I will say again that the phenomenon that Enderman is explaining makes sense, but actual measurements disagree with the proposed model.
Below is a graphical representation of the data and the two models: measuring the distance from the lens and measuring the distance from 2.14m behind the lens, as the calculator predicted.
This plot shows the measured lux vs distance. The blue diamonds are the data points in the quote above that I measured. I estimate the uncertainty at about 100lux. The red line is the lux according to the inverse square law, measured from the lens. The equation is lux=265000cd/(d^2). The blue line is the predicted lux when the distance is measured from 2.14m behind the lens, as the calculator predicts for the measurement. The equation is lux=390900cd/((d+2.14m)^2). The two lines cross at 10.29m because that is the measurement that was input to the calculator.
The two models predict different lux numbers and the measurements are consistent with measuring distance from the lens and not from a point behind the lens.