Light Bulb CRI_Grades

I see. Thank you.

Thanks. I use LibreOffice Calc (instead of MS Excel), and it says it can not open those files because “the maximum number of columns per sheet was exceeded”.

But my meter gives me TM-30, Rf,Rg, SPD picture, all that with each reading, so I think I am covered.

The CRI_Grade system mostly fills my need to rank bulbs I have never tested against the ones I have.

Really though, R9 and R12 can be trusted to break away from the pack first, so even if Ra was including R10,11,13,14,15, it wouldn’t change much.

Actually, it seems opposite to me. By including too many samples that average the same, you dilute the significance of R9 and R12, where the real differences are.

Having used a few bulbs that were below the BBL, I’m really not a fan for home/area lighting, if there’s any sunlight or other light sources it makes them look strange and artificial, and they make all other light sources look super green in comparison (even my calibrated computer monitor) which defeats the purpose IMO.

Low-CRI and -duv would be even worse, they look like fluorescents and I’d deal with swapping incandescent bulbs before going back to that, same reason I stick with high-CRI in my flashlights. The lack of much of the spectrum is immediately apparent to me personally.

Reminder that sunlight, fires, etc. (all the light sources we have evolved to be used to) are on or above the BBL. Rosy tint shouldn’t be taken as objectively desirable for all environments, that’s why Nichia for example offers specific tints and spectrum profiles for different types of retail, groceries, etc.

Sunlight is usually a lot higher CCT than any bulbs you can buy. What CCT are you using?
And I’m with you on not being impressed by rosy tints.

Also, on a super interesting note, I have the backlights from 2 PC monitors in that table! “DELL” is my PC, and “HP ENVY” is my wife’s. I opened Notepad to make a white screen, them measured with the meter against the screen.

You have to open the LM79 doc in the link I posted for you. It’s a complete lab assessment of the bulb

I’ve never heard you recommend the hyperikon bulbs either. Where did you buy the Sunlike bulb? link?

Hello Joshk, I saw you also started a topic regarding High CRI bulbs. Great initiative, you know how much I'm also looking forward to that!

May I suggest that instead of having two topics on BLF for a common subject, we unit our energy and efforts towards one community goal? As proposed and already started in the other topic, I'm pleased to discuss formula/scale, bulbs, or any other matter.

Ah, I see. That page has 16 links, I didn’t notice some were LM79. Thanks. It’s interesting. It seems to focus mainly on brightness in different rooms with different paint and flooring.

I bought the SunLike from http://sunlikelamp.com/

Sorry if you didn’t like the split, it wasn’t my intention. I didn’t want to spam the subscribers with my CRI_Grade proposal and discussion. Plus it could cause fatal confusion between your Qfactor and my CRI_Grade.
As you may know, BLF has no way to delete or merge threads.

Everyone, go ahead and keep posting interesting new light bulb finds on fneuf’s thread. This will remain a CRI_Grade thread.

Is the point to point out which lights have high R9?

TMI-30 includes additional output for situational measurement such as skin tones. Besides R9 not existing in TM-30 or CQS Wouldn’t it be better to base our BLF database on a more updated methodology?

I like the TM-30 diagrams (picture form), but the Rf and Rg it get summarized into are so in-sensitive I don’t find them very useful.

fneuf, can you please add a CRI_Grade column to your data so we can see how it performs?

The only one higher than 3000K is a 5000K bulb in a flexible neck overhead light above my desk. Differences in temp are far less annoying than tint/duv to me, I don’t mind using 2700K lighting indoors on a cloudy (>6000K sunlight) day.

Ick. Do you know what they are or where you bought them? I’m wondering who sells junk like that in 2019.

Sunlight covers nearly all CCTs, it just depends on the hour of the day and atmospheric conditions. On a clear day at dawn or sunset ≈3000K, ≈3500K one hour before sunset, etc.

I particularly tend to go for warm or neutral CCTs, and I think I'm not bothered by green tints too much because I have a custom lamp built with 4000K CRI90+ LH351Ds (from first AEDe group buy batches, T6/T7), considered greeny by others, and I'm fine with it.

Huh? I purposely bought the 5000K from Waveform to have neutral white work area lighting I can use when I want something closer to sunlight.

“Junk” is a strong word tbh.

I think there is a chart that suggests how people reacts towards light with different CCTs and intensities.

At least, right up until 6500k, the higher the intensities the higher the CCTs should be or the light feels “too hot”. The reverse is also true, the higher the CCT, the higher the intensities should be, lest the lights looks too cold and depressing.

Well, yeah it’s the Kruithof curve. You need at least 300 lux of the light to make 5000k looks somewhat pleasant. According to this theory, if you feel the light looks too cold, you need to add more light to it. On the other hand, if you don’t need any more brightness, you would then need to swap it with a “warmer” lights.

I must have misread your post. I understood your bulbs had a strong green tint. It reminded me of the green light bulbs my grandparents have. It’s hard to focus on the conversation when all you can thing is “turn it off! turn it off!”.

Not after you see it.

I live where 765 fluorescent lights are the standard, 865 is sold as a “premium” product. 840/830’s are a rare find where the 640/530 fluorescents are everywhere. If I buy the warm white fluorescents in the supermarkets nearby, I will most likely get ones with only 50 CRI. :person_facepalming:

Pretty much anything should be an upgrade I guess (as long as the tint is not outright terrible).

I'm totally happy if we can advance together on a perfect way to compare bulbs. And as such your dedicated topic on a grade is interesting. It's just that if we have two separate tables on BLF for the same subject, with the same meaning, quite very probably the same bulbs, but just using a different ordering formula, it will mainly be confusing. And in the overall both of us will loose time maintining those, members will not know where to declare new bulbs/tests, nobody we'll be sure what's the latest, and so on. Everybody will loose energy, readers will loose exhaustivity, etc.

So if we can converge on something built together that will be perfect. For instance if you feel it, I'd be glad to grant you update rights on the sheet document initiated in the other topic. And you can add there the CRI_grade, bulbs, or whatnot. I'm sincerely opened.

My intent here is to build something greater apon all our motivations, ensure we don't "spoil ressources." I'm convinced we can build something great together for BLF, by joining efforts.