Old style filament lamps?
Terry Pinnell
Does anyone know where I can buy 'normal' filament lamp bulbs in the UK
please? I just cannot get on with the new economy type. My remaining stock
of 60W and 100W is dwindling rapidly.
--
Terry, East Grinstead, UK
Phil Allison
"Terry Pinnell"
> Does anyone know where I can buy 'normal' filament lamp bulbs in the UK
> please? I just cannot get on with the new economy type. My remaining stock
> of 60W and 100W is dwindling rapidly.
** AFAIK- even if you came across a stock it is illegal now for anyone to
sell them to you.
Have a look for the high efficiency halogen bulbs that are made in the same
style as regular BC and ES 40 watt and 60 watt bulbs. Rated at 2000 hours
and bit whiter light but rather more expensive.
Legally on sale all over Australia, but not sure about the UK.
..... Phil
Arfa Daily
"Terry Pinnell" <terry...@DELETEgmail.com> wrote in message
news:v22ir6tkftirp75f6...@4ax.com...
You, and many others, including this +1, I'm afraid, Terry ... :-(
I just looked on my favourite lamp buying site in the UK, and they don't
appear to do any standard lightbulbs except ecobollox types at all now. Even
the halogen ones that Phil mentions, now don't seem to be available. I have
one of those in my hallway, and it is superb. They are basically a halogen
capsule bulb, inside a 'standard' lightbulb. The one I have is a pearl type,
so nice even light, but I seem to recall someone saying that even those had
been made available only in a clear glass outer shell, and now it looks like
that has gone as well. It really pisses me off actually, that yet another
mature technology that gave good even and diffuse light - the whole reason
that that pearlisation of the envelope was introduced in the first place -
has now been forcibly replaced with an ecobollox product that doesn't hold a
candle (pun intended) to what it's replacing. I wouldn't mind if the end
justified the means. I read the other day that it has been calculated that
in the UK, if every single conventional lightbulb was changed for an
ecobollox type, all it would save is the output from one small power
station.
Arfa
Adrian Tuddenham
> (Re-posted from the lower traffic sci.electronics.misc group.)
>
> Does anyone know where I can buy 'normal' filament lamp bulbs in the UK
> please? I just cannot get on with the new economy type. My remaining stock
> of 60W and 100W is dwindling rapidly.
http://www.wrightshardware.co.uk/Eaccess.htm
--
~ Adrian Tuddenham ~
(Remove the ".invalid"s and add ".co.uk" to reply)
www.poppyrecords.co.uk
Phil Allison
"Adrian Tuddenham"
> http://www.wrightshardware.co.uk/Eaccess.htm
** Have you rung the phone number?
Does ma or pa Wright answer ??
Looks like a ghost web site to me.
.... Phil
William Sommerwerck
> appear to do any standard lightbulbs except ecobollox types at all now.
Even
> the halogen ones that Phil mentions, now don't seem to be available. I
have
> one of those in my hallway, and it is superb. They are basically a halogen
> capsule bulb, inside a 'standard' lightbulb. The one I have is a pearl
type,
> so nice even light, but I seem to recall someone saying that even those
had
> been made available only in a clear glass outer shell, and now it looks
like
> that has gone as well. It really pisses me off actually, that yet another
> mature technology that gave good even and diffuse light - the whole reason
> that that pearlisation of the envelope was introduced in the first place -
> has now been forcibly replaced with an ecobollox product that doesn't hold
a
> candle (pun intended) to what it's replacing. I wouldn't mind if the end
> justified the means. I read the other day that it has been calculated that
> in the UK, if every single conventional lightbulb was changed for an
> ecobollox type, all it would save is the output from one small power
> station.
We're been through this before.
British CFLs must be of very poor quality, because you can get excellent
ones in the US. They come instantly -- faster than incandescent -- and have
good color balance.
I've replaced all but the miniature "decorative" lamps in my condo with
CFLs. I would never go back to incandescent.
I'm writing this in my den. The light is from a 100W-equivalent Home Depot
CFL in an IKEA shade. The /only/ way you can tell it's not incandescent is
by looking under the shade.
The bathroom has a 6-bulb "bar". The middle bulbs have been loosened so they
won't light, and the end bulbs replaced with CFLs. Yeah, it looks a bit
funny. Big deal.
Smitty Two
"William Sommerwerck" <grizzle...@comcast.net> wrote:
> British CFLs must be of very poor quality, because you can get excellent
> ones in the US. They come instantly -- faster than incandescent -- and have
> good color balance.
You buy CFLs that come on faster than an incandescent? Would like to see
a pic of the packaging so I know what to look for at HD. I'm just a tad
skeptical. Do you know the color temp?
William Sommerwerck
news:prestwhich-E7742...@news.eternal-september.org...
I've been using Home Depot's store brand -- EcoSmart -- for several years.
Consumer Reports recently gave them a very high rating.
No color temp or rendering quality is specified. But the balance is on the
warm side. It's acceptable (in my opinion) for non-critical color
photography.
Geoffrey S. Mendelson
> No color temp or rendering quality is specified. But the balance is on the
> warm side. It's acceptable (in my opinion) for non-critical color
> photography.
Similar ones are available here in Israel. I assume since we use the same
electrical system as the UK, they are available there too.
There are also cheap junk, but I avoid them.
BTW, I've been using them since the late 1990's and CFLs keep getting cheaper,
more efficient and on the whole better. They are not perfect, and we still use
incandescent bulbs in some places, but 99% of the light in my home is from
either CFLs or the old fashioned long ones.
Geoff.
--
Geoffrey S. Mendelson N3OWJ/4X1GM
Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to misquote it.
William Sommerwerck
news:slrnirisl...@cable.mendelson.com...
> BTW, I've been using them since the late 1990's and CFLs keep
> getting cheaper, more efficient and on the whole better. They are
> not perfect, and we still use incandescent bulbs in some places,
> but 99% of the light in my home is from either CFLs or the old-
> fashioned long ones.
It's amazing that, despite their generally poor color rendering, tubular FLs
have long been tolerated in kitchens and workspaces.
spamtrap1888
wrote:
None that I can buy. In my double fixtures I have one incandescent and
one CFL. Otherwise I have to wait every time I turn on a light.
Further, none of the bulbs I can buy are rated to work outdoors. I put
one in my porchlight anyway, and it wore out in less time than an
incandescent.
Geoffrey S. Mendelson
> It's amazing that, despite their generally poor color rendering, tubular FLs
> have long been tolerated in kitchens and workspaces.
I can't quantify it, but I have a much brighter tubular floursecent lamp
over my head because of the color problems. It seems I need a lot more
light to read with them than an incadescent one.
Smitty Two
"William Sommerwerck" <grizzle...@comcast.net> wrote:
Not amazing to me. In commercial and industrial (IOW business)
applications, it's all about economy. It's a holdover from the days of
candlelit rooms filled with accountants. The "grumble factor" determined
how many candles were allowed: just enough to minimize but not totally
eliminate employee grumbling.
Adrian Tuddenham
> "Adrian Tuddenham"
>
> > http://www.wrightshardware.co.uk/Eaccess.htm
>
>
> ** Have you rung the phone number?
>
> Does ma or pa Wright answer ??
Thursday is early closing day in Bath; it's when he goes to the
wholesalers to stock up. Try again tomorrow.
> Looks like a ghost web site to me.
Nope - just under delayed construction. I'm the webmaster and I'm
waiting for more info.
Terry Pinnell
>Terry Pinnell <terry...@DELETEgmail.com> wrote:
>
>> (Re-posted from the lower traffic sci.electronics.misc group.)
>>
>> Does anyone know where I can buy 'normal' filament lamp bulbs in the UK
>> please? I just cannot get on with the new economy type. My remaining stock
>> of 60W and 100W is dwindling rapidly.
>
>http://www.wrightshardware.co.uk/Eaccess.htm
Thanks Adrian. Phoned at 7pm but I see they're closed all day Thursdays
anyway. I'll try again on Saturday after the Wedding. Doesn't look like
they have any online ordering but presumably they will despatch? Bath's a
little too far to justify the trip!
Meat Plow
Who is going to arrest you for selling incandescent bulbs? The bulb
police?
--
Live Fast Die Young, Leave A Pretty Corpse
spamtrap1888
I remember when Detroiters would cross into Canada to buy 5 gallon
flush toilets. Good times.
