and RO or amber. This is something very new to high power LEDS.. for really good color and detail apparently there is something to the colors represented by the amber because it is night and day different as far as being able to pick out details.

-awr


----------



## mwr (Nov 3, 2005)

I'm late to this thead, but I'll give my possibly retro opinion which is if you want real power in a beam, use incandescent. I have a PrincetonTec Surge, PrincetonTec Tec-40, Surefire D3 (all incandescent) and a Streamlight 4AA 7-LED. There is simply no comparison in the output of those. The Streamlight LED is a dark shadow of any of the others (it's approximately the same size and uses the same batteries as the Tec-40).


----------



## balazer (Nov 14, 2005)

It's ridiculous to compare those incandescents to a 7-LED light.


----------



## balazer (Nov 14, 2005)

I should have said white + cyan + red, or white + white + cyan + red.

My thinking is this: If you look at the spectrum of a white Luxeon, you see that it hits blue well and green-yellow somewhat, but there are big gaps everywhere else. To get the most natural color rendition, you would like to hit all the wavelengths more or less equally. Cyan and red hit two of the big gaps in the white Luxeon's spectrum - especially red, which is almost completely missing. If you look at the CIE chromaticity diagram, you'll see that the wavelengths of the cyan and red Luxeons are almost directly opposite each other. That means (I think) that if you mix cyan and red in the right proportion, you will get white light, even without a white Luxeon. So you can add cyan and red to a white Luxeon or two, and you'll still have white, while improving the color rendition. Improved color rendition comes at the expense of efficiency: the eye is less sensitive to cyan and red. 

Lighting spectra are always a compromise between efficiency, tint, and color rendition. Luxeons favor efficiency while preserving white tint. It would be nice if Lumileds offered a different product that favored color rendition more. You have great flexibility to control the spectrum when fluorescent materials are involved. Crees are already somewhat better than Luxeons in this respect.

I'm imagining a very nice cut-down bored-out 1D Maglite, direct drive from 4 x AA NiMH, with four LEDs and trimpots for easy adjusting. But alas, I have more pressing flashlight projects. I hope someone will try out the colored LEDs and let me know how it turns out.


----------



## andrewwynn (Nov 15, 2005)

I think we actually found a home-run with the color mixing.. the amber hits the home run of the missing colors quite nicely.. when i get the next BAM+ made i will be taking head-to-head pictures more scientifically this time.. i'll probably even send them for review to Newbie who can take the spectral plots.. You will see that it's probably not woth the effort to try to improve it with more colors.. other than as i mentioned.. putting several tint-bin of the whites to spread the colors out a bit. 

We've been begging lumileds to make a 'natural white' color.. that the phospher mix would get you something similar to the likes of this combo but in a single emitter.. maybe the'd have to do something funny like actually have both dies in the same frame? Kinda like the luxV.. 3 white and 1 amber in the center... but in a single emitter. (good luck since they are different types of junction).

-awr


----------



## Ray_of_Light (Nov 18, 2005)

I'll try to give my small contribute here.

The generic question "incandescent vs. LED" , when emphasizing the advantage of incendescent, is:

Portable incandescent power spans from few mW to hundreds of watts. LED portable power spans from few mW to 5 Watts.

Point source size for incandescent can be made very small, compared to average LEDs. Thus, focusability is easier with incandescent.

The most important disadvantage of current white LEDs is their "uneven" spectral distribution, as NewBie pointed out in his post. 
The unevenness is not referred to different power distribution in given areas of the visible spectrum, but to the fact that the "beat" of Blue and Yellow produces a series of spectral lines with "gaps" in between.

Two frequencies "beats" togheter to produce other frequencies that are the sum and the difference of them both. In turn, the resulting frequencies beats togheter to produce more frequencies, and this process produces a spread of frequencies all over the visible spectrum.

But... there are gaps in the spectrum so created.

The human eyes need continuity in the spectrum to conduct a good 3-D recognition. White LED lights, even if well focused, do not provide continous spectrum coverage. This phenomena is perceived as the "wash" effect in presence of other lights source, and the "lack of 3-D" recognition.

Hopefully, RGB LEDS will correct this problem in the future.


Hope this helps

Anthony


----------



## Paul_in_Maryland (Nov 18, 2005)

js said:


> I have only ever blown or instaflashed *FOUR* lamps over two intensive years of hotwire use, modding, and testing. Total dollar value? Something under $20.


Congratulations, js. I wish I had your discipline. I've instaflashed lamp assemblies and bipins in two ways: By using lithium-ion cells too fresh off the charger (with G&P 12V lamp assemblies), and by forgetting which lamp assembly or bipin was installed.



js said:


> And I have never had an incan die on me while out in the field.


I have, by using 1.7V AA lithium cells in a bulb that was designed for 1.5V AA cells.

All of my instaflashes were the result of my error. But judging by the number of fellow hotwires who confessed to similar experiences in a recent thread (which I can't seem to find), I'm far from alone.


----------

