The Tint Snob Thread

[kaichu dento]

Re: The Tint Snob Thread .

...the white wall test is just one method of determining what works best for someone. For me, the best test is using it outdoors and seeing which lights render colors the best. A white wall test is useless when out in the woods... and other factors like runtime, how well trail markers are discerned, etc are far more important.

You're overthinking it, yet nailed it exactly in the first line I quoted here, in your own post.

It has always been simply one of the tools in the box for assessing a light. It's really the people that make fun of the whole subject of white walls who totally miss the fact that no one is testing lights. They're simply assessing the lights characteristics, and a wall is a great way to see if there are noticeable artifacts and color zoning, then it's on to other backgrounds, outdoors, etc.

 

[snowlover91]

Re: The Tint Snob Thread .

You're overthinking it, yet nailed it exactly in the first line I quoted here, in your own post.

It has always been simply one of the tools in the box for assessing a light. It's really the people that make fun of the whole subject of white walls who totally miss the fact that no one is testing lights. They're simply assessing the lights characteristics, and a wall is a great way to see if there are noticeable artifacts and color zoning, then it's on to other backgrounds, outdoors, etc.

The problem is that not everyone sees it the way you mentioned. If it doesn’t pass a white wall test then there are some who won’t test out or examine it in other ways.

 

[kaichu dento]

Re: The Tint Snob Thread .

The problem is that not everyone sees it the way you mentioned. If it doesn’t pass a white wall test then there are some who won’t test out or examine it in other ways.

Sure, there will always be those who over-value a singular approach to determining whether a given light is worth further consideration but talking in generality of 'white wall hunting', it has always been used as a terminology to demean other CPF'ers in order to appear to be the more evolved flashaholic.

I highly doubt that a poll asking if anyone used a white wall as a sole test of a lights usefulness to them would get even a single positive vote. Over-hyped talking point that can't be put away soon enough.

 

[jon_slider]

Re: The Tint Snob Thread .

fwiw, I don't need High CRI to see green plants well
I do need High CRI to see the palm of my hand, the cooking of my food at camp, the skin tone of my lover, and other things that contain red, with realistic color.

in fact, I will admit that after being a 4-4500k snob for a while, I have a new appreciation for cool white. It is actually Better at showing green plants than High CRI. Cool white is also better for working on a car during the day, and it is brighter than my High CRI option.

My conclusion is to have Both.

I do find white wall tests very informing when comparing beams side by side, and I agree that the people that say things like "I don't notice in actual use" are just missing the point, changing the subject, and also at times, ridiculing someone who cares.

Recently I posted a number of tests of a V11R, which has very wide brightness fluctuations on a Light Meter. People without a light meter can NOT see changes of 60 lumens easily. Does that mean it does not matter to me, no. Does it mean it may not matter to them, sure. Do I care if my battery drains faster because my light turned itself up by 60 lumens, yes.

There is no One PURE White. That is a misconception. In fact, there is White at 6000k, and White at 4000k, and at every other CCT, depending on the white balance of ones brain.

If I have been outdoors in the sun, 6000k seems white, but if I have been indoors in the evening under incandescent, 4000k looks white. Here is an illustration of that concept:

When the white balance is set to the 6000k cool white led on the right, it looks white. Notice the pink 4000k N219b in the. middle, in the next photo it will be white

now white balance is set to 4000k, so the pink Nichia looks white

(I removed the 6000k so my auto white balance iPhone would choose the 4000k for white balance.) Notice the very same light that looks pink during 6000k white balance, looks white during 4000k white balance. People who prefer 4000k, are most definitely NOT using it to work on a car in the sunlight. And people who prefer 6000k, are certainly not using it as a night light, for which 3000k is far superior, even better than 4000k.

Ive spent a lot of time demonstrating things that some people claim do not matter to them, PWM, circuit noise, brightness flux, green tint, pink tint, blue tint, warm, neutral, cool, etc. It is often the people who want to change the conversation, that will bring up comments like, "I don't notice in actual use".

I also "don't notice in actual use" the green tint in a Cool White light used to work on a car in the sun. There is plenty of ambient CRI to offset the pathetic CRI of a Cool White LED. But after dark, I again become a High CRI Neutral White Tint snob, I put away the Cool White, and put a High CRI 4-4500k light in my pocket.

then again, If Im trying to spot a bear at 100 yards, Cool White rules, because of the brightness. But if Im inspecting Bear Scat at close range, and want to know if its been eating any berries with red seeds, then High CRI, which will usually Not be in the Cool White Color Temperature range, will be my preference.