Adrian Tuddenham
He told me he intends to open the shop tomorrow (Friday).
I warned him that, if he had a website, people would expect him to do
mail order, but I don't know if he is ready for it yet.
M.Joshi
'Terry Pinnell[_3_ Wrote:
> ;2636067'](Re-posted from the lower traffic sci.electronics.misc
Do you mean that your light fittings cannot accomodate the larger
compact fluorescent bulbs?
If so, there are halogen bulbs available in the same form factor as the
old incandescent filament bulbs. These are classed as lower energy than
a standard incandescent and can be purchased from most supermarkets and
DIY stores. See the link below:
They give you full brightness at switch on unlike compact fluorescents
that take time to warm-up.
--
M.Joshi
William Sommerwerck
> compact fluorescents that take time to warm-up.
Yes, but...
The better CFLs are quite bright at turn-on -- bright enough that you don't
feel you bought a defective lamp.
Andrew Rossmann
says...
> British CFLs must be of very poor quality, because you can get
excellent
> ones in the US. They come instantly -- faster than incandescent -- and have
> good color balance.
>
> I've replaced all but the miniature "decorative" lamps in my condo with
> CFLs. I would never go back to incandescent.
>
> I'm writing this in my den. The light is from a 100W-equivalent Home Depot
> CFL in an IKEA shade. The /only/ way you can tell it's not incandescent is
> by looking under the shade.
Although many CFL's list the color temperature (2700K is roughly
equivalent to incandescent), they rarely list the CRI (Color Rendering
Index). That gives an idea on how well a bulb displays all colors.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Color_rendering_index
--
If there is a no_junk in my address, please REMOVE it before replying!
All junk mail senders will be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the
law!!
http://home.comcast.net/~andyross
Jim Yanik
> William Sommerwerck wrote:
>
>> It's amazing that, despite their generally poor color rendering,
>> tubular FLs have long been tolerated in kitchens and workspaces.
maybe color rendering isn't that important compared to seeing what you're
doing.The eye/brain manages to compensate,excpet under low light levels.
Besides,tungsten lighting(2700K or 3200K) isn't all that "color accurate"
itself. That's why color photo film came in tungsten variety,for better
color rendering for that color temp lighting. Even digital cameras have a
setting for color temp(my cheapo Polaroid does),not that people use them as
they should.
>
> I can't quantify it, but I have a much brighter tubular floursecent
> lamp over my head because of the color problems. It seems I need a lot
> more light to read with them than an incadescent one.
>
> Geoff.
>
you need color rendering accuracy to READ?
--
Jim Yanik
jyanik
at
localnet
dot com
David Nebenzahl
You're buying the wrong kind of CFLs, then.
All of the *newer* ones I have light almost instantly. Some older ones
have an annoying long startup time. But all of them last a looooong
time. Some of my CFLs are 8-9 years old and still working fine.
So where are you, anyhow?
--
The current state of literacy in our advanced civilization:
yo
wassup
nuttin
wan2 hang
k
where
here
k
l8tr
by
- from Usenet (what's *that*?)
William Sommerwerck
news:Xns9ED5C3F112686...@216.168.3.44...
> "Geoffrey S. Mendelson" <g...@mendelson.com> wrote in
> news:slrnirj3a...@cable.mendelson.com:
>> William Sommerwerck wrote:
>>> It's amazing that, despite their generally poor color rendering,
>>> tubular FLs have long been tolerated in kitchens and workspaces.
> maybe color rendering isn't that important compared to seeing what you're
> doing.The eye/brain manages to compensate,excpet under low light levels.
It _is_ important in photography, where color accuracy is of considerably
greater significance than "seeing what you're doing".
> Besides, tungsten lighting (2700K or 3200K) isn't all that "color
accurate"
> itself.
In this context, that's not really correct. Any continuous-spectrum lighting
source that's free of holes or peaks in its spectrum inherently has
"perfect" rendering. All it needs is a filter (or RGB gain adjustment) to
give correct rendering for any color temperature.
CFLs generally have discontinuous spectra, and vary widely in rendering
accuracy. The photographic CFLs in my Lowell ego lights are rated at 93%,
which is fairly good.
Arfa Daily
"Jim Yanik" <jya...@abuse.gov> wrote in message
news:Xns9ED5C3F112686...@216.168.3.44...
I don't know about 'colour rendering accuracy', Jim, but I too find it
extremely difficult to read under CFLs as opposed to incandescent light
sources. I imagine that it is just some characteristic that my eyes have
developed as I've gotten older, and my sight overall, has declined compared
to when I was young. Perhaps I am in a minority of people that suffer in
this way, but trust me, it is very real. Oddly enough though, I have no
trouble at all reading or working under linear flourescent light,
irrespective of the quoted colour composition (eg warm white, daylight etc)
of said tubes.
Arfa
Arfa Daily
"William Sommerwerck" <grizzle...@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:ipcma2$21u$1...@dont-email.me...
The operative word being "quite". I thought you said that your Home Despot
types came on quicker than an incandescent. Certainly doesn't sound that way
from that description ... And as far as I'm concerned, any incandescent
replacement technology lamp that does not produce the *full* light output
within a few mS of switch on, or is ambient temperature dependant for its
performance, *is* a defective lamp.
Arfa
Arfa Daily
"William Sommerwerck" <grizzle...@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:ipbnl5$if2$1...@dont-email.me...
Well. 'looking a bit funny' might be fine in your home, but it's not in
mine. Light fixtures are part of the decor, chosen as much for their
appearance, as for their lighting function, and I would like to still be
able to get the proper bulbs for them that their designers intended to go in
them. I don't want candle bulbs that are half as long again as the 'real'
thing and stick out of the shades, or convoluted spirals that look
ridiculous in open or glass shaded fixtures. I don't want to go to the local
store and be presented with 96 different bulb types, all vying with one
another to try to tell me what their equivalent power rating is. Even this
is shortly to be replaced over here with yet another piece of nonsense to
try to cover up the poor light output performance of them in comparison to
incandescent types, and that is to start rating them in "Lumens". But they
can't even agree on how that is actually measured, so a bulb with a lower
lumen figure could actually be subjectively brighter than a 'similar' one
with a higher quoted figure. 'Colour balance' is also a fairly meaningless
term. No matter how they mix the phosphors up on them to try to improve the
CRI, the spectrum never-the-less remains discontinuous in comparison to that
of an incandescent bulb. This is true no matter where they are sold or
manufactured. U.S. bought ones are no different in this respect to U.K.
bought ones. Contrary to what many Americans seem to think, the U.K. is not
a technically-backward banana republic.
Maybe you can't see anything wrong with them, and they suit your eyes, But
they are no good for me on both counts. I, and many others both here and
over there, *can* see their deficiencies, and don't like them. As indeed
prompted the OP to make his post ...
Arfa
Arfa Daily
"Adrian Tuddenham" <adr...@poppyrecords.invalid.invalid> wrote in message
news:1k0fkrv.1hb4ln918f80yN%adr...@poppyrecords.invalid.invalid...
Nice one, Ade. Duly placed in my Favourites folder ... :-)
Arfa
Arfa Daily
"M.Joshi" <M.Joshi...@diybanter.com> wrote in message
news:M.Joshi...@diybanter.com...
> --
> M.Joshi
The originals of these were very good - when they used a pearlised outer
envelope. But note the picture in your link shows a clear enveloped capsule
bulb in a clear outer envelope. Unfortunately, this leads to them producing
a 'harsh' light with sharp shadows. Which is precisely why pearlisation of
the envelope of incandescent bulbs, was introduced in the first place. I
have wall lights in my lounge, which use R50 reflectors. They shine up onto
the ceiling, and used to produce a nice diffuse light from the pearl-fronted
bulb envelope. But now, they are only available with a clear-fronted
envelope, and the consequence of this is that the blue glass shade which
used to glow nice and evenly, now has light and dark stripes in it, and the
light that falls on the ceiling, is an image of the filament. I also have a
four lamp fixture here in the computer room, which uses the same bulb type.
