some strange thoughts on the quality of light

keithhr

Flashlight Enthusiast
Joined
Mar 21, 2003
Messages
1,388
Location
bay area California
I'm new to all of this but was comparing light beams of my new E1E-HA. ARC LSH, and Inova X5 and noticed that although the E1E gave off more light , there was something more compelling or transpatent in the beam of the ARC and even the Inova. The ARC beam although with not much of a hot spot gave off more of coldly illuminating light, maybe the surefire tighter hot spot with not much else didn't appeal to me as much because it seemed like a lot less around it was revealed. Maybe I'll have to buy an ultra stinger just to aquaint myself with the potential of a brighter incandescent. I was surprised that just brightness alone wasn't enough and I wanted more of something else. I was puzzled because I mostly read about hot spots and technical features of lights but not much about the quality and nature of the light itself. Maybe I'm going down some dark road by addressing this, but am I alone ?, I think not, please help me by telling me what is it about light and the nature of the various types of lights that you enjoy that you find seductive. I was involved in high end audio for quite some time and a lof of the "audiophiles" simply like the equipment but some liked the music. It seems like this comparison might be valid, some flashaholics might like the various technologies involved in making light and some people may be attracted to various types of lights. Can someone please help and describe what it is about light that you find appealing.
 

Ginseng

Flashlight Enthusiast
Joined
Feb 27, 2003
Messages
3,734
You bring up some interesting points. I too am new to this fringe madness about lights. And I too was into high end audio. I really turned off from that some years ago because the argument about "objective vs. subjective" reviewing got so snitty and bickering. It was clear that many folks were in it for the "gear". But that's potentially true of almost any leisure/non-essential endeavor. Would you buy a $750 bottle of California Screaming Eagle cabernet? What if all your internet millionaire buddies did? Would you buy a Dodge Viper and then never track it or take an advanced driving skills class? I'm sure many have. The techno fields seem to really foster this sort of mania, perhaps because of the personalities involved, perhaps because of the nature of the endeavor.

Ok, getting back to your question about "quality" of light. I think it is both useful to understand the subjective aspect of light as well as the technical aspects to make sense of the phenomenon. The two things that seem to be intertwined here are the light color/temperature and the spot characteristics. For example, my 9P well out-throws the LSH and has a brighter central spot and a more well defined outer corona. The LSH spot also has a square or cross-shaped nature to it which is distracting. The light from the 9P is also much warmer than the LED light of the LSH. Comparing the two side by side only accentuates the differences. Use one alone in a dark room and you're likely to find either quite acceptable. However, color color varies in nature as well as in lights. The 9P casts like evening light and the LSH casts like high noon. They are both equally valid, but subject to preference.

Personally, I think all unfiltered lights are relatively poor in beam quality. I hate hotspots. That's why I use a holographic diffuser on my lights. It eliminates the hotspot, replacing it with a uniform and much more useful cone of light. With the diffusers on, the only difference between the 9P and the LSH come down to color and intensity. If I need up-close work I prefer the LSH for its lower brightness and "truer" color. For lighting up the side of a room, you can't beat a 9P with a P91 lamp and diffuser. The light is even, and beautiful in quality, just yellower than with "white" LEDs. Now, if I wanted to see if it was a squirrel or a cat at the top of my pine tree, I'd remove the diffuser and use the brightest, most focused hotspot beam I had. Different uses, different lights. Not just brightness, not just color, not just spot quality...all three factors in balance.

Perhaps this will spark some discussion, but more than likely it's been discussed before.

Wilkey
 

Charles Bradshaw

Flashlight Enthusiast
Joined
Sep 14, 2002
Messages
2,495
Location
Mansfield, OH
Ginseng brings up a vary valid point, that of different uses. The hotspot is what projects the farthest.

The other thing which you are attempting to describe, is your personal tastes in light shape and color.

I listen to Classical Music. My tastes in that are instrumental only (no voice), and tend to run to the Baroque period (Vilvaldi, Mozart). I do hate piano music, but love the harpsichord. In music equipment, all I need is good low end response for the varied percusion intruments. Most audio stuff at retail, is only good enough to tell that percusion exists, but not what the intruments are. Again all this is my personal tastes. (had to add to Ginseng's mention of audiophiles).

In lights, my tastes run to LEDs, rather than incandescants. This is because I have different needs and an extremely low budget. I tend to sit down here in the basement recreation room, where the computer is, with a PT Solo headlamp and Matrix Module, turned on. It is easy on my eyes. (weird: definitely!)
 

SilverFox

Flashaholic
Joined
Jan 19, 2003
Messages
12,449
Location
Bellingham WA
Hello keithhr,

The quality of light is an interesting question.

I have an ARC LSH-P and love the beam and light color. I also enjoy the way the hot spot fades to the peripheral light smoothly. I use this light a lot and sometimes I need the hot spot, and other times I need a little less than the hot spot. The beam from this light is what I think of when I think of a flashlight.

Along the same lines, my TigerLight has the same beam qualities, and it throws a lot further. The color of the beam is warmer than the LSH-P, but it is still pretty white. If I could figure out a way to conveniently carry it, I would use it every day.

My wife viewed a beam shot of a 2 AA Mag Lite vs a BB400. She preferred the Mag Lite because of the color of the light. She did not even notice the artifacts in the beam, the color was the most important feature. As a matter of fact, she would rather light a candle than use a flashlight. "The flickering light from a candle is just more romantic."

My son likes the TigerLight because it is bright. He also likes the ARC AAA because it works well and is small. I think he is more focused on what a light does, rather than the quality of the light it produces.

SureFire has put a lot of effort into developing the perfect hotspot. They have done a good job. I sometimes find that the drop off from the hot spot is rather abrupt, but they do have a nice smooth beam.