Do whatever makes you happy. Buy lots of different lights, use the ones that work best for you at the time. There is no one single color temperature, tint, and CRI that works equally well as a nightlight, scat reader, spotlight, or mechanics light. Some situations call for high brightness, and CRI is secondary, some situations call for low brightness, and CRI becomes more important. Some applications call for Cool, Warm, or Neutral White. Each has their place.

A white wall will help demonstrate the differences.

Here is a photo comparing two 3000k LEDs (far left top and bottom), one has a Magenta tint, one has a Yellow tint. I prefer the magenta, but, if Im only using the Yellow one at the time, my brain will adjust itself to make that OK.

At my current stage of learning I like a choice of 3 different color temperatures, depending on time of use.

Pure White Tint is NOT a specific CCT, it is simply any LED that lands on the BBL.. I wish they called it the White Body Line, so people would understand that Whiteness is an absence of green or magenta tint. It is any CCT that lands on the ideal radiator line, shown as a black line in this pic:

some LEDs land above the "Pure White (black line) Radiator line". Typically they are Cool White Cree LEDs, optimized for brightness. Our eyes are especially sensitive to green, so an LED with a lot of green will seem brighter. Its CRI may not be ideal, but it will spot bear at 50 yards, better than a 4000k Nichia.

Courses for horses.

 

[snowlover91]

Re: The Tint Snob Thread .

Sure, there will always be those who over-value a singular approach to determining whether a given light is worth further consideration but talking in generality of 'white wall hunting', it has always been used as a terminology to demean other CPF'ers in order to appear to be the more evolved flashaholic.

I highly doubt that a poll asking if anyone used a white wall as a sole test of a lights usefulness to them would get even a single positive vote. Over-hyped talking point that can't be put away soon enough.

Still, the point remains as I originally stated, that white wall hunting is only one out of many considerations when evaluating tint and usefulness of a new light. Furthermore, I’ve read many posts over the years from CPF posters who simply shine a light on a wall and perform no further testing. It’s not meant to demean other posters but simply highlight the fact that white wall hunting is a small part of evaluation.

A poll phrased that way would be meaningless. A better poll would be one asking if a person would return a light that exhibited beam artifacts or a tint issues on a white wall, and no other testing done.

 

[ven]

Re: The Tint Snob Thread .

Jon, pretty much bang on with my uses and thoughts. I have not evolved into 3000k as of yet, still a little too cosy/warm for me generally. But 4000-6000k covers most applications, 5000k being bang in the middle seems to cover all well. Granted not best at every time of day, but good enough for me if makes sense( i could live with 5000k only) . In the last year or so, my taste has gone warmer, 4000k i really enjoy, usually more in the evening. Daytime 5000k is spot on, also works well in artificial light(think factory). I will still swap things about in work, so 4000-5000k gets used daily. Todays flavour was 219b 4500k, in mule and triple and optic form.

I certainly agree on how we see different ct/tints and how our eyes get "contaminated" by other ct's. Last night i used my sportac xp-g2 which is a cool white. Yet it did not look as cool as last time I used it , and presume the prior use of the xp-l2 easy white made it so.

If i shine the xp-l2 easy white next to a 219c 4000k(yellow side), the 219c 4000k almost looks white due to the more yellow in the xp-l2 EW. Yet shining the 219c 4000k next to a 4500k 219b, the 219c looks yellow. .............not easy to put into words! But tint is exaggerated by the other tints and changes the way my eyes see's them.

Of course i enjoy said lights the best used on their own, no mixing etc as my eyes adapt quick. Just out of curiosity i wanted to see the changes in front of me.

The above comments come from an unscientific experiment by unscientific eyes

 

[jon_slider]

Re: The Tint Snob Thread .

A better poll would be one asking if a person would return a light that exhibited beam artifacts or a tint issues on a white wall, and no other testing done.

A white wall test is a way to Illustrate an observation that a user makes in actual use. IF they are bothered by tint and beam issues, the white wall test spares us all from reading tons of text, describing the user experience, and quantifies the issue so it can be communicated easily.

Nobody JUST shines their light on a wall and then decides to return the light. Shining on a wall is a way to Explain Why they are returning the light. There will still be people who settle for what they got, and won't take the time to return it.

What I see as folly, is to return a light for replacement with another light that will still use the same LED, and will still have the same tint. If the Green Tint of an LED bothers someone, Change LEDs. Don't just swap for another one that has the same tint binning, and the same tendency to land above the "White" (why do they call it black?) Body Line.

