Thank you, could not have said it in so few words!
Reference photo
High CRI LEDs with differing CCT and R9
beam0 wrote: Color rendering definition, does CCT play a role?
jon_slider wrote: no, CCT does not change CRI
I might need to reconsider if what my former self said… should be my final answer…
Is it just White balance that matches better between the Tool and the daylight on a foggy afternoon?
No, you should dissociate those two type of measurements of the light. As said before, CRI has nothing to do with CCT.
CRI is based on spectrum of reflectance. A higher CRI means a richer spectrum of reflectance, more “true” colors will bounce back from subjects to a receptor (eye, camera sensor, etc).
We are not talking about the overall tint of a light source or it’s temperature that seems to affect all colors but about its spectrum. Colors are wavelenghts reflected from a light source. The reference is a black body. If another light source lacks wavelenghts, those missing wavelenghts won’t be reflected then some colors will look different because of those missing wavelengths. Hence metamerism.
^ thanks for the new word.
Metamerism (color), in colorimetry, a perceived matching of the colors that, based on differences in spectral power distribution, do not actually match.
More chewing gum for the eyeballs:
Since the question in the OP seems to have been laid to rest, and we have decided to go deliciously sideways (this being a “Democratic” flashlight forum, without a Gestapo), maybe we can tie things together in an Exoteric manner?
Zappaman ended his post with:
“Balance is in a way, an appreciation for the “whole view” (or whole sound-field in the studio) and it’s not always so easy to identify WHAT is missing exactly; as much as it is to “feel” that (that) “something” IS missing… OR alternatively, too bright (or loud) at a certain frequency.”
Then:
Jon_Slider ended his post (venturing perhaps where no known BLF poster has gone before) with:
“Do sounds have colors?”
With his permission, I will offer that he previously mentioned his desire to bring white balance into the current type of discussion.
Zappaman has managed to do it succinctly, to the point, and leaving no room for rebuttal.
As to Jon’s query:
Yes, ‘Esoterics’ insist sounds do have colors.
Borrowing from Confucius, and his observations concerning beauty, sounds do have colors, but not everyone can hear them.
I might add, that not everyone can hear the same tune.
In an ‘Absolutists’ forum, this might lead to….
“Prove it to me, go ahead, make me believe it”
^ …seems more like religion, not intended for those with open minds, a burning desire to learn, evolve, and discover whatever it is that brought them to the quest in the beginning.
Could it be that so many treat the CRI, CCT, R9, white balance, and latent image perception tug of war/interaction as an Exact Science, ignoring the inconvenience of personal, subjective sensory perception?
Not even all Esoterics envision the same color progression of the 7 major Chakras, though related to the a shared design of our Human Energy/Endocrine gland system?
How many different methods of measuring, determining, and presenting CRI, RMS wattage and Daylight White exist?
How many valid observations can be offered regarding an individual’s personal perceptions?
Do those with vision impairment hear the same, do the vision AND hearing impaired feel ‘touch’ the same? Are any of their perceptions less, or more valid?
Ironic that most people in the world who need a ’good flashlight, have none, nor any idea of what it means. Just a bulb and battery, maybe even a switch that still works…? Right?
What happens the first time they see one of HWang’s Meteors?
From my repeated experiences, unless you explain things first, they will not notice the difference between my 2A and 3D, care much, or pay attention for that matter.
Do they instinctively know what they prefer, of course!
Do they all see/prefer the same?
The challenge of pushing the flashrocket envelope to shorter burn times, and fuglier flames is merely another WTF? to them.
Maybe Esoteric FlashHeads like us can remember things we forgot after drinking too much Lumen-Aid.
The first avowed Exoteric I met never had a Guru, claimed if he had been born in India, he would have ended up a Yogi. Thankfully he was never limited in that manner.
He ate 2-3 times a week, mostly meat, living on coffee and cigarettes to keep himself ‘grounded’.
Every waking hour to him was described as “being on Las Vegas Strip at night, with no relief”.
He could see better than anybody I have known.
I wonder if he ever needed a flashlight?