The room used to be nice and bright all over. Now, with clear fronted bulbs
fitted, it doesn't matter where you point each individual spot-lamp, the
room is a sea of shadows and pools of light. Gawd, how I hate all this
eco-bollox nonsense ... >:-(
Arfa
William Sommerwerck
> term. No matter how they mix the phosphors up on them to try to improve
the
> CRI, the spectrum never-the-less remains discontinuous in comparison to
that
> of an incandescent bulb. This is true no matter where they are sold or
> manufactured.
True. But the subjective balance is excellent. The Home Depot bulbs are good
enough for color photography.
> Maybe you can't see anything wrong with them, and they suit your eyes, But
> they are no good for me on both counts. I, and many others both here and
> over there, *can* see their deficiencies, and don't like them. As indeed
> prompted the OP to make his post ...
I've been involved in photography for over 40 years. If the better CFLs
weren't "good", I wouldn't use them.
William Sommerwerck
> >> compact fluorescents that take time to warm-up.
> >
> > Yes, but...
> >
> > The better CFLs are quite bright at turn-on -- bright enough that you
> > don't feel you bought a defective lamp.
> The operative word being "quite". I thought you said that your Home Despot
> types came on quicker than an incandescent. Certainly doesn't sound that
way
> from that description ... And as far as I'm concerned, any incandescent
> replacement technology lamp that does not produce the *full* light output
> within a few mS of switch on, or is ambient temperature dependant for its
> performance, *is* a defective lamp.
The Home Depot lamps come on instantly at a level I'd judge to be around
60% -- maybe higher -- of full brightness. Full brightness takes another 30
seconds or so. This is a huge improvement over the bulbs from 15 years ago.
hrho...@att.net
wrote:
On one of our stairways, the ceiling light is two identical CFL's.
They come on instantly, at about 80% of full brightness, enought to
see where the top and bottome steps are, so it is not a safety
hazard. I woudl guess that they reach full brightness in 10 sec or
so, just about the time I have traversed the staircase. I have them
all over the house except in dimmable fixtures. I haven't been able
to stomach the cost of the dimmable lights, and we can still buy the
full range of incandescent lamps here in the USA.
Phil Allison
"Meat Plow"
>>
>> ** AFAIK- even if you came across a stock it is illegal now for anyone
>> to sell them to you.
>
> Who is going to arrest you for selling incandescent bulbs? The bulb
> police?
>
** Here, all that has to happen is someone report the shop keeper to the
relevant Energy Authority.
They would end up being fined for breaching the regulation called " MEPS" =
minimum energy performance standard in relation to selling non compliant
lamps.
.... Phil
William Sommerwerck
>> 60% -- maybe higher -- of full brightness. Full brightness takes another
30
> > seconds or so. This is a huge improvement over the bulbs from 15 years
ago.
> On one of our stairways, the ceiling light is two identical CFL's.
> They come on instantly, at about 80% of full brightness, enought to
> see where the top and bottom steps are, so it is not a safety
> hazard. I would guess that they reach full brightness in 10 sec or
> so, just about the time I have traversed the staircase. I have them
> all over the house except in dimmable fixtures. I haven't been able
> to stomach the cost of the dimmable lights, and we can still buy the
> full range of incandescent lamps here in the USA.
The Home Depot lights are X10-dimmable, though marked as not dimmable.
You need to use a wall-switch lamp controller. These do not interrogate the
lamp to see if the switch has been turned on or off, so you don't get
flickering when the lamp is off.
Father Haskell
wrote:
> "Smitty Two" <prestwh...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
>
> news:prestwhich-E7742...@news.eternal-september.org...
>
> > In article <ipbnl5$if...@dont-email.me>,
> > "William Sommerwerck" <grizzledgee...@comcast.net> wrote:
> >> British CFLs must be of very poor quality, because you can get
> >> excellent ones in the US. They come instantly -- faster than
> >> incandescent -- and have good color balance.
> > like to see a pic of the packaging so I know what to look for at HD.
> > I'm just a tad skeptical. Do you know the color temp?
>
> I've been using Home Depot's store brand -- EcoSmart -- for several years.
> Consumer Reports recently gave them a very high rating.
>
> No color temp or rendering quality is specified. But the balance is on the
> warm side. It's acceptable (in my opinion) for non-critical color
> photography.
Probably warm / soft white; any other fluorescent is
horror movie lighting. If you don't have the color temp
spec, hold a lit, known temperature bulb next to it and
see if it looks redder, bluer, or the same.
spamtrap1888
wrote:
Nothing I've seen on the market today equals the Panasonic CFLs of
years ago, either in time to full output or longevity.
Terry Pinnell
>Maybe you can't see anything wrong with them, and they suit your eyes, But
>they are no good for me on both counts. I, and many others both here and
>over there, *can* see their deficiencies, and don't like them. As indeed
>prompted the OP to make his post ...
Arfa: Agreed. My feelings exactly.
Terry Pinnell
>
>'Terry Pinnell[_3_ Wrote:
>> ;2636067'](Re-posted from the lower traffic sci.electronics.misc
>> group.)
>>
>> Does anyone know where I can buy 'normal' filament lamp bulbs in the UK
>> please? I just cannot get on with the new economy type. My remaining
>> stock
>> of 60W and 100W is dwindling rapidly.
>>
>> --
>> Terry, East Grinstead, UK
>
>Do you mean that your light fittings cannot accomodate the larger
>compact fluorescent bulbs?
No, my gripes are more basic: I like instant light when I flick a switch
and I like bright light to work and read by. I also resent what seems to
be downright misleading statements by the manufacturers about 'equivalent'
ratings. I've never found one that warrants the claim.
>If so, there are halogen bulbs available in the same form factor as the
>old incandescent filament bulbs. These are classed as lower energy than
>a standard incandescent and can be purchased from most supermarkets and
>DIY stores. See the link below:
>
>http://tinyurl.com/68nocgh
>
>They give you full brightness at switch on unlike compact fluorescents
>that take time to warm-up.
Thanks, I'll investigate and try a few, although from what I've read
up-thread it sounds as if I'll still favour the old filament types.
That link gave me a nice picture but can anyone recommend a specific 60W
and 100W UK supplier please?
Phil Allison
"Terry Pinnell"
> "Arfa Daily"
>
>>Maybe you can't see anything wrong with them, and they suit your eyes, But
>>they are no good for me on both counts. I, and many others both here and
>>over there, *can* see their deficiencies, and don't like them. As indeed
>>prompted the OP to make his post ...
>
> Arfa: Agreed. My feelings exactly.
** Arfa has admitted to being colour blind.
So you are too - it seems.
Have trouble with 1% resistor codes do we???
12% of all males are colour blind - ie they fail one of the basic tests.
Only 1 or 2% of females are so afflicted - but THEY are the CARRIERS !
.... Phil
Smitty Two
"William Sommerwerck" <grizzle...@comcast.net> wrote:
>
> The Home Depot lamps come on instantly at a level I'd judge to be around
> 60% -- maybe higher -- of full brightness. Full brightness takes another 30
> seconds or so.
That is some serious backpedaling from your earlier assertions. Thanks
for telling the truth this time around.
Geo
<terry...@DELETEgmail.com> wrote:
>That link gave me a nice picture but can anyone recommend a specific 60W
>and 100W UK supplier please?
CPC Farnell
LP00298 100W BC PEARL
£4.72 (inc VAT) for 10
They do not seem to do 60 watt but our local high street electrical
shop still sells both.
Geoffrey S. Mendelson
> you need color rendering accuracy to READ?
I don't have a way of quantifying it, but a continous source is much easier
for me to use as a reading lamp. So a 20 watt halogen lamp on "low" is
easier to read than an 11 watt flourescent at the same distance.
Farther away it works the same way too, but I no longer have an incandesent
lamps except for special purpose ones (reading lamps, photgraphic safelights,
etc) to do an eaual distance comparison.
Geoff.
--
Geoffrey S. Mendelson N3OWJ/4X1GM
Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to misquote it.
Smitty Two
"Arfa Daily" <arfa....@ntlworld.com> wrote:
> I would like to still be
> able to get the proper bulbs for them that their designers intended to go in
> them.
If you really didn't stock up before the bans, have you tried bulbs.com
or similar?
Geoffrey S. Mendelson
> Well. 'looking a bit funny' might be fine in your home, but it's not in
> mine. Light fixtures are part of the decor, chosen as much for their
> appearance, as for their lighting function, and I would like to still be
> able to get the proper bulbs for them that their designers intended to go in
> them. I don't want candle bulbs that are half as long again as the 'real'
> thing and stick out of the shades, or convoluted spirals that look
> ridiculous in open or glass shaded fixtures.
