Not the CFLs, but the 'proper' tubes...

Does anyone have any experience of using these in living rooms,
bedrooms, etc? I like the light they give out but they do seem a bit
clinical as just tubes, from an aesthetic point. So, I was thinking of
hiding the (daylight) tubes on top of shelves or something similar so
the light would effectively illuminate the room by reflecting off the
(white) ceiling. I am fed up with having these ****y CFLs dimming my
living areas.

Any thoughts?

TIA, David Paste.

On Oct 18, 12:43*am, David Paste wrote:
Not the CFLs, but the 'proper' tubes...

Does anyone have any experience of using these in living rooms,
bedrooms, etc? I like the light they give out but they do seem a bit
clinical as just tubes, from an aesthetic point. So, I was thinking of
hiding the (daylight) tubes on top of shelves or something similar so
the light would effectively illuminate the room by reflecting off the
(white) ceiling. I am fed up with having these ****y CFLs dimming my
living areas.

Any thoughts?

TIA, David Paste.

You can get circular ones with shades that aren't too bad
aesthetically and are more appropriately shaped for a square room that
the linear ones. One day I'll get around to installing some myself
instead of the expensive, short-lived, slow warm-up, high power CFLs.

Chris

David Paste writes:

Does anyone have any experience of using these in living rooms,
bedrooms, etc? I like the light they give out but they do seem a bit
clinical as just tubes, from an aesthetic point. So, I was thinking of
hiding the (daylight) tubes on top of shelves or something similar so
the light would effectively illuminate the room by reflecting off the
(white) ceiling. I am fed up with having these ****y CFLs dimming my
living areas.

Any thoughts?

Above a window/pelmet so that it gives the impression that there's
daylight outside, instead of 'drear Februeer' ?

--
Windmill, Use t m i l l
J.R.R. Tolkien:- @ O n e t e l . c o m
All that is gold does not glister / Not all who wander are lost

On Oct 18, 2:01*am,
wrote:
On Oct 18, 12:43*am, David Paste wrote:

Not the CFLs, but the 'proper' tubes...

Does anyone have any experience of using these in living rooms,
bedrooms, etc? I like the light they give out but they do seem a bit
clinical as just tubes, from an aesthetic point. So, I was thinking of
hiding the (daylight) tubes on top of shelves or something similar so
the light would effectively illuminate the room by reflecting off the
(white) ceiling. I am fed up with having these ****y CFLs dimming my
living areas.

Any thoughts?

TIA, David Paste.

You can get circular ones with shades that aren't too bad
aesthetically and are more appropriately shaped for a square room that
the linear ones. One day I'll get around to installing some myself
instead of the expensive, short-lived, slow warm-up, high power CFLs.

Chris

I have CFLs that are over ten years old. You can get fittings with
"2D" tubes that are OK in domestic areas. Tubes are expensive.
All fluorescent technology gives the same qualty of light, it is
identical technology. Indirect lighting will just make things even
dimmer.
Pix of 2D tubes and fittings here.
http://www.supaprice.co.uk/p/result....+light+fitting

On Oct 18, 7:02*am, harry wrote:
On Oct 18, 2:01*am,
wrote:









On Oct 18, 12:43*am, David Paste wrote:

Not the CFLs, but the 'proper' tubes...

Does anyone have any experience of using these in living rooms,
bedrooms, etc? I like the light they give out but they do seem a bit
clinical as just tubes, from an aesthetic point. So, I was thinking of
hiding the (daylight) tubes on top of shelves or something similar so
the light would effectively illuminate the room by reflecting off the
(white) ceiling. I am fed up with having these ****y CFLs dimming my
living areas.

Any thoughts?

TIA, David Paste.

You can get circular ones with shades that aren't too bad
aesthetically and are more appropriately shaped for a square room that
the linear ones. One day I'll get around to installing some myself
instead of the expensive, short-lived, slow warm-up, high power CFLs.

Chris

I have CFLs that are over ten years old. *You can get fittings with
"2D" tubes that are OK in domestic areas. *

I have some 2D tubes and other models that are over 25 years old.

Jonathan

On 18/10/2011 07:02, harry wrote:
On Oct 18, 2:01 am,
wrote:
On Oct 18, 12:43 am, David wrote:

Not the CFLs, but the 'proper' tubes...

Does anyone have any experience of using these in living rooms,
bedrooms, etc? I like the light they give out but they do seem a bit
clinical as just tubes, from an aesthetic point.