It sounds like you think white wall tests are somehow not valid. I disagree, photos of white wall tests, Add information in a way that is easily communicated to people that are not in the same room . There are many people who have not found a way to get a decent photo to show what they see. That does not mean all photos are invalid.

There are many tools to evaluate the color of an LED, and a white wall comparison is one of them. If I had a spectrometer like maukka, that would be even better, which is why I Love his tests. He does not need a white wall, his instrument is even more detailed and sophisticated. Otoh, a white wall comparison (of more than one beam at a time) is definitely Very informing, to me. OTOH, I consider single beam photos, relatively useless, as they are subject to different white balance adjustments, than other photos. I Have To see more than one beam in a photo at the same time, so I can begin to make a useful comparison, and interpretation, of what the image captures.

If i shine the xp-l2 easy white next to a 219c 4000k(yellow side), the 219c 4000k almost looks white due to the more yellow in the xp-l2 EW. Yet shining the 219c 4000k next to a 4500k 219b, the 219c looks yellow. .............not easy to put into words! But tint is exaggerated by the other tints and changes the way my eyes see's them.

well put and I agree
if you look at the spectrograph I posted, you will see that maukka confirms that a 4000k 219c has tint above the "White" Body Line, in the Yellow Tint zone. I agree this yellow tint will get "filtered out", and our brain will "whiten" it IF there is no other reference light for my brain to integrate.

It IS very surprising how wide a tint tolerance I have, when only using one light.

brightness is another important variable. I Love 3000k at under 10 lumens in full dark, but I would never try to get 500 lumens from a 3000k source, for that I will, like you, prefer something closer too 5000k..

bright and cool
dim and warm

candle color for candle brightness
sun color for sun brightness

and I agree that 5000k High CRI is a very nice option to span a range of needs. slightly too cool in some cases, slightly too warm in others, but a very good general use CCT..

Choice of CCT is really dependent on the CCT adaptation of the brain seeing it.

 

[18650]

Re: The Tint Snob Thread .

I would have to disagree a little bit with the “white wall” test aides mentioned. It’s a great way to get a general idea of tint, but it can also be quite deceptive or misleading too. A person’s eyes, perception and sensitivity to different colors/tints, the ambient light in the room, the shade of “white” on the wall, etc are all variables to consider. A warmer light may tend to cast a more yellow/golden tint that might be pleasing to some while offputting to others. I personally find 4000k preferable to 5000k now, as that seems too “cool” for me. Some might find 4000k too “warm” or yellow for them and prefer the 4500-5000k range. A light that performs great on a white wall test may also perform worse outdoors on green and brown colors. I have experienced this first hand in using my better “white wall” lights vs my warmer ones. My warmest one is a 4000k ZL with 93-95cri and it does better outdoors with wood grain and green grass/leaves than my Nichia does. The Nichia is a better white wall light, but my real world use is primarily outdoors and that’s where I want the best performance. There are so many factors involved that, imo, the white wall test is just one method of determining what works best for someone. For me, the best test is using it outdoors and seeing which lights render colors the best. A white wall test is useless when out in the woods... and other factors like runtime, how well trail markers are discerned, etc are far more important.

Performs "better" outdoors in what sense? It could just as easily be imbalanced spectral output leading to oversaturated colors in some parts of the spectrum. That's a personal preference for some.

 

[snowlover91]

Re: The Tint Snob Thread .

A white wall test is a way to Illustrate an observation that a user makes in actual use. IF they are bothered by tint and beam issues, the white wall test spares us all from reading tons of text, describing the user experience, and quantifies the issue so it can be communicated easily.

Nobody JUST shines their light on a wall and then decides to return the light. Shining on a wall is a way to Explain Why they are returning the light. There will still be people who settle for what they got, and won't take the time to return it.

What I see as folly, is to return a light for replacement with another light that will still use the same LED, and will still have the same tint. If the Green Tint of an LED bothers someone, Change LEDs. Don't just swap for another one that has the same tint binning, and the same tendency to land above the "White" (why do they call it black?) Body Line.

It sounds like you think white wall tests are somehow not valid. I disagree, photos of white wall tests, Add information in a way that is easily communicated to people that are not in the same room . There are many people who have not found a way to get a decent photo to show what they see. That does not mean all photos are invalid.