That's my biggest problem with CFL's. I can live with the color problems,
I can live with the slow startup, but what bothers me is the extremely bright
end sticking beyond the fixture causing my eyes to compensate when I look in
that direction, making the rest of the room too dark until I look away and
they recover.
It's very annoying that while I have several globe fixtures that perfectly well
took 75 watt incadescent bulbs, there are no similar CFLs. Even the short
curly ones don't fit in the same space once they get beyond the equivalent
of a 40 watt incadescent bulb. :-(
Also what do you put in a refrigerator?????
Geo
item no. 230611860137
Arfa Daily
"Phil Allison" <phi...@tpg.com.au> wrote in message
news:91v54r...@mid.individual.net...
Yes indeed - I am colour blind, and if that is what makes the difference
between someone who does have an issue with CFLs, and someone who doesn't,
then 12% - one eighth - of the population being forced to suffer because
of this legislation, seems a pretty poor show of arrogance by the powers
that be, in insisting that we suffer in the way that we are being made to
...
Arfa
William Sommerwerck
> horror movie lighting. If you don't have the color temp
> spec, hold a lit, known temperature bulb next to it and
> see if it looks redder, bluer, or the same.
It is difficult to specify a "color temperature" for a non-continuous
source.
The bare bulbs look "white", leaning a bit to the warm side.
Arfa Daily
"William Sommerwerck" <grizzle...@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:ipd6e4$ml9$1...@dont-email.me...
With all due respect William, that is the most feeble justification that you
have come up with so far. It's like the government banning cars and making
everybody buy bikes instead, and then turning round and saying that riding a
bike is still better than when you had to walk before the bike was invented
... If it has taken 15 years so far to get these dreadful things from
total crap to utter crap, then by the time they are actually at a point
where they can properly replace incandescent lamps, I will be a pile of dust
anyway. I'm afraid that I cannot, by any stretch of my imagination, equate
"60%" and "30 seconds" to either "instant" or satisfactory replacement
technology. If they really were 'good', they wouldn't need defending against
all of the criticisms that are levelled against them by (colour blind ??)
people the world over.
Arfa
William Sommerwerck
> difference between someone who does have an issue with
> of the population being forced to suffer because of this legislation,
> seems a pretty poor show of arrogance by the powers that be, in
> insisting that we suffer in the way that we are being made to.
I assume you suffer from protanopia or deuteranopia. My father did. (I
don't.)
I worked with a guy with that problem. One day he asked me to help him pick
colors for a Web site. It was causing him all kinds of confusion. I showed
him a fluorescent-green pen, and asked him what color it looked to him --
"Orange". (That doesn't mean he saw it in the way a person with normal color
vision would see orange. Rather, he could not distinguish it from what we
would call orange.)
Peter Wensberg, the author of "Land's Polaroid" (a beautifully written and
wonderfully entertaining book) told how, during a lunch of Chinese takeout,
Dr Land administered one of the standard color perception tests (the kind
with colored circles, where you indicate which letter or number you see).
Wensberg utterly flunked it, getting every one wrong.
I've lived with fluorescent light for more than 60 years, and have never
suffered (except in my early days at Microsoft, when the office lights gave
me (and some others) headaches). It appears to me that your suffering is
primarily aesthetic.
William Sommerwerck
news:prestwhich-8CBAD...@mx01.eternal-september.org...
I'm not backpedaling in the least. They do, indeed, come on instantly. You
ASSUMED that "come on" means "light at full brightness".
Consider tubular fluorescent lights. Many DO NOT come on instantly. But when
they do light, it's at full brightness -- at THAT instant, which could be
considered the point of turn-on.
William Sommerwerck
Refrigerator bulbs represent such a small percentage of energy consumption
there would be no point in switching to CFLs.
Once the color problems with LEDs are solved, there will no doubt be an LED
refrigerator lamp.
Roger Blake
> ** Here, all that has to happen is someone report the shop keeper to the
> relevant Energy Authority.
Very Orwellian, and I suspect this is just the tip of the iceberg.
Rather than fawning all over the "royal couple" (it's hard to imagine a
more worthless set of parasitical leeches than the "royal" family), it may
be time for the Brits to start planning revolution.
Of course we have our own problems with these enviro-nazi types on our side
of the pond as well. When a ban on incandescents was planned here I stocked
up and have a basement with a lifetime supply of good ol' 100 watt bulbs.
--
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Roger Blake (Change "invalid" to "com" for email. Google Groups killfiled.)
"Climate policy has almost nothing to do anymore with environmental
protection... the next world climate summit in Cancun is actually
an economy summit during which the distribution of the world's
resources will be negotiated." -- Ottmar Edenhofer, IPCC
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Geoffrey S. Mendelson
> Yes indeed - I am colour blind, and if that is what makes the difference
> between someone who does have an issue with CFLs, and someone who doesn't,
> then 12% - one eighth - of the population being forced to suffer because
> of this legislation, seems a pretty poor show of arrogance by the powers
> that be, in insisting that we suffer in the way that we are being made
That's an interesting point. If 12% of the population is aflicted with a
gentic disorder, or one caused by a disease or trauma, then the National
Health should provide them with incadescent bulbs and a susbidy for
electricity to run them.
I know the US has the "Americans with Disabilities Act" that would require
it, and I'm sure there is something in British or EU law like that.
I would persue it based on what the National Health does for people
with macular degeneration and work backwards. At what point is the
inability to see defined and where does color blindness affect your
daily life.
Geoffrey S. Mendelson
> I'm afraid that I cannot, by any stretch of my imagination, equate
> "60%" and "30 seconds" to either "instant" or satisfactory replacement
> technology.
>
Besides outdoor lighting where I needed hundreds of watts of incandesent
lighting, I used the first for indoor lighting in places that
traditionally have lights on timers. In a windowless bathroom an 8 watt CFL
provides enough light at so low a cost I just leave them on.
After all a timer uses electricty too, and figuring out when to have it go
on and off without leaving people in the dark is an art.
We don't turn lights on or off during the Sabbath, and used to leave the
main light in our apartment on all Friday night. We installed a timer
to turn it off at midnight (when the last of us goes to sleep) and on again
at six AM, (when the first of us gets up), but it will take 200 weeks
to even out the cost of the timer and installation versus the cost
of electricity. By that time, we will have long since moved out. :-(
Michael A. Terrell
Arfa Daily wrote:
>
> Yes indeed - I am colour blind, and if that is what makes the difference
> between someone who does have an issue with CFLs, and someone who doesn't,
> then 12% - one eighth - of the population being forced to suffer because
> of this legislation, seems a pretty poor show of arrogance by the powers
> that be, in insisting that we suffer in the way that we are being made to
It's time for the villagers to gather their pitchforks and burning
torch, and storm that infestation in Belgium.
--
You can't fix stupid. You can't even put a Band-Aid™ on it, because it's
Teflon coated.
Michael A. Terrell
There are small LED replacements that may fit a refrigerator.
<http://shop.ebay.com/i.html?_nkw=e26+led&_frs=1&_trksid=p3286.c0.m359>
Michael A. Terrell
"Geoffrey S. Mendelson" wrote:
>
> Arfa Daily wrote:
> > I'm afraid that I cannot, by any stretch of my imagination, equate
> > "60%" and "30 seconds" to either "instant" or satisfactory replacement
> > technology.
> >
>
> Besides outdoor lighting where I needed hundreds of watts of incandesent
> lighting, I used the first for indoor lighting in places that
> traditionally have lights on timers. In a windowless bathroom an 8 watt CFL
> provides enough light at so low a cost I just leave them on.
I have several motion sensor lights in my house so I don't have to
search for a light switch when I have my hands full, or I'm half asleep.
Arfa Daily
"William Sommerwerck" <grizzle...@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:ipd6e4$ml9$1...@dont-email.me...
>> >> They give you full brightness at switch on, unlike
>> >> compact fluorescents that take time to warm-up.
>> >
>> > Yes, but...
>> >
>> > The better CFLs are quite bright at turn-on -- bright enough that you
>> > don't feel you bought a defective lamp.
