Bridgelux -vs- 100watt Incan

[blasterman]

It occured to me while looking at the lumen specs for a standard 100-watt incan that's it's about 4x my smaller Bridgelux. Coincidentally, a 440lumen Bridgelux rated at 120 degrees should produce about the same spot intensity as a incan light source that's 4x as bright but tested via a sphere. At least that's my understanding of the math.

So, I tested this with one of my smaller Bridgelux warm-whites just to see if the math was right vs a Sylvania frosted white 100-watt bulb (rated at 1690lumens). I shot both light sources at an exact equal distance over a dusty box of crayons with my dSLR set for manual (1.5 sec F8) . I then converted both images in RAW set for a color temp of 3700 with no other corrections, which retained enough warmth to show the subjective diferences between the light sources.

Sure enough, the brightness levels are almost identical in the final shots. So, both claimed lumen vaues are pretty close with the incan likely being a tad generous. As per prior posts, the reason I like warm-white Bridgelux is because their color rendering in this category is superb and there's no goofing around with bin tints. Crees, especially the WW XPG when it hits ths streets, utterly destroy the Bridgelux in terms of efficiency, but I haven't figured out the exact bin tint to cross reference the WW Bridgelux.

The warmth of the Bridgelux along with color rendition shows how it compares to the 100-watt incan. While the Incan is still quite a bit lower in color temp, the LED does a pretty good job mimmicking the warmth of the incan. While WW LEDs tend to punch up blues just a bit -vs- incan, their over-all color rendering is pretty comparable for general needs. If you throw a WW CFL into the mix the colors tend to get a bit spikey with oranges and yellows getting hyped.

I any case, you can see why I like the WW Bridgelux and why it doesn't take many of them to light up a room with pretty nice light.

Top: Incan / bottom: Bridgelux

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4048/4291346328_a44d8fef8e_o.jpg

 

[lilmarvin4064]

Very nice comparison, I would have to say that I prefer the Bridgelux from the pictures. Have you tried out the Neutrals and if so what were your impressions?

Do you know if this heatsink would be adequate for the Bridgelux 400lm?...
http://www.newark.com/wakefield-thermal-solutions/882-100ab/heat-sink/dp/96M8765
or this one...
http://www.mouser.com/ProductDetail...=sGAEpiMZZMttgyDkZ5WiuuZ02DfyANgTENLl1Mu0YYA=

I'm in the market for "many" new emitters for a few indoor designs. For my next project I'm pretty much set on XPEs, or untill the XPG NW or WW come out. But the 400lm Bridgelux is like getting 2 emitters for about the price of 1. Very nice.

Also, did you notice any difference with shadows cast by this emitter compared to other (cree, luxeon) emitters? And are there any optics?

More pictures please! Great stuff.

 

[blasterman]

Lilmarvin' , I've used all the Bridgelux colors, and the neutrals are 'dead neutral'. They match Crees that are the same CCT in terms of color, with the Crees being much more efficient of course.

Personally I avoid neutral LEDs for interiour lighting because they are rather bland. I prefer to follow what Cree does with their ceiling fixtues and mix in ambers or red with neutrals to give them some depth.

Optics for Bridgelux are limited (if not non-existent), but for 60-80degree options there's a cheap solution. I just use the standard, generic dome type acrylic lens that typically requires a holder, and just shim it up about .25" over the emitter with some plastic spacer and superglue. Works great.

Neither of the heatsinks you listed is adequate for Bridgelux - the thermal resistance specs aren't good enough. However, the big brother of the Wakefield one you linked will work in an open enclosure.

 

[Nubo]

The crayons where I see the most difference

White -- the LED version is much more stark. Like looking at a bright area of the Moon.

Cranberry? (bottom right) - The LED version has quite a bit more blue, leans towards Maroon.

Peach? (Bottom left) The incan version is deeper, richer, redder, more buttery.


I'm not sure which is more accurate. But the incan is a bit more pleasing. All in all pretty close though. Just a few years ago we were just happy to have efficient lumens, damn the CRI

 

[blasterman]

When I white balanced both shots these differences went away. The biggest difference was then just the way LEDs render more vivid blues and greens because of the way their spectrum is shaped. You need a really finely graduated chart and shooting in better color spaces other than sRGB to show the higher CRI of incan. I avoided halogen because they are all over the place in terms of color temp depending on what metals the chinese are using that week. Some are notoriously green. Wish I had a high CRI Seoul or Nichia for comparison.

But yeah, you have to see the colors with some residual color temp to get an idea how they compare in a subjective realm. If I were to to put a light orange gel over the Bridgelux and claim it was an incan I doubt you'd be able to tell the difference.