There are many tools to evaluate the color of an LED, and a white wall comparison is one of them. If I had a spectrometer like maukka, that would be even better, which is why I Love his tests. He does not need a white wall, his instrument is even more detailed and sophisticated. Otoh, a white wall comparison (of more than one beam at a time) is definitely Very informing, to me. OTOH, I consider single beam photos, relatively useless, as they are subject to different white balance adjustments, than other photos. I Have To see more than one beam in a photo at the same time, so I can begin to make a useful comparison, and interpretation, of what the image captures.

1. The first two bolded statements I'd have to disagree with. I've been around CPF for quite awhile and I've seen many users who post beamshots and talk about how they pointed the light on a wall, didn't like it, and immediately returned it with no additional testing/usage. For those people, a white wall test is the ONLY test they use. Search through the threads and you'll quickly see what I'm talking about. That was my point, to use one single criteria and automatically write off a light and return it is not a good evaluation of a light, imo, unless it is so horrendous (like an ugly green, purple, etc). The point isn't to criticize such posters but merely to bring to light (no pun intended) that some do actually open a box, shine it on the wall and return it if they see any flaws in the light. This is something which happens not just with flashlights but many high-end products or hobby specific products.

2. My exact words were "white wall hunting is only one out of many considerations when evaluating tint and usefulness of a new light." I see white wall tests as one of many ways for the end user to determine if it meets their expectations. If I open up a new light, shine it on the wall and it has an ugly purple or green tint (not subtle but very distinct) then I'll quickly be sending it back. If I open a light and it has a subtle green, yellow tint I will do further testing in my typical daily usage to see if I find it bothersome or not. Your last bolded statement is exactly my point; there are many ways to evaluate the tint and the white wall test is one out of many.

18650, one of the tests I like to use my lights on is a walk through the woods. Spotting trail markers, encountering fog or snow, colors on vegetation, wood grain, etc are some of the ways I will use a light. There are cases where a warmer light will a slight yellow tint, like my ZL, will more accurately render some of these things or do a bit better in fog than my 4500k Nichia 219b. Sometimes trail markers can be difficult to spot when hiking, especially if faded, and having a light that makes that color stand out from the tree bark can be a lifesaver. I find my 4000k Cree with 93-95 is slightly better at this than my Nichia and much better than any of my other lights.

 

[LeanBurn]

Re: The Tint Snob Thread .

I agree with many of the points and comparison photos made by jon_slider ven and others. Indeed our eyes and brains translate whatever light source we have at the time adjust the way we translate colors and make the best of it. I like white wall tests (WWT) for extra information and they have their place. The auto white balance however creates a floating frame of reference and any serious choices or opinions made from it would be a strange thing to do.

I used WWT to show myself how much variance there is between the "NW" in all the ThruNite models I have. It was quite enlightening (ok...pun intended) to visualize in real life, but in taking a picture there is a loss in accuracy and translation due to auto white balance and lack of a benchmark.

If we are talking about tint, the BBL's benchmark is the incandescent bulb. So for me when I put up a WWT picture to illustrate tint between any LEDs, the incandescent has to be included to provide that fixed frame of reference.

Only on CPF could there be such differing opinions (some strange and strong ones too) on flashlights....wonderful.

 

[markr6]

Re: The Tint Snob Thread .

This is the tint snob thread. So when I shine my high CRI 4000K Nichia (Malkoff MD2) on a white wall and see a nice white tint, I'm happy. When I shine a 4000K Zebralight on a wall and see yellow, I'm upset. High CRI or not, it's not something I want to live with, no matter how good it looked outside (it looks pretty darn nice, actually). Part of it is the inconsistency between two 4000K lights that drives me crazy. Yes, everything I just said there is 37% insanity.

 

[kaichu dento]

Re: The Tint Snob Thread .

Still, the point remains as I originally stated, that white wall hunting is only one out of many considerations when evaluating tint and usefulness of a new light. Furthermore, I’ve read many posts over the years from CPF posters who simply shine a light on a wall and perform no further testing. It’s not meant to demean other posters but simply highlight the fact that white wall hunting is a small part of evaluation.

A poll phrased that way would be meaningless. A better poll would be one asking if a person would return a light that exhibited beam artifacts or a tint issues on a white wall, and no other testing done.

Apparently here just for the argument when you disagree with me using the exact points in my post which you consider yourself to be contradicting.

A better poll would be the one I mentioned, gaining the same results, but with your wording instead. Right. :tinfoil:

Fact of the matter is markr6 made some excellent points, jonslider made what should have been the definitive post on white walls worldwide and yet on you go... :tired:

Just for the record, my belief is that there are two kinds of CPF'ers: Ones who admit they shine their lights at white walls and ones who do it but make fun of others, then go back to looking at pictures of beamshots taken against a backdrop of white walls.