>
>> The operative word being "quite". I thought you said that your Home
>> Despot
>> types came on quicker than an incandescent. Certainly doesn't sound that
> way
>> from that description ... And as far as I'm concerned, any incandescent
>> replacement technology lamp that does not produce the *full* light output
>> within a few mS of switch on, or is ambient temperature dependant for its
>> performance, *is* a defective lamp.
>
> The Home Depot lamps come on instantly at a level I'd judge to be around
> 60% -- maybe higher -- of full brightness. Full brightness takes another
> 30
> seconds or so. This is a huge improvement over the bulbs from 15 years
> ago.
>
>
With all due respect William, that is the most feeble justification that you
have come up with so far. It's like the government banning cars and making
everybody buy bikes instead, and then turning round and saying that riding a
bike is still better than when you had to walk before the bike was invented
... If it has taken 15 years so far to get these dreadful things from
total crap to utter crap, then by the time they are actually at a point
where they can properly replace incandescent lamps, I will be a pile of dust
anyway. I'm afraid that I cannot, by any stretch of my imagination, equate
"60%" and "30 seconds" to either "instant" or satisfactory replacement
Arfa Daily
"William Sommerwerck" <grizzle...@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:ipeaeg$7t2$1...@dont-email.me...
As I've said on a number of occasions, linear flourescent light doesn't
affect me in anything like the same way as CFL. I can read perfectly well
under it. I work perfectly well under it. I don't find the light displeasing
in either colour or quality. I don't know how to reconcile this apparent
disparity, as I too have lived under flourescent light for over fifty years.
I don't know what my type of colour blindness is called, nor whether it is
common in type, or rare. I am apparently red blind and green insensitive, as
far as I recall. It is many years since I took the test. I think it meant
that I couldn't see some shades of red at all, when they were mixed in with
other colours, and that I couldn't distinguish some shades of green amongst
other shades of green. Oddly enough though, the light from CFLs always
appears to have a slightly 'sick' green caste to me, irrespective of the
quoted colour temperature.
Arfa
Arfa Daily
"Roger Blake" <rogb...@iname.invalid> wrote in message
news:2011042...@news.eternal-september.org...
> On 2011-04-29, Phil Allison <phi...@tpg.com.au> wrote:
>> ** Here, all that has to happen is someone report the shop keeper to the
>> relevant Energy Authority.
>
> Very Orwellian, and I suspect this is just the tip of the iceberg.
>
> Rather than fawning all over the "royal couple" (it's hard to imagine a
> more worthless set of parasitical leeches than the "royal" family), it may
> be time for the Brits to start planning revolution.
Not wishing to be rude, Roger, but what exactly is it that you purport to
know about my country's Royal Family in general, or indeed the couple who
today got married, that gives you the right to rubbish them in this way ?
For the most part, they work very hard in ambassadorial roles for our
country around the world. The one that got married today is a nice enough
lad who's a serving officer in our military, and his new wife is a very nice
girl who is not herself from a royal background. I have seen little evidence
of people 'fawning' over this event. Most seem genuinely pleased for them,
and if, in these difficult and depressing financial times, the occasion
provides the general population with a bit of a boost, what's wrong with
that ?
>
>
Arfa
Terry Pinnell
>Or Ł6.99 for 10 (post free) on ebay:-
>item no. 230611860137
Thanks Geo.
Terry Pinnell
>Terry Pinnell <terry...@DELETEgmail.com> wrote:
>
>> adr...@poppyrecords.invalid.invalid (Adrian Tuddenham) wrote:
>>
>> >Terry Pinnell <terry...@DELETEgmail.com> wrote:
>> >
>> >> (Re-posted from the lower traffic sci.electronics.misc group.)
>> >>
>> >> Does anyone know where I can buy 'normal' filament lamp bulbs in the UK
>> >> please? I just cannot get on with the new economy type. My remaining stock
>> >> of 60W and 100W is dwindling rapidly.
>> >
>> >http://www.wrightshardware.co.uk/Eaccess.htm
>>
>> Thanks Adrian. Phoned at 7pm but I see they're closed all day Thursdays
>> anyway. I'll try again on Saturday after the Wedding. Doesn't look like
>> they have any online ordering but presumably they will despatch? Bath's a
>> little too far to justify the trip!
>
>He told me he intends to open the shop tomorrow (Friday).
>
>I warned him that, if he had a website, people would expect him to do
>mail order, but I don't know if he is ready for it yet.
Adrian: I phoned this morning but it appears as you suspected that Mr
Wright supplies only to those visiting his shop. He did say he'd have a
think and "talk to Adrian...". However, I'm pleased to say I've now found
another local source. I bought 20 x 60W and they've ordered the same
number of 100W.
BTW, I was surprised to learn that no 'pearl' types are now made, all are
clear glass.
Arfa Daily
"Terry Pinnell" <terry...@DELETEgmail.com> wrote in message
news:jhqlr6pjpkocn6uv6...@4ax.com...
Yes Terry. See my other posts making mention of this. Apparently, pearlised
types were the first to be phased out, because they consume more energy to
make than clear ones. Oh brother ! And I suppose that CFLs, with their
hundreds of manufacturing processes, don't ... ?
Arfa
lsmartino
> "William Sommerwerck" <grizzledgee...@comcast.net> wrote in message
>
> - Mostrar texto de la cita -
Linear flourescent tubes usually uses a type of phosphor called
halophosphate. That phosphor normally emits light in a very narrow
band of the spectrum, and since you are collor blind, probably what
happens is that your eyes are fully sensitive to that particular band.
In the other had, halophosphate phosphors aren´t suitable for CFL´s
because they produce less light output than triphosphors. A
triphosphor can be seen like a mix of three different phosphors, each
one emitting in a particular band. The sum of all three produces the
light coming from the CFL tube. Probably you are blind to one of these
bands, making you uncomfortable with the light.
This is just a theory, of course.
Adrian Tuddenham
> adr...@poppyrecords.invalid.invalid (Adrian Tuddenham) wrote:
>
> >Terry Pinnell <terry...@DELETEgmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >> adr...@poppyrecords.invalid.invalid (Adrian Tuddenham) wrote:
> >>
> >> >Terry Pinnell <terry...@DELETEgmail.com> wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> (Re-posted from the lower traffic sci.electronics.misc group.)
> >> >>
> >> >> Does anyone know where I can buy 'normal' filament lamp bulbs in the UK
> >> >> please? I just cannot get on with the new economy type. My remaining
>>>stock
> >> >> of 60W and 100W is dwindling rapidly.
> >> >
> >> >http://www.wrightshardware.co.uk/Eaccess.htm
> >>
> >> Thanks Adrian. Phoned at 7pm but I see they're closed all day Thursdays
> >> anyway. I'll try again on Saturday after the Wedding. Doesn't look like
> >> they have any online ordering but presumably they will despatch? Bath's a
> >> little too far to justify the trip!
> >
> >He told me he intends to open the shop tomorrow (Friday).
> >
> >I warned him that, if he had a website, people would expect him to do
> >mail order, but I don't know if he is ready for it yet.
>
> Adrian: I phoned this morning but it appears as you suspected that Mr
> Wright supplies only to those visiting his shop. He did say he'd have a
> think and "talk to Adrian...". However, I'm pleased to say I've now found
> another local source. I bought 20 x 60W and they've ordered the same
> number of 100W.
Thanks for letting me know, I'll pass the information on to him. He
didn't seem at all keen on posting them when I spoke to him this
morning, the chance of breakage is too high.
The website was intended to draw in local trade and his stock changes so
rapidly that I have never managed to get it up to date.
--
~ Adrian Tuddenham ~
(Remove the ".invalid"s and add ".co.uk" to reply)
www.poppyrecords.co.uk
josephkk
I don't think so. Expanding beyond just fluorescent versus incandescent
we can observe more of what is being discussed. For most people, mercury
vapor (MV) lighting is easier to read by but tends to make people look
ghastly, especially in photographs. On the other hand people look better
and photographs look better with high pressure sodium (HPS) lighting, and
many find it easier to see large objects especially at very low light
levels, but reading is more difficult. It is primarily a matter of
spectral intensities and the placement of the various strong lines. Many
comparisons of MV vs HPS lighting are available but most rarely touch on
these issues, especially the reading and fine resolution issue. Now that
white (fluorescent) LED lighting is becoming more available with yet
different color balances, the whole subject becomes even more complicated.
josephkk
<grizzle...@comcast.net> wrote:
>> >> They give you full brightness at switch on, unlike
>> >> compact fluorescents that take time to warm-up.