There are quite a few alternatives to just tubes. Follow the link to
Interior lighting / Surface and suspended luminaires here for a few
examples.

http://www.thornlighting.com/com/en/...atalogue_f.htm

So, I was thinking of
hiding the (daylight) tubes on top of shelves or something similar so
the light would effectively illuminate the room by reflecting off the
(white) ceiling. I am fed up with having these ****y CFLs dimming my
living areas.

Any thoughts?

I did this, quite successfully, in the 1960s with pelmet boxes over the
windows. The curtains hung below the box and the lights shone out the top.


TIA, David Paste.

You can get circular ones with shades that aren't too bad
aesthetically and are more appropriately shaped for a square room that
the linear ones. One day I'll get around to installing some myself
instead of the expensive, short-lived, slow warm-up, high power CFLs.

Chris

I have CFLs that are over ten years old. You can get fittings with
"2D" tubes that are OK in domestic areas. Tubes are expensive.
All fluorescent technology gives the same qualty of light, it is
identical technology. Indirect lighting will just make things even
dimmer.

Except of course, for the fact that a 6 ft fluorescent tube starts off a
lot brighter than the average CFL lamp.

Colin Bignell

Well get electoronic ones, as eventually the choke based ones buzz and start
getting really irritating

Brian
--
Brian Gaff -
Note:- In order to reduce spam, any email without 'Brian Gaff'
in the display name may be lost.
Blind user, so no pictures please!
"David Paste" wrote in message
...
Not the CFLs, but the 'proper' tubes...

Does anyone have any experience of using these in living rooms,
bedrooms, etc? I like the light they give out but they do seem a bit
clinical as just tubes, from an aesthetic point. So, I was thinking of
hiding the (daylight) tubes on top of shelves or something similar so
the light would effectively illuminate the room by reflecting off the
(white) ceiling. I am fed up with having these ****y CFLs dimming my
living areas.

Any thoughts?

TIA, David Paste.

I would not say the newer white compacts are that short lived or dim
though, it has to be said the freebies and cheapies are crap. Do the chinese
prefer weird light or something. I cannot see much but even I hat the misty
light they give out, kind of yellow green yuck colour.

Brian

--
Brian Gaff -
Note:- In order to reduce spam, any email without 'Brian Gaff'
in the display name may be lost.
Blind user, so no pictures please!
wrote in message
...
On Oct 18, 12:43 am, David Paste wrote:
Not the CFLs, but the 'proper' tubes...

Does anyone have any experience of using these in living rooms,
bedrooms, etc? I like the light they give out but they do seem a bit
clinical as just tubes, from an aesthetic point. So, I was thinking of
hiding the (daylight) tubes on top of shelves or something similar so
the light would effectively illuminate the room by reflecting off the
(white) ceiling. I am fed up with having these ****y CFLs dimming my
living areas.

Any thoughts?

TIA, David Paste.

You can get circular ones with shades that aren't too bad
aesthetically and are more appropriately shaped for a square room that
the linear ones. One day I'll get around to installing some myself
instead of the expensive, short-lived, slow warm-up, high power CFLs.

Chris

I don't agree the quuality is the same. It very much depends on the phosphor
used.

Brian

--
Brian Gaff -
Note:- In order to reduce spam, any email without 'Brian Gaff'
in the display name may be lost.
Blind user, so no pictures please!
"harry" wrote in message
...
On Oct 18, 2:01 am,
wrote:
On Oct 18, 12:43 am, David Paste wrote:

Not the CFLs, but the 'proper' tubes...

Does anyone have any experience of using these in living rooms,
bedrooms, etc? I like the light they give out but they do seem a bit
clinical as just tubes, from an aesthetic point. So, I was thinking of
hiding the (daylight) tubes on top of shelves or something similar so
the light would effectively illuminate the room by reflecting off the
(white) ceiling. I am fed up with having these ****y CFLs dimming my
living areas.

Any thoughts?

TIA, David Paste.

You can get circular ones with shades that aren't too bad
aesthetically and are more appropriately shaped for a square room that
the linear ones. One day I'll get around to installing some myself
instead of the expensive, short-lived, slow warm-up, high power CFLs.

Chris

I have CFLs that are over ten years old. You can get fittings with
"2D" tubes that are OK in domestic areas. Tubes are expensive.
All fluorescent technology gives the same qualty of light, it is
identical technology. Indirect lighting will just make things even
dimmer.
Pix of 2D tubes and fittings here.
http://www.supaprice.co.uk/p/result....+light+fitting

David Paste wrote:
Does anyone have any experience of using these in living rooms,
bedrooms, etc?