I'll have to spend some more time thinking about this...

Tom
 

keithhr

Flashlight Enthusiast
Joined
Mar 21, 2003
Messages
1,388
Location
bay area California
Wilkey, you brought up some interesting points,specifically the issue of diffusers. Maybe I like the arc throw because it didn't have much of a hot spot and I guess i'll have to do some searches on diffusers and what types are available. Interesting you having been in high end audio. I became obsessed with sound reproduction and actually invented an audio cable that made what came out of speakers sound like the best headphones, the ultimate electrical signal transducer. I don't think I want to duplicate that experience here and searching for the perfect light might be even more difficult. It could wind up being a life of solitude spent in the dark of night, alone, dreading not being in control when the sun comes up, or going into that special room that I could build, totally void of windows.
I was just kidding, (strange humor)
 

McGizmo

Flashaholic
Joined
May 1, 2002
Messages
17,290
Location
Maui
This topic has been discussed before and will no doubt be discussed again. I suspect that most of us fine tune our ideas and demands for lights as we proceed on our own learning curves of self discovery of light tempered with our unique needs for illumination. I for one have been pleasantly surprised at the level of acceptance and concurrence of the McLux with the McFlood reflector as being a desirable illumination tool.

I propose that it might be helpful to consider flashlights from two different perspectives; A flashaholic will grab a flashlight with one of two general intents in mind.

1) The light is turned on to see the beam and evaluate its properties.
2) The light is turned on to see objects in the surrounds as aided by light returned from the flashlight beam.

I think for most of us, these two conditions require contradictory radiation and disbursement of the photons available. I think there are two polar extremes here working at some level of our awareness and criteria. At the extremes, when viewing the beam, we want to see a tight and intense laser like beam that is visible at high noon on a wall 50' away. When viewing the surrounds as a result of photons released, we want a uniform and wide dispersion of light to give us a view, un altered by artifacts or nulls or hot spots within the beam.

In other words, on one hand, we want to look at the light and on the other, we want to use the light; viewing its reflection off our surrounds.

IMHO, the ultimate light source we use every day is the sun. This is the standard by which we have learned to evaluate colors and our world. When the sun goes down, we want our own sources of light to allow us to see in conditions where ambient light does not allow us to see clearly. Since our eyes have adapted as best they can to the ambient low levels of light and we don't have a sun in our pocket to bring on daylight, it behooves us to use our limited photons wisely. Compromises must be made and the better our choice of tool for the task at hand, the more satisfactory the results will be. Knowing the tools and proper evaluation of the task requirements will yield an optimal illumination.

Hey, I haven't rambled on CPF for some time but this is a topic near and dear. I'll stop the ramble and finish with some one line points and observations/ opinions:

* the sun has a 360 degree beam angle; hardly a spot light.
* price and technology aside, the ultimate flashlight, IMO, would have a variable luminous output as well as an adjustable beam from 180 degrees down to 2 degrees. Its color temp would be close to sunlight.
* to impress your friends, would you whip out a powerful high pressure washer or show them a fine misting head nozzle used for watering delicate foliage?
* A consistant color and even distribution of photons within the area to be illuminated will typically provide the best image on return.
* I recently replaced the Nichia 500's on an A2 with 312's. The flashlight now has a good even flood of consistant color and intensity in "low" and of course a great reflected narrower beam for throw in "high".
* Know your lights and understand your needs. Play with your toys and use your tools with skill.
* I propose that if you can see the task at hand or object in question with out strain and close your eyes without seeing white spots, you have been effective in illumination.
* Proper illumination provides clarification and provides an accurate return image.
* In the analogy of music and sound systems to quality light, it has been my experience that in both cases that the better the sound or light, the more the "volume" can be either increased or decreased and yet still be acceptable. Also, I suspect the choice of music and volume level might be different in the case of showing the sound system to someone as opposed to using the sound system for personal enjoyment or background fill.

I just spent almost a month on Maui where quality dark was available every night and the moon in its phases had dramatic effect on ambient. The value of a single LED can really be appreciated here and with large, open dark spaces it was easy to see the limits of penetration in comparing various flashlights and luminous output.

OK, I'll go back under a rock now............ /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/icon15.gif

- Don
 

Ginseng

Flashlight Enthusiast
Joined
Feb 27, 2003
Messages
3,734
Good points all. The basic difference between evaluating the device and the signal processed by the device is a basic dichotomy in high-end audio and pretty much any other evaluative endeavor. It is certainly true here in flashlightland and Don states this much more clearly than I could.

From a strictly utilitarian viewpoint, the only attribute of value would be the quality of the product, in this case, the illumination of the object of interest. What is quality? Does the lighting provide allow you to see what you want to see about the object you are illuminating? Is it a true color representation, detail, a part of it, the whole object, motion? The user decides.

Of course in the real world, we have must often strike a compromise between the utilitarian and the aesthetic. In this case, what does the beam image (the product) look like when projected on a standardized object? In this case, the quality attributes might be the brightness of central spot, candelas, freedom from artifacts, or any one of a number of things.

My bottom line with lights as well as anything else is this: Read the reviews, learn evaluative skills and techniques from them, then do it yourself. After all, the only value system you need to satisfy in order to be happy with your choice, is of course your own.

I realize we've waxed philosophical, but hey, right at this moment I'm tired of reading about the next great mod. Time to get out and enjoy. Mmmmm, Maui.

Wilkey
 

keithhr

Flashlight Enthusiast
Joined
Mar 21, 2003
Messages
1,388
Location
bay area California
Don,
no rocks available here that I can see. What a wonderful observation though, much food for thought. I just ordered and EL Blaster VI to further my knowledge in this area, at some point I suppose there will be just subtle variations of each other, I don't know how far I will go with this and it is fascinating.
 
Top