I agree technically, but have an experiential question
Regarding the 3 hand photos I posted,
I can also see how beam0 could perceive that the warmer LED has better “CRI rendition”
I myself also see that the warmer light appears to have “better CRI rendition”
Is it some factor other than CRI that makes the Tool the better illuminant, closer to foggy afternoon daylight?
can you help illustrate the reason for the difference between the Tool and S1 Mini hand images. Both are “High CRI”.
does the Tool illuminated hand, look more like the foggy afternoon daylight illuminated hand because the Tool 4000k Color Temperature is closer to the daylight photo color temperature (aka white balance?) than the 5500k S1 Mini?
what causes the Tool to illuminate the hand more realistically than the S1 Mini?
is it a difference in CRI, Tint, R9, or just white balance (aka color temperature?)
Is CRI overrated and misunderstood? Is R9 or white balance a more significant variable in making the Tool appear to be better than the S1 Mini at matching late afternoon foggy daylight?
CRI is a match of the colors between the light source being measured and an ideal light source (black body) at the same temperature. It is why both the sun and an incandescent light source has a CRI near 100, even though colors are perceived vastly different.
So… CRI is related to CCT, but is not affected by CCT. You might say the CCT of a light source is the zero point for measuring the CRI of that source (because CCT is ‘defined’ in a specific way).
My Cool White ZL CREEns are also the best for hunting and destroying blood sucking mosquitoes…
Look at my hand ....look very closely ... The hand is making you very sleepy .
just concentrate on the hand ...look at all the pretty colors.you're going deeper and deeper into the cri zone ...GET OUT !!!
The Flashlight ..,,where's your stinkin flashlight ?
I like his hand :sunglasses: It bares pretty jewels… never gets old.
Are you French?
I’m from Ohio, along with Wilbur and Orville.
Here in Brazil everybody grows up learning Santos Dumont was the first man to learn to fly, but had to go overseas so the French could take credit.
thanks for your kind words
Re: Color rendering definition, does CCT play a role?
testing some different auto white balance effects, around 2pm on a sunny day in Paradise, indoors, outdoors in direct sun, and a couple outdoors in the shade
I would say yes, changes in white balance produces changes in perceived color
bottom right is direct sun, I prefer the bottom left, but the indoor top right is closer to the full sun
the jewels are Baltic Amber, Mexican Turquoise, and Tibetan (Italian) Coral
Along with the rude button, a warning about thread incongruety would come in handy.
Wow, old thread.
Maybe of interest, I just stumbled on this video the other day while watching one of his others. He’s taken three high-binned XHP50 emitters in 5000K with the three available CRI options (70, 80, 90 with Cree) and tested them with a (legit…$$:money_mouth_face: spectrometer. Not a completely perfect test but he covered all the bases he could. His goal was more about whether the CRI would affect recording/viewing on video, not so much about viewing with the eye as we do with flashlights, but it’s still a neat test and I don’t recall seeing something similar. The spectrographs are probably the most helpful.
I’ll counter Rayfish again as far as the value of higher CRI….it’s helpful and sometimes very important in many more things than skin tones. There has been a big shift in working trades toward higher quality light as soon as they started to become available in the lights/models/styles they tend to favor. Nobody has to like or want higher CRI, that’s fine, but don’t discount its value or importance…imho.
Really? C’mon man…The horse is already dead.
It seems rayfish is on a mission.
Helpful video, thanks Correllux.
Yes, CRI or spectrum accuracy matters. The resulting lemons are due to a biased measurement according to the definition of luminous efficacy. Efficacy is not efficiency, it's quite a different thing, and is often misleading.
The fact that you cannot see or perceive something at all or very well does not mean it doesn't exist or it is not doing its job. In fact, with respect to CRI or light quality our friend rayfish has related parasitic negative entities attached to his/her subtle bodies and his/her trolling is exactly caused for this reason. This, the parasitic negative entities thing, is more common than most people imagine, particularly in the current times. 
Thanks to him, I’ve seen so much info on high CRI LED’s lately that I’m almost converting into a high CRI lover. I’ve already started checking SST20, 4k flashlight models to buy… 
@rayfish Please refrain from throwing around labels. If you think somebody is trolling then hit the Report button on the relevant post(s), and PM me if you think it's serious enough. And for your own posts please re-read the BLF Rules and make the necessary changes:
https://budgetlightforum.com/forum/misc/siterules
you accuse others of your own behavior,
what do you hope to accomplish by posting disruptive, and baseless, claims and accusations?