I had a circular tube in my room at University inside a diffuser.
It seemed unexceptional, though most people took the diffuser off.
My Nanan & Grandad had circular tubes in the dining room and living
room and there didn't seem to be any discomfort.

JGH

In article
s.com, David Paste writes

So, I was thinking of
hiding the (daylight) tubes on top of shelves or something similar so
the light would effectively illuminate the room by reflecting off the
(white) ceiling.

I did this in the kitchen in my previous house and was very pleased with
the results. Undercupboard lights for worktop illumination, one centre
ceiling fitting, and lights on top of the kitchen cabinets hidden behind
a pelmet, all individually switched from the wall switch so the desired
combination could be chosen.

Was very pleased with the results. I used slimline fittings with
triphosphor tubes, e.g. http://tinyurl.com/5scxppp

Bouncing the light off the ceiling eliminates the glare and makes it
more diffused.

--
(\__/)
(='.'=)
(")_(")

In article
s.com, jgharston writes

I had a circular tube in my room at University inside a diffuser.

I hate those circular tubes. They were very common in the 50s and 60s,
seem very dated nowadays, they look so institutional.

--
(\__/)
(='.'=)
(")_(")

Huge wrote:
On 2011-10-18, Tim Streater wrote:
In article ,
"Brian Gaff" wrote:

Well get electoronic ones, as eventually the choke based ones buzz
and start getting really irritating

Any chance of you using a newsreader that quotes properly, so I don't
start buzzing and getting really irritating?

Brian is blind.

Don't worry, I made the same comment for the same reason. I was
embarrassed, too.

Still really irritating though.

Tim

On Oct 18, 7:02*am, harry wrote:
On Oct 18, 2:01*am,
wrote:









On Oct 18, 12:43*am, David Paste wrote:

Not the CFLs, but the 'proper' tubes...

Does anyone have any experience of using these in living rooms,
bedrooms, etc? I like the light they give out but they do seem a bit
clinical as just tubes, from an aesthetic point. So, I was thinking of
hiding the (daylight) tubes on top of shelves or something similar so
the light would effectively illuminate the room by reflecting off the
(white) ceiling. I am fed up with having these ****y CFLs dimming my
living areas.

Any thoughts?

TIA, David Paste.

You can get circular ones with shades that aren't too bad
aesthetically and are more appropriately shaped for a square room that
the linear ones. One day I'll get around to installing some myself
instead of the expensive, short-lived, slow warm-up, high power CFLs.

Chris

I have CFLs that are over ten years old.

They are probably far down the lumen depreciation curve.

*You can get fittings with
"2D" tubes that are OK in domestic areas. *Tubes are expensive.

With life of a decent T5 tube being a realistic 20,000 hours,
reasonable value for the cost.

All fluorescent technology gives the same qualty of light, it is
identical technology. *

Not at all, they started with halophosphors moved to tri phosphors,
lot of black art in blending phosphors for fluro and LED lamps.
White is a big range ofcolours ;-)

Indirect lighting will just make things even
dimmer.

Its used a lot in retail enviroments where high brightness is one of
the main specifications.

T5 and HF dimmable ballasts, suprsingly cheap in ebay, can make quite
a succesful scheme.

Cheers
Adam

Pix of 2D tubes and fittings here.http://www.supaprice.co.uk/p/result....+light+fitting

On Oct 18, 7:02*am, harry wrote:

All fluorescent technology gives the same qualty of light, it is
identical technology.

Except for the ones that are different, of course.

MBQ

Tim Downie wrote:
Huge wrote:
Brian is blind.
Still really irritating though.

Brian Gaff has his own entry in the CSS FAQ:
http://www.worldofspectrum.org/cssfo...html#briangaff

This would not be needed if *everybody* actually trimmed and
quoted correctly, instead of spewing irrelevent extreneous
bits of previous posts in replies. Unfortunately, newsgroup
readers that are usable by blind people are very fiddly to
use to correctly trim and quote responses correctly when
the post being responded to is already mangled.

JGH

Tim Downie wrote:
Huge wrote:
On 2011-10-18, Tim Streater wrote:
In article ,
"Brian Gaff" wrote:

Well get electoronic ones, as eventually the choke based ones buzz
and start getting really irritating

Any chance of you using a newsreader that quotes properly, so I don't
start buzzing and getting really irritating?