 

[jon_slider]

Re: The Tint Snob Thread .

snowlover thanks for the exploration, I don't want to single you out as someone to debate, in fact, I think we are on the same side of the table
Most of all I absolutely respect that you have found a light that works for your needs and application. Great to hear your descriptions and observations. Thanks for the food for thought.

LeanBurn, I also totally agree that auto white balance changes the tint of an image. That is why I intentionally include a cool white LED in my photos. It sets the white balance.

I also use an incandescent light at home, it is 3000k. I like to shine my flashlights on the ceiling near it, to compare how much cooler my LEDs are. All these tests are informing because they show relative tint. Like you, I find whitewall particularly informing when comparing identical model LEDs, as there can be some surprising variations..

this group surprised me, they are all 10180 N219b lights, Astrolux M01, M02, M03.. some pretty wild tint bin variation on the middle one in particular:

btw, my white wall studio is actually a piece of printer paper folded at 90 degrees.. recommended

next I compare two of the 10180 N219b LEDs to my Maratac w Nichia.. surprise!

Not all Nichias are pink, at all

fwiw, I dont post every photo I shoot, Im not a pro, Ive just a few steps that help me capture an image that approximately shows what I see, and more particularly, because Im a 4000k N219b snob (that is to say I have the most experience with it), I really like beam shots that contain a 4000k Nichia for my reference.

thanks to everyone contributing, really appreciate the chance to test and explore ideas together.
respect

ps
the only meaning any of these colors have, to me, is in the context of my experience using them. its not that I like the purple beam, particularly, but I prefer it to the green beam. I find the Maratac a little more yellow than I would like, but I tolerate it because of a number of other features I find value in, the size, the efficiency, the material, the circuit..

I can definitely see that just returning a light for being pink purple or green, misses the context of actual use, that could be so much more informing. The colors then are really only a reference point, to compare actual experience with.

So, "actual use" testing is definitely equally, or more important, than white wall comparisons.. both are useful, its not an OR choice, its an And choice.. kind of like buying lights

 

[Modernflame]

Re: The Tint Snob Thread .

@jon_slider. I've thoroughly enjoyed your soap box stump speeches on beam tint and CRI. You've helped me to warm up to cool white, if you'll endure the pun. The only part I couldn't understand was the bit about green leaves and high CRI. I've always thought hi CRI works better on green as well, but my observation may be influenced by the poor rendition of nearby browns (tree bark, dirt, etc.) when using a typical ~70 CRI CW flashlight.

 

[snowlover91]

Re: The Tint Snob Thread .

Apparently here just for the argument when you disagree with me using the exact points in my post which you consider yourself to be contradicting.

A better poll would be the one I mentioned, gaining the same results, but with your wording instead. Right. :tinfoil:

Fact of the matter is markr6 made some excellent points, jonslider made what should have been the definitive post on white walls worldwide and yet on you go... :tired:

Just for the record, my belief is that there are two kinds of CPF'ers: Ones who admit they shine their lights at white walls and ones who do it but make fun of others, then go back to looking at pictures of beamshots taken against a backdrop of white walls.

No, just pointing out an observation. Your original statement was "I highly doubt that a poll asking if anyone used a white wall as a sole test of a lights usefulness to them would get even a single positive vote. Over-hyped talking point that can't be put away soon enough." If a poll was phrased and said "Do you use a white wall as a sole test of a light's usefulness" then very few to none would admit to that. However, if a poll question was phrased "Would you return a light that exhibited beam artifacts/tint issues on a white wall?" the results would be much different. It is the same question, yes, but in any language the context and way a question is asked can have an impact on the results and the perception of those reading the question.

I have a feeling you have not carefully read my posts. I several times mentioned the usefulness of white wall testing and that I do it myself, and take beam shots as well. If you've seen me post before, you'll see that I've done quite a few white wall beam shots. They certainly have their place but shouldn't be the sole criteria, and as jon mentioned, I mostly agree with him.

