"Battle Lines Drawn Over CRI and LEDs"

Apparently I was onto something, if albeit somewhat minor, with the whole, “kelvin + CRI = nothing specific” ideas I had talked of.

The article about the proposed additions to the CIE 1931:


Why the LED R9 value isn’t important

CRI, R9 and R13 - a Primer

Just for the data not trying to be contrversial

By te way, for those too lazy to click, the title “Why the LED R9 value isn’t important” is click bait.

I’m, open

What would you prefer?

If I:

A do nothing
B Pull the link
C change the link name

If C let me know what you think it should be called.

You could do what magazines do to get you to read an article. You could title it with something like this

“Is the R9 red value important? Click here and find out, you may be surprised”

OR… If you wanted to be like the side panel ads, you could say:

“See how this guy became an expert on R9 values by using this one easy trick!”

On the site that the article was listed, I’m sure EVERYONE already knows how important the R9 value is. That’s why a title of
“Why the LED R9 value isn’t important” would draw reads. Anywhere else though, where the readers are not so well informed, that title doesn’t work well because the readership wouldn’t think anything so unusual as to create an overwhelming urge to click.

Free R9’s.

that’s from a fellow named Dave Stoft, posting on plots-spectometry@googlegroups.com
(para. breaks added for online readability)

This group — and the website linked below — iis about the little $40 kit spectrometer I’ve been using for a while. Recommended.

As they say there:
Public Lab mailing lists (http://publiclab.org/lists) are great for discussion, but to get attribution, open source your work, and make it easy for others to find and cite your contributions, please publish your work at http://publiclab.org