Brian is blind.

Don't worry, I made the same comment for the same reason. I was
embarrassed, too.

Still really irritating though.

Not as irritating as some of the badly spelt, ungrammatical and
downright wrong posts I read here. At least Brian has a reason for
posting the way he does.

--
Tciao for Now!

John.

On Oct 18, 12:43*am, David Paste wrote:
Not the CFLs, but the 'proper' tubes...

Does anyone have any experience of using these in living rooms,
bedrooms, etc? I like the light they give out but they do seem a bit
clinical as just tubes, from an aesthetic point. So, I was thinking of
hiding the (daylight) tubes on top of shelves or something similar so
the light would effectively illuminate the room by reflecting off the
(white) ceiling. I am fed up with having these ****y CFLs dimming my
living areas.

Any thoughts?

TIA, David Paste.

Its a good way to get good quality, adjustable, long lived reliable
high efficiency lighting, but there are potential gotchas.
1. The tubes must be made invisible, either shelf or preferably trough
fittings solve that.
2. Dont make the common mistake of installing huge uberpowerful 65w
tubes. As a starting point I'd suggest max 4' for large rooms, 2' for
others.
3. Fl tubes vary hugely in quality. For this approach to work, you do
need to pick your tubes with a little knowledge. Its simple, but
essential.
4. Finding a place to put the huge tubes can be an issue in some
rooms.
5. Fittings also vary in quality. The popular cheap glowstart ones
flash horribly on startup, and are best avoided for domestic use.
6. Finally I like to put them on a switchbank, or where there's only
one light needed, fit 2 of different output. That way you've got
different brightnesses to choose from, makes it rather nicer to live
with.

Mo http://wiki.diyfaq.org.uk/index.php?title=Fluorescent


NT

Huge wrote:
On 2011-10-18, Tim Streater wrote:
In article ,
"Brian Gaff" wrote:

Well get electoronic ones, as eventually the choke based ones buzz and start
getting really irritating
Any chance of you using a newsreader that quotes properly, so I don't
start buzzing and getting really irritating?

Brian is blind.

Don't worry, I made the same comment for the same reason. I was embarrassed,
too.


If brian is blind what is he doing commenting on the quality of lighting?

Man at B&Q wrote:
On Oct 18, 7:02 am, harry wrote:

All fluorescent technology gives the same qualty of light, it is
identical technology.

Except for the ones that are different, of course.


Is anyone compiling a 'book of harry' to put in te biog to keep yourself
amused?

I do not understand how he can be wrong more often than random chance
would dictate.


MBQ

On Oct 18, 3:35*pm, The Natural Philosopher
wrote:

If brian is blind what is he doing commenting on the quality of lighting?

He was commenting on the noise it makes...

Neil

Neil Williams wrote:
On Oct 18, 3:35 pm, The Natural Philosopher
wrote:

If brian is blind what is he doing commenting on the quality of lighting?

He was commenting on the noise it makes...


Ah. In which case I apologise. Someone who lives by sound and touch..

Neil

On 18/10/2011 00:43, David Paste wrote:
Not the CFLs, but the 'proper' tubes...

Does anyone have any experience of using these in living rooms,
bedrooms, etc? I like the light they give out but they do seem a bit
clinical as just tubes, from an aesthetic point. So, I was thinking of
hiding the (daylight) tubes on top of shelves or something similar so
the light would effectively illuminate the room by reflecting off the
(white) ceiling. I am fed up with having these ****y CFLs dimming my
living areas.

Any thoughts?

I have used the technique in a kitchen with a chain of connected link
lights concealed above and below the top kitchen units. The effect was
very good, no harsh light, and good colour rendition (that's with
tri-phosphor tubes and electronic ballasts):

http://www.tlc-direct.co.uk/Main_Ind...ing/index.html

Note that those are the compact slim tubes - they life from these does
not seem to be as good as larger ones. So if you have the space, then
these using 1" tubes are a better bet:

http://www.tlc-direct.co.uk/Main_Ind...ard/index.html

(these are often supplied with "white" rather than "warm white" tubes -
so may appear slightly cooler than incandescents - although are probably
a good match for LV halogens)

--
Cheers,

John.