Furthermore, tint is subjective, so really any test whether on white walls, in the woods, or anywhere else will be based on a user's personal experience and preferences. Some users here use white wall testing as their sole criteria for determining if the light meets their standards or not. Is there anything wrong with that? Absolutely not, that is a personal choice/preference. Would it be better for a person to go through a wide range of tests and usage scenarios to further examine the usefulness of said light? In my opinion, yes. Mark's point is valid, if he shines it on the wall and it is so off-putting that he can't stand it, then he needs to get rid of it. I mentioned previously that the only time I consider the white wall test as the sole criteria is if the perceived tint is so horrible (green, purple, yellow, etc) that a person won't be happy with it. However, in a situation where it has a subtle tint of yellow, green, etc then the person should evaluate further with other usage scenarios and tests to determine the usefulness of the light.

Jon summarized the same thoughts I have quite well below:

ps
the only meaning any of these colors have, to me, is in the context of my experience using them. its not that I like the purple beam, particularly, but I prefer it to the green beam. I find the Maratac a little more yellow than I would like, but I tolerate it because of a number of other features I find value in, the size, the efficiency, the material, the circuit..

I can definitely see that just returning a light for being pink purple or green, misses the context of actual use, that could be so much more informing. The colors then are really only a reference point, to compare actual experience with.

So, "actual use" testing is definitely equally, or more important, than white wall comparisons.. both are useful.

 

[jon_slider]

Re: The Tint Snob Thread .

I've always thought hi CRI works better on green as well

I recently discovered that my 70 CRI cool white flashlight did a better job on green leaves than my favorite neutral high cri nichia. I was as surprised as you are.. there was no bark, wood, nor dirt involved, just pure green canopy.. the cool was more lush.. strange but true.. look at the green spectrum of these LEDs:

xpg2 6000k 71 cri

N219A 4300k 87 Cri

both can do green
but when dirt and bark come into the picture, then yes, High Cri has a big advantage:

you can see though the green actually pops more on the cool white side (because it fails to show the reds and browns in the leaf maybe)

tint is subjective

I agree. But it bothers me when people "seem" to disagree, until I find find a rhyme to their reason.

that is why Im investing my efforts into emphasizing that the subjective prefference might actually be more universally held in common, IF similar mindsets, our in this case, white balance of the brain, are in play.

example, a guy who drives a truck to service a boiler in a basement will enter the dark and will be glad to use his 6000k 500 lumen light, for about half an hour, after which he might switch to his 4000k Nichia and be perfectly happy spending the next hour underground with 100 Lumens of neutral white light..

a guy who works at Home Depot, and has to go into a back room to find something, 4000k, probably not. Inside my camper, close range, 10 lumens and a Beer, not likely to be 6000k.. get my drift? People aren't that different, its their environment that varies, and their preference is based on where they are using the lights.. and at what lumen levels..

kind words are always appreciated, Im also grateful when my typing echoes other's thinking.. thanks
I also appreciate your forgiveness when I test my thoughts in long wordy posts, only later to learn I disagree with myself.. LOL

whirled peas

 

[kaichu dento]

Re: The Tint Snob Thread .

It is the same question, yes, but in any language the context and way a question is asked can have an impact on the results and the perception of those reading the question.

Yes, and like you, I find a lot of valuable content in jon_slider's posts.

We share some views and differ on others, just like the rest of humanity. At least we've got lights...

 

[Modernflame]

Re: The Tint Snob Thread .

I recently discovered that my 70 CRI cool white flashlight did a better job on green leaves than my favorite neutral high cri nichia.

both can do green
but when dirt and bark come into the picture, then yes, High Cri has a big advantage:

you can see though the green actually pops more on the cool white side (because it fails to show the reds and browns in the leaf maybe)

Thanks for the photos. I'm trying, but I still struggle to see what you mean. Maybe the green seems to pop because there is a higher contrast with the bark? I'm going to play around in the woods tonight and find a green canopy with no nearby browns.

 

[ven]

Re: The Tint Snob Thread .

I also notice the xp-g2 6000k has pretty fairly accurate colours. For a cool white 6000k, it is.......how can I put it, easily tolerable maybe. I just find my eyes welcome a slightly warmer cast generally, and certainly in the evening.

An older quad xp-g2 5000k off vinh(CQvn) is still a pleasure to use today as it was several years back. When used in work , with cooler artificial light, it makes it look on the warm side of neutral=perfect for me!

Back to the 6000k xp-g2, I am pretty made up I have tried it again of late(you know all these nichia's and xpl HI 4000-5000k spoil us). I don't like p60's not in use(left to one side by having a preferred ). So at least now I can enjoy using it again, all be it with selected aplications(more in day time).

 

[Ozythemandias]

Re: The Tint Snob Thread .

Speaking of XP-G2, whatever Don is using in the Haiku pleasantly surprised me. I have to find out what bin it is.