>> >
>> > Yes, but...
>> >
>> > The better CFLs are quite bright at turn-on -- bright enough that you
>> > don't feel you bought a defective lamp.
>
>> The operative word being "quite". I thought you said that your Home Despot
>> types came on quicker than an incandescent. Certainly doesn't sound that
>way
>> from that description ... And as far as I'm concerned, any incandescent
>> replacement technology lamp that does not produce the *full* light output
>> within a few mS of switch on, or is ambient temperature dependant for its
>> performance, *is* a defective lamp.
>
>The Home Depot lamps come on instantly at a level I'd judge to be around
>60% -- maybe higher -- of full brightness. Full brightness takes another 30
>seconds or so. This is a huge improvement over the bulbs from 15 years ago.
>
>
Mine are 'faster' still. Hitting about 85% to 90% faster than i can
detect with my eyes, say under 100 ms.
josephkk
<terry...@DELETEgmail.com> wrote:
>M.Joshi <M.Joshi...@diybanter.com> wrote:
>
>>
>>'Terry Pinnell[_3_ Wrote:
>>> ;2636067'](Re-posted from the lower traffic sci.electronics.misc
>>> group.)
>>>
>>> Does anyone know where I can buy 'normal' filament lamp bulbs in the UK
>>> please? I just cannot get on with the new economy type. My remaining
>>> stock
>>> of 60W and 100W is dwindling rapidly.
>>>
>>> --
>>> Terry, East Grinstead, UK
>>
>>Do you mean that your light fittings cannot accomodate the larger
>>compact fluorescent bulbs?
>
>No, my gripes are more basic: I like instant light when I flick a switch
>and I like bright light to work and read by. I also resent what seems to
>be downright misleading statements by the manufacturers about 'equivalent'
>ratings. I've never found one that warrants the claim.
Agreed, i have always had to go one lamp higher output.
>
>>If so, there are halogen bulbs available in the same form factor as the
>>old incandescent filament bulbs. These are classed as lower energy than
>>a standard incandescent and can be purchased from most supermarkets and
>>DIY stores. See the link below:
>>
>>http://tinyurl.com/68nocgh
>>
>>They give you full brightness at switch on unlike compact fluorescents
>>that take time to warm-up.
>
>Thanks, I'll investigate and try a few, although from what I've read
>up-thread it sounds as if I'll still favour the old filament types.
>
>That link gave me a nice picture but can anyone recommend a specific 60W
>and 100W UK supplier please?
Arfa Daily
"lsmartino" <luisma...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:6327313c-9341-48b4...@r20g2000yqd.googlegroups.com...
> In the other had, halophosphate phosphors aren愒 suitable for CFL愀
> because they produce less light output than triphosphors. A
> triphosphor can be seen like a mix of three different phosphors, each
> one emitting in a particular band. The sum of all three produces the
> light coming from the CFL tube. Probably you are blind to one of these
> bands, making you uncomfortable with the light.
>
> This is just a theory, of course.
Nice explanation, and seems on the face of it, to hold water. Good that
someone can actually come up with a reasonable theory, instead of telling me
that the problem doesn't affect them, therefore I must be wrong, or using
the wrong CFLs. I really have tried to embrace these lamps since their first
inception, but the fact is that for practical reasons, as discussed, I
simply cannot get on with them. Yes, I hate the fact that they have been
forced on us for dubious reasons of ecology, and I freely admit that does
colour my perception of them a little, but my fundamental problem with them
is just that - they are a problem to my (obviously defective) eyesight.
Arfa
Arfa Daily
"josephkk" <joseph_...@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
news:bdulr6l61q2rktvog...@4ax.com...
Interesting. See my reply to Ismartino, elsewhere in the thread.
Arfa
William Sommerwerck
>>>> Yes, but...
From my perspective, I don't know why I /need/ to justify the better current
CFLs. To only slightly paraphrase Sam Spade... "They're good. They're very
good."
I don't think objections come solely from people with non-standard color
vision (though, obviously, they're more-sensitive to non-continuous
spectra). There are multiple issues.
People are used to lights reaching "full" brightness very quickly. This is
of no concern to me, if the lamp more-than-sufficiently bright when it's
turned on. (This one reason I use only 90W or 100W-equivalent CFLs. When
you're using only one-fourth the energy of a standard incandescent, why use
anything smaller?)
People object to the shape of coiled CFLs -- at least when they're visible.
The choice of shade should fix this.
People object to being forced to buy something they don't want. This is a
political issue that should perhaps be discussed later.
William Sommerwerck
> affect me in anything like the same way as CFL. I can read perfectly well
> under it. I work perfectly well under it. I don't find the light
displeasing
> in either colour or quality. I don't know how to reconcile this apparent
> disparity, as I too have lived under flourescent light for over fifty
years.
> I don't know what my type of colour blindness is called, nor whether it is
> common in type, or rare. I am apparently red blind and green insensitive,
as
> far as I recall. It is many years since I took the test. I think it meant
> that I couldn't see some shades of red at all, when they were mixed in
with
> other colours, and that I couldn't distinguish some shades of green
amongst
> other shades of green. Oddly enough though, the light from CFLs always
> appears to have a slightly 'sick' green caste to me, irrespective of the
> quoted colour temperature.
That's hardly "odd" if you have little or no red sensitivity. It's to be
expected.
The obvious question is... Why doesn't tungsten lighting show a similar
green cast? The answer might be that tungsten lighting puts out more red
energy, over a wider band.
lsmartino
> "lsmartino" <luismartin...@gmail.com> wrote in message
> > triphosphor can be seen like a mix of three different phosphors, each
> > one emitting in a particular band. The sum of all three produces the
> > light coming from the CFL tube. Probably you are blind to one of these
> > bands, making you uncomfortable with the light.
>
> > This is just a theory, of course.
>
> Nice explanation, and seems on the face of it, to hold water. Good that
> someone can actually come up with a reasonable theory, instead of telling me
> that the problem doesn't affect them, therefore I must be wrong, or using
> the wrong CFLs. I really have tried to embrace these lamps since their first
> inception, but the fact is that for practical reasons, as discussed, I
> simply cannot get on with them. Yes, I hate the fact that they have been
> forced on us for dubious reasons of ecology, and I freely admit that does
> colour my perception of them a little, but my fundamental problem with them
> is just that - they are a problem to my (obviously defective) eyesight.
>
>
> - Mostrar texto de la cita -
Exactly. For instance, I do like CFL lamps, but I understand people
who find them objectionable just because they don´t like their shape
(I admit that spiral ones are ugly), or because they don´t like the
quality of the light produced by them. I also avoid store brand lamps
because most of the time they are rubbish. I usually find that store
brand lamps are either short lived, blueish, or completely lacking in
light output.
Thats why I only buy Osram, Philips or General Electric CFL´s. To my
tastes, the best CFL regarding light quality is the 2700K General
Electric. They are almost indistinguishable from an incandescent lamp,
and I find them perfect for household use. They start pretty quick at
a 70% ilumination level and have very good life. I have some that are
still running since I bought them 7 years ago, 5 - 6 hour of daily
use.That makes more than 15000 hours in each, and they are still going
strong. Then the second best one is the Philips, but I don´t like
their 2700K CFL´s because I find them a little pinkish for my tastes,
and sometimes they are hit or miss. If the ballast doesn´t get blown
the first year of use, they will last for a long time.
For general purpose use, like illuminating exterior areas, I prefer
4100 K lamps. Osram lamps are excellent for that application, they are
the longer lasting of all, but their 2700K lamps aren´t available in
my country, so I avoid they use at home.
I personally hate 6500 K lamps for general household use except inside
a task lamp. I think they don´t have a place in a household, perhaps
in a kitchen but they are too bluish for my tastes. In a commercial
environment they are ok, or in a photographic studio, but not in a
household.
In the end, I think that CFL´s will be superseded by led lamps, once
that led lamps become more powerful for general use. Problem is that
regarding light quality, led lamps have the same shortcomings of CFL
´s, at least right now.