/================================================== ===============\
| Internode Ltd - http://www.internode.co.uk |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------|
| John Rumm - john(at)internode(dot)co(dot)uk |
\================================================= ================/

On Mon, 17 Oct 2011 16:43:09 -0700 (PDT), David Paste
wrote:


Does anyone have any experience of using these in living rooms,
bedrooms, etc? I like the light they give out but they do seem a bit
clinical as just tubes, from an aesthetic point. So, I was thinking of
hiding the (daylight) tubes on top of shelves or something similar so
the light would effectively illuminate the room by reflecting off the
(white) ceiling.

Used that for many years, two 60W fittings simply rested on top of two
small spacers to keep them a few mm off the top of a long bookcase. By
choosing the right tubes you can have either a warmish or cool light
as you prefer. No light source is visible so there is no glare at
all. Works very well.

On Oct 18, 7:02*am, harry wrote:


All fluorescent technology gives the same qualty of light, it is
identical technology. *

In the bigger lamps there is a choice over the spectrum of the light
emitted - its' indicated by the "color temperture" .

http://donklipstein.com/f-spec.html

On Oct 18, 1:11*pm, "Man at B&Q" wrote:
On Oct 18, 7:02*am, harry wrote:

All fluorescent technology gives the same qualty of light, it is
identical technology.

Except for the ones that are different, of course.

MBQ


The best fluorescent tubes have a triple phosphor coat.
The same applies with CFLs. They are the same technolgy, if they have
a triple phosphor coat, they too will have a more acceptable light
colour.
Many of the Chinese cheapies don't. I have some Philips ones that are
excellent.

The Natural Philosopher wrote:
Huge wrote:
On 2011-10-18, Tim Streater wrote:
In article ,
"Brian Gaff" wrote:

Well get electoronic ones, as eventually the choke based ones buzz
and start getting really irritating
Any chance of you using a newsreader that quotes properly, so I
don't start buzzing and getting really irritating?

Brian is blind.

Don't worry, I made the same comment for the same reason. I was
embarrassed, too.


If brian is blind what is he doing commenting on the quality of
lighting?

dennis knows nothing about anything but it does not stop him commenting
about most subjects.

--
Adam

harry wrote:
On Oct 18, 1:11 pm, "Man at B&Q" wrote:
On Oct 18, 7:02 am, harry wrote:

All fluorescent technology gives the same qualty of light, it is
identical technology.
Except for the ones that are different, of course.

MBQ


The best fluorescent tubes have a triple phosphor coat.

So harry are those the same technology as the worst ones then?

If so why would there be a best and a worst one when they are all the
same technology?

The Natural Philosopher wrote:
Neil Williams wrote:
On Oct 18, 3:35 pm, The Natural Philosopher
wrote:

If brian is blind what is he doing commenting on the quality of
lighting?

He was commenting on the noise it makes...


Ah. In which case I apologise. Someone who lives by sound and touch..

That will by why he posted on the "Scratches in a glossy worktop" thread
then.

I'll get my coat.

--
Adam

ARWadsworth wrote:
The Natural Philosopher wrote:
Neil Williams wrote:
On Oct 18, 3:35 pm, The Natural Philosopher
wrote:

If brian is blind what is he doing commenting on the quality of
lighting?
He was commenting on the noise it makes...

Ah. In which case I apologise. Someone who lives by sound and touch..

That will by why he posted on the "Scratches in a glossy worktop" thread
then.

fingertips are the best sensors for surface smoothness..ask any Romeo.

I'll get my coat.

In article ,
Nightjar writes:
On 18/10/2011 07:02, harry wrote:
On Oct 18, 2:01 am,
wrote:
On Oct 18, 12:43 am, David wrote:

Not the CFLs, but the 'proper' tubes...

Does anyone have any experience of using these in living rooms,
bedrooms, etc? I like the light they give out but they do seem a bit
clinical as just tubes, from an aesthetic point.

There are quite a few alternatives to just tubes. Follow the link to
Interior lighting / Surface and suspended luminaires here for a few
examples.

http://www.thornlighting.com/com/en/...atalogue_f.htm

So, I was thinking of
hiding the (daylight) tubes on top of shelves or something similar so
the light would effectively illuminate the room by reflecting off the
(white) ceiling. I am fed up with having these ****y CFLs dimming my
living areas.

Any thoughts?

I did this, quite successfully, in the 1960s with pelmet boxes over the
windows. The curtains hung below the box and the lights shone out the top.

So did my parents - still there.
I have replacement tubes/ballasts waiting to go in when the room
is redecorated.