Father Haskell
wrote:
> Jim Yanik wrote:
> > you need color rendering accuracy to READ?
>
> I don't have a way of quantifying it, but a continous source is much easier
> for me to use as a reading lamp. So a 20 watt halogen lamp on "low" is
> easier to read than an 11 watt flourescent at the same distance.
Flicker frequency? CFLs flicker in the kHz range. Imperceptable.
Bigger difference is incandescents are more of a point light source,
which is easier to read fine details -- including letter fonts --
by.
I still prefer them for paint and finishing work, where I need
more accurate color (halogens are second only to sunlight)
and shadow rendition.
> Farther away it works the same way too, but I no longer have an incandesent
> lamps except for special purpose ones (reading lamps, photgraphic safelights,
> etc) to do an eaual distance comparison.
Bunsen grease spot photometer:
http://users.snip.net/~veraandscience/Light/Bunsen_P.html
Essentially a sheet of paper with a grease spot in the
middle.
Father Haskell
wrote:
> > Probably warm / soft white; any other fluorescent is
> > horror movie lighting. If you don't have the color temp
> > spec, hold a lit, known temperature bulb next to it and
> > see if it looks redder, bluer, or the same.
>
> It is difficult to specify a "color temperature" for a non-continuous
> source.
>
> The bare bulbs look "white", leaning a bit to the warm side.
It's amazing how blue a 3500K warm white bulb will look when
held next to a 2700K.
Father Haskell
>
> I personally hate 6500 K lamps for general household use except inside
> a task lamp. I think they don´t have a place in a household, perhaps
> in a kitchen but they are too bluish for my tastes. In a commercial
> environment they are ok, or in a photographic studio, but not in a
> household.
26/100 watt 6500s are excellent for growing plants under.
42/150s are even better, but cost twice as much for 50%
more output.
> In the end, I think that CFL´s will be superseded by led lamps, once
> that led lamps become more powerful for general use. Problem is that
> regarding light quality, led lamps have the same shortcomings of CFL
> ´s, at least right now.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
LEDs are point sources and produce harsher, less
comfortable light.
William Sommerwerck
> comfortable light.
GE is or will be selling LED lamps in conventional bulbs.
William Sommerwerck
> I need more accurate color (halogens are second only to
Regardless of perceived color temperature, a discontinuous source is more
likely to cause problems with metamerism.
Given proper filtration, any tungsten source should be fully equal to
daylight.
By the way, noon daylight appears, to me, slightly yellow.
Phil Allison
"Father Haskell"
Flicker frequency? CFLs flicker in the kHz range. Imperceptable.
** The light of a CFL is modulated at 100 Hz too.
Cos the internal DC supply is very poorly filtered.
In general, the 100Hz ( or 120Hz) light modulation is less than experienced
with regular fluoros and low wattage ( 60 or 70 W) incandescent lamps.
.... Phil
spamtrap1888
<grizzledgee...@comcast.net> wrote:
> There are multiple issues.
>
> People are used to lights reaching "full" brightness very quickly. This is
> of no concern to me, if the lamp more-than-sufficiently bright when it's
> turned on. (This one reason I use only 90W or 100W-equivalent CFLs. When
> you're using only one-fourth the energy of a standard incandescent, why use
> anything smaller?)
My torchieres were designed to fit 50-100-150 W bulbs. No one makes a
globe or bullet brightness equivalent, much less a three-way CFL. I
tried a "100 W equivalent" twisty bulb, and promptly brushed it
against the ceiling, turning my living room into a hazmat scene.
>
> People object to the shape of coiled CFLs -- at least when they're visible.
> The choice of shade should fix this.
I should just throw away my torchiere lamps? Already I can find no CFL
equivalent for my 60 W hall fixture -- an incandescent bulb that has
lasted at least 20 years -- it hasn't been changed since we bought the
house. I guess I'll stock up on clears since it is a cloudy decorated
globe fixture.
lsmartino
That is also true. Specially in cheap (read: bad quality) CFL´s. The
effect becomes worse as the CFL ages, I guess that happens because the
poor quality filter caps inside the ballast lose capacitance as the
heat generated by the electronics cooks them.
Inside brand CFL´s I have found 105ºC caps inside, cheap ones usually
have 85ºC caps and with less capacitance. In some CFL´s the internal
fuse opens when one of the filter capacitors fail shorted, often after
venting, in some others the filter capacitor just opens electrically
and the CFL starts to flicker badly at 120 Hz. That also happens with
cheap chinese ballasts for linear fluorescent tubes.
One more reason to avoid *no name* CFL´s.
hrho...@att.net
wrote:
> Arfa Daily wrote:
> > Yes indeed - I am colour blind, and if that is what makes the difference
> > between someone who does have an issue with CFLs, and someone who doesn't,
> > of this legislation, seems a pretty poor show of arrogance by the powers
> > that be, in insisting that we suffer in the way that we are being made
>
> gentic disorder, or one caused by a disease or trauma, then the National
> Health should provide them with incadescent bulbs and a susbidy for
> electricity to run them.
>
> I know the US has the "Americans with Disabilities Act" that would require
> it, and I'm sure there is something in British or EU law like that.
>
> I would persue it based on what the National Health does for people
> with macular degeneration and work backwards. At what point is the
> inability to see defined and where does color blindness affect your
> daily life.
>
> Geoff.
>
> --
> Geoffrey S. Mendelson N3OWJ/4X1GM
> Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to misquote it.
Geof:
You and a previous poster are sexist. It is 12% of males that are
color-blind to varying degrees. That's only 6% of the total
population if we assume more or less equal males and females.
josephkk
wrote:
We should all know by now that the eco-nazis don't do energy accounting in
any reasonable way.
Phil Allison
<hrho...@att.net>
You and a previous poster are sexist. It is 12% of males that are
color-blind to varying degrees.
Here is what I wrote, you idiot:
------------------------------------------------------------------
12% of all males are colour blind - ie they fail one of the basic tests.
Only 1 or 2% of females are so afflicted - but THEY are the CARRIERS !
------------------------------------------------------------------
That's only 6% of the total
population if we assume more or less equal males and females.
** Silly and irrelevant.
.... Phil
William Sommerwerck
> Apparently, pearlised types were the first to be phased out,
> because they consume more energy to make than clear ones.
> Oh brother ! And I suppose that CFLs, with their hundreds of
> manufacturing processes, don't ... ?
What about simple selfishness on the part of the consumer?
Suppose a 100W-equivalent CFL that draws 25W lasts only 1000 hours. In that
time you save 75kWh. At 10 cents per kWh, that's $7.50 -- three times the
cost of the bulb.
Andrew Rossmann
18g2000prd.googlegroups.com>, spamtr...@gmail.com says...
> My torchieres were designed to fit 50-100-150 W bulbs. No one makes a
> globe or bullet brightness equivalent, much less a three-way CFL. I
> tried a "100 W equivalent" twisty bulb, and promptly brushed it
> against the ceiling, turning my living room into a hazmat scene.
3-way CFL's do exist. I have several. In the US, Target and WalMart sell
a GE branded one. Sylvania also makes one that you can find at home
improvement stores. There are also several store-brand models.
--
If there is a no_junk in my address, please REMOVE it before replying!
All junk mail senders will be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the
law!!
http://home.comcast.net/~andyross
N_Cook
> (Re-posted from the lower traffic sci.electronics.misc group.)
>
> Does anyone know where I can buy 'normal' filament lamp bulbs in the UK
> please? I just cannot get on with the new economy type. My remaining stock
> of 60W and 100W is dwindling rapidly.
>
> Terry, East Grinstead, UK
In-Excess have loads of 60W and 150W conventional lamps, West End,
Southampton this pm, depots may vary across the country
Meat Plow
> Maybe you can't see anything wrong with them, and they suit your eyes,
> But they are no good for me on both counts. I, and many others both here
> and over there, *can* see their deficiencies, and don't like them. As
> indeed prompted the OP to make his post ...
Lots of things I don't like I had to adapt to because they were NLA or
not practical. I feel lucky at this point to afford electricity 24 hours
a day.
--
Live Fast Die Young, Leave A Pretty Corpse
stra...@yahoo.com
> "Phil Allison" <phi...@tpg.com.au> wrote in message
>
> news:91v54r...@mid.individual.net...
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > "Terry Pinnell"
> >> "Arfa Daily"
>
> >>>Maybe you can't see anything wrong with them, and they suit your eyes,
> >>>But
> >>>they are no good for me on both counts. I, and many others both here and
> >>>over there, *can* see their deficiencies, and don't like them. As indeed
> >>>prompted the OP to make his post ...
>
>
> > ** Arfa has admitted to being colour blind.
>
> > So you are too - it seems.
>
> > Have trouble with 1% resistor codes do we???
>
> > 12% of all males are colour blind - ie they fail one of the basic tests.
>
> > Only 1 or 2% of females are so afflicted - but THEY are the CARRIERS !
>
>
> Yes indeed - I am colour blind, and if that is what makes the difference
> between someone who does have an issue with CFLs, and someone who doesn't,
> then 12% - one eighth - of the population being forced to suffer because
> of this legislation, seems a pretty poor show of arrogance by the powers
> ...
>
> Arfa
They want 'equality' - so now you're all equally miserable. Coming
soon to this side of the pond.
G²
Jeff Liebermann
<grizzle...@comcast.net> wrote:
>Suppose a 100W-equivalent CFL that draws 25W lasts only 1000 hours. In that
>time you save 75kWh. At 10 cents per kWh, that's $7.50 -- three times the
>cost of the bulb.
$0.10 per kw-hr is subsidized (baseline) electricity. A tolerable
average for domestic electricity is about $0.19 per kw-hr and about
$0.28 per kw-hr for commerical electricity. The highest rate for
commerical power shown is about $0.45 per kw-hr
<http://www.pge.com/about/rates/>
Throw in the cost of manufacture, cost of packaging, cost of replacing
the heat produced by the incandescent lamp in winter, and CFL looks
even worse. Light reading:
<http://www.greenmuze.com/blogs/guest-bloggers/1031-the-dark-side-of-cfls.html>
Some of the above is more than a little alarmist and paranoid, but
still interesting. For example, it takes 16 times as much energy to
produce a CFL bulb, but at $0.17 per kw-hr, the difference is cost is
negligible.
On the base of all my CFL bulbs, I scribble in pencil the date it was
installed. I've been doing this for about 10 years. I have yet to
see a CFL bulb that I use every day last more than about 3 years. CFL
bulbs that point down last maybe a year. However, I still have one 40
watt desk lamp bulb that is about 30 years old. Unfortunately, the
piece of paper that I was scribbling the results has disappeared. If I
find it, I'll post my numbers.
--
Jeff Liebermann je...@cruzio.com
150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558
Phil Allison
"William Sommerwanker is Wrong Again"
>
> Suppose a 100W-equivalent CFL that draws 25W lasts only 1000 hours. In
> that
> time you save 75kWh. At 10 cents per kWh, that's $7.50 -- three times the
> cost of the bulb.
** A CLF that genuinely replaces a 100W bulb cost at lot more than $2.50
where I live.
Even a "no brand" 27W CFL ( direct from China import ) sells for $ 8 to
$10 each.
I worked out long ago that the break even point for a CFL occurs at about
1000 hours - but only about half of them make it that long ,without dying
or losing almost half their light output.
.... Phil
William Sommerwerck
Wrong.
>> Suppose a 100W-equivalent CFL that draws 25W lasts only 1000 hours. In
>> that
>> time you save 75kWh. At 10 cents per kWh, that's $7.50 -- three times the
>> cost of the bulb.
> ** A CLF that genuinely replaces a 100W bulb cost at lot more than $2.50
> where I live.
Well, it doesn't where I live. So who's wrong?
Even if the bulb cost $5, you'd still be ahead.
Phil Allison
"William Sommerwanker is a Lying Cunt "
>
>
>>> Suppose a 100W-equivalent CFL that draws 25W lasts only 1000 hours. In
>>> that
>>> time you save 75kWh. At 10 cents per kWh, that's $7.50 -- three times
>>> the
>>> cost of the bulb.
>
>> ** A CLF that genuinely replaces a 100W bulb cost at lot more than $2.50
>> where I live.
>
> Well, it doesn't where I live.
** Blatant lie.
And STOP SNIPPING people's cases out of sight - you FUCKHEAD !!!!!!!
** A CLF that genuinely replaces a 100W bulb cost at lot more than $2.50
where I live.
Even a "no brand" 27W CFL ( direct from China import ) sells for $ 8 to
Meat Plow
EcoSmart 27-Watt (100W) Daylight CFL Light Bulb (2-Pack)
Model # ES5M827250K Internet # 100677481 Store SKU # 599526
$3.97
3.97÷2 = 1.98 each
--------------------------------------------------------------------
EcoSmart
23-Watt (100W) Soft White CFL Light Bulbs (4-Pack)
$3.97
3.97÷4 = 0.99 each.
Phil Allison
>
>> ** A CLF that genuinely replaces a 100W bulb cost at lot more than $2.50
>> where I live.
>>
>> Even a "no brand" 27W CFL ( direct from China import ) sells for $ 8
>> to $10 each.
>>
>> I worked out long ago that the break even point for a CFL occurs at
>> about 1000 hours - but only about half of them make it that long
>> ,without dying or losing almost half their light output.
>>
>
>
> EcoSmart 27-Watt (100W) Daylight CFL Light Bulb (2-Pack)
> Model # ES5M827250K Internet # 100677481 Store SKU # 599526
>
>
> $3.97
** Says $5.97 when I look.
Plus delivery.
> EcoSmart
> 23-Watt (100W) Soft White CFL Light Bulbs (4-Pack)
** 23W CFL does not " genuinely replace" a 100W bulb.
> $3.97
** Says $7.97 when I look.
Plus delivery.
You a bigger liar than Sommerwanker or is he a bigger one than you ??
.... Phil
William Sommerwerck
One buck apiece.
The posted reviews are mostly highly negative. I've had no trouble with any
of the Home Depot CFLs I've bought -- including these.
I put a free one they handed out at Christmas, 2009, in the "porch light" at
my door. It's been going for well over a year -- upside-down.
Home Depot apparently has major quality-control problems. No surprise for a
Chinese product.
Phil Allison
"William Sommerwerck is a Lying Pig "
Sorry, Phil... How are you going to get out of this one?
>
> http://www.homedepot.com/EcoSmart/h_d1/N-5yc1vZ4b8/R-100686997/h_d2/ProductDisplay?langId=-1&storeId=10051&catalogId=10053
>
> One buck apiece.
>
> The posted reviews are mostly highly negative. I've had no trouble with
> any
> of the Home Depot CFLs I've bought -- including these.
** My post was:
" A CFL that **genuinely replaces** a 100W bulb cost at lot more than
$2.50 where I live."
Then you post an example of CFLs that are total crap.
Lasting only weeks and producing no where near the light of a 100W bulb.
And you cannot even divide 8 by 4 and get it right.
Fuck OFF you bloody IMBECILE !!
.... Phil
William Sommerwerck
> > One buck apiece.
> ** My post was:
The only way to defend yourself against imbeciles is to speak the truth.
I haven't measured the output of a "100W" CFL. However, they're subjectively
quite bright, on the borderline of "too bright to stare at".
Are they as bright as a 100W incandescent? The light is spread over a larger
area, so it might not look as intense. Regardless, the opinions of some
reviewers that these are not "truly" 100W equivalents are suspect.
I have exactly the same four-bulb package shown. All the EcoSmart CFLs I've
bought have given good service -- at least one year of several-hours-daily
operation -- including the one in my den, which runs upside-down. When they
"die", they start erratically and fail shortly afterwards.
Why, Phil, do you want people to think you're a sociopath? Are you afraid
people might not respect you?
One of these days, you're going to run into someone less tolerant than the
people in this group, and he'll smash your head in. No doubt your dying
words will be "I was just joking". Well, I'm not amused, nor is anyone else
here.
Why don't you just join Bin Laden? You're probably too old for him, but one
never knows. Perhaps the two of you can drop in on Chris and Satan.
Smitty Two
"William Sommerwerck" <grizzle...@comcast.net> wrote:
>
> Why don't you just join Bin Laden?
You're suggesting he gets himself shot in the head?
William Sommerwerck
> You're suggesting he gets himself shot in the head?
No, I just suggested he join him. The method is up to Phil.