TIA, David Paste.

You can get circular ones with shades that aren't too bad
aesthetically and are more appropriately shaped for a square room that
the linear ones. One day I'll get around to installing some myself
instead of the expensive, short-lived, slow warm-up, high power CFLs.

Chris

I have CFLs that are over ten years old. You can get fittings with
"2D" tubes that are OK in domestic areas. Tubes are expensive.
All fluorescent technology gives the same qualty of light, it is
identical technology. Indirect lighting will just make things even
dimmer.

Except of course, for the fact that a 6 ft fluorescent tube starts off a
lot brighter than the average CFL lamp.

but still far short of final light output, and the run-up time for
a long T12 tube is almost half an hour (so people don't notice).

With T8 and T5 tubes, it's more noticable. Unfortunately, it's a
trade-off for increased efficiency and lower mercury dosing.

--
Andrew Gabriel
[email address is not usable -- followup in the newsgroup]

In article ,
Mike Tomlinson writes:
In article
s.com, jgharston writes

I had a circular tube in my room at University inside a diffuser.

I hate those circular tubes. They were very common in the 50s and 60s,
seem very dated nowadays, they look so institutional.

They were the bee's knees at the time, particularly the circular
tube ballasted with a regular filament lamp in the middle, all
behind a glass diffuser.

Then there was the Milk Bar fittings, with the 3 different sized
circular tubes nested inside each other.

The original T9 circular tubes will probably vanish over the next
few years. There are now T5 ones now which meet future efficiency
requirements, but not compaitible.

--
Andrew Gabriel
[email address is not usable -- followup in the newsgroup]

On 18/10/2011 16:45, RobertL wrote:
On Oct 18, 7:02 am, wrote:


All fluorescent technology gives the same qualty of light, it is
identical technology.

In the bigger lamps there is a choice over the spectrum of the light
emitted - its' indicated by the "color temperture" .

Your choice of words there may be slightly confusing since its
conflating two separate things. The colour temperature will dictate the
overall perceived tone or "warmth" of the light (with counter
intuitively, lower colour temperatures appearing warmer, and higher
temperatures appearing cooler or bluer), but the spectrum emitted is a
more complex affair than just the overall perceived tone or the
"whiteness". Its possible to create the same colour temperature as a
incandescent lamp quite easily with a CFL, its very much harder to
create the same spectrum without noticeable peaks and gaps in it. Hence
looking at the bulb, they can appear very similar, however the light
reflected from a range of coloured surfaces can appear very different.

http://donklipstein.com/f-spec.html

Yup, that link has a pretty good explanation.

--
Cheers,

John.

/================================================== ===============\
| Internode Ltd - http://www.internode.co.uk |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------|
| John Rumm - john(at)internode(dot)co(dot)uk |
\================================================= ================/

On Oct 18, 9:10*pm, The Natural Philosopher
wrote:
harry wrote:
On Oct 18, 1:11 pm, "Man at B&Q" wrote:
On Oct 18, 7:02 am, harry wrote:

All fluorescent technology gives the same qualty of light, it is
identical technology.
Except for the ones that are different, of course.

MBQ

The best fluorescent tubes have a triple phosphor coat.

So harry are those the same technology as the worst ones then?

If so why would there be a best and a worst one when they are all the
same technology?


Basically yes.

On Oct 19, 12:20*am, John Rumm wrote:

Its possible to create the same colour temperature as a
incandescent lamp quite easily with a CFL, its very much harder to
create the same spectrum without noticeable peaks and gaps in it.

I wandered around the house last night with a CD and compared the
spectrum I could see on the back of it under different lamps. The best
was the one incandescent lamp I have, in the toilet - nice continuous
spectrum, followed by the linear fluorescent tubes in the kitchen. The
CFLs all had gaps in the spectrum, which actually looked quite pretty
on the CD, but clearly lends to my dissatisfaction with the lamp
itself.

Thanks to all for the suggestions and views given.

In article ,
David Paste writes:
On Oct 19, 12:20*am, John Rumm wrote:
Its possible to create the same colour temperature as a
incandescent lamp quite easily with a CFL, its very much harder to
create the same spectrum without noticeable peaks and gaps in it.
I wandered around the house last night with a CD and compared the
spectrum I could see on the back of it under different lamps. The best
was the one incandescent lamp I have, in the toilet - nice continuous
spectrum, followed by the linear fluorescent tubes in the kitchen. The
CFLs all had gaps in the spectrum, which actually looked quite pretty
on the CD, but clearly lends to my dissatisfaction with the lamp
itself.
Thanks to all for the suggestions and views given.

My guess is that the linear fluorescent you checked is a halophosphate
tube (which are being phased out because of poor efficiency).

Your filament lamp will have a CRI (Colour Rendering Index) of almost 100.
Tri-phosphor tubes achieve CRI in the 80's.
Multi/poly phosphor tubes with CRI of 90 or more will also have more
infill phosphors, but they are harder to find and expensive.

Most bog-standard halophosphate tubes had CRI in the 70's, but
they were available in everything from 50 to 90, although the
high CRI ones were rather inefficient. The low CRI in these
cases was more often due to lack of balance across the whole
visible spectrum, rather than discrite line sources.

Tube colours and CRI are usually given by a 3-digit code such
as 830, which means CRI in the 80's, and colour is 3000K,
or 940, which means CRI in the 90's, and colour is 4000K.

CFLs are normally 827 (CRI in the 80's, and colour is 2700K,
which is designed to be same as the filament lamp they are
replacing, and for mixing with other filament lamps).

2700K-3000K is warm white (filament lamps are 2700K).
3500K-4000K is white
4000K-5500K is cool white
5500K-6500K is (misleadingly referred to as) daylight or full spectrum
(which doesn't mean full spectrum at all - it's a marketing term).

Each colour temperature has a range of lux levels at which it looks
right (Kruithof curve). So 5500K will look right at midday sunlight
levels (e.g. your ceiling plastered in fluorescent fittings), but it
will look blue with one fitting generating twilight lighting levels
normally used indoors.

For a living room, you probably want a lighting level were 2700K
looks about right. Kitchens generally need higher lighting levels
where 3500K would be more reasonable. Supplemental lighting in an
office during daylight is going to use white or cool white tubes.

--
Andrew Gabriel
[email address is not usable -- followup in the newsgroup]

On Wed, 19 Oct 2011 04:31:49 -0700 (PDT), David Paste wrote:

On Oct 19, 12:20*am, John Rumm wrote:

Its possible to create the same colour temperature as a
incandescent lamp quite easily with a CFL, its very much harder to
create the same spectrum without noticeable peaks and gaps in it.

I wandered around the house last night with a CD and compared the
spectrum I could see on the back of it under different lamps. The best
was the one incandescent lamp I have, in the toilet - nice continuous
spectrum, followed by the linear fluorescent tubes in the kitchen. The
CFLs all had gaps in the spectrum, which actually looked quite pretty
on the CD, but clearly lends to my dissatisfaction with the lamp
itself.

Thanks to all for the suggestions and views given.

I must try that. T'other day I wanted to get a photo of something under a
CFL - the initial view on the LCD was a horrible yellowish colour then,
after a couple of seconds the camera corrected it to somewhere near
normality. Still not 100% but OK for the purpose.
--
Peter.
The gods will stay away
whilst religions hold sway

On Oct 19, 2:35*pm, PeterC wrote:

T'other day I wanted to get a photo of something under a
CFL - the initial view on the LCD was a horrible yellowish colour then,
after a couple of seconds the camera corrected it to somewhere near
normality.

Ah yes! "White Balance"!

David Paste wrote:
On Oct 19, 2:35 pm, PeterC wrote:

T'other day I wanted to get a photo of something under a
CFL - the initial view on the LCD was a horrible yellowish colour then,
after a couple of seconds the camera corrected it to somewhere near
normality.

Ah yes! "White Balance"!
juts as easily achieved with Photo* post processing...

On Oct 19, 2:22*pm, (Andrew Gabriel)
wrote:

Tube colours and CRI are usually given by a 3-digit code such
as 830, which means CRI in the 80's, and colour is 3000K,
or 940, which means CRI in the 90's, and colour is 4000K.

CFLs are normally 827 (CRI in the 80's, and colour is 2700K,
which is designed to be same as the filament lamp they are
replacing, and for mixing with other filament lamps).


Thanks for that. I went rooting around in *The Drawer* and found an
IKEA branded CFL with 946 printed on the bottom of the pack. I am sure
this won't be what I want it to be. I'll see what the back of the CD
has to say after the sun has disappeared.

Looking at the rest of the CFLs (accumulated over the past few years
by many people) in *The Drawer*, it seems that colour codes /
information have only recently been printed on the packages.