For the tomato sauce pic I prefer the red one. The pizza for some reason both of them don’t look right but the top one looks marginally better. I think too much orange in the second pic. BUT!! that is viewing through pics on a phone screen and my eyes are not adjusted to the environment those pics were taken in.
If I get time later I’ll try replicate the times I’ve seen something different
I agree on all counts
It was a Tasty Test… and bears repeating
A lot of CRI fanatics on here that need to get off their high horse. Led manufacturers know more about average preferences than anyone else. They have almost surely ran many focus groups, and have had numerous discussions with industry professionals. The fact that most Leds are in the 70-80 CRI range despite the ability to produce 95CRI+ emitters suggests that this is what most people prefer in regards to the balance of price, output, and CRI.
I’m curious to know how much ‘research’ actually goes into it. fogofwar do you have any substantial to show us?
Most companies do research to figure out ways to make more money. Brightest and highest lumens always sells better. In my experience, everyone I have ever spoken to outside this forum has no idea what CRI is or means.
> Led manufacturers know more about average preferences than anyone
> else. They have almost surely ran many focus groups
Acctually, the evidence suggests most budget LED flashlight manufacturers are insensitive about color temperature but exquisitely sensitive to price and availability of whatever LEDs are available wholesale.
Remember, the BLF membership is not the average customer.
LOL. I guess I’ll start buying low CRI lights now that make it almost impossible for my 55 year-old eyes to discern orange from red in a 50-pair bundle. I think that’s a legitimate use of a high CRI light, but since it’s just a “high horse” and I’m clearly not average, does anybody want to buy a bunch of nice, high CRI lights?
CRI is very subtle and hard to compare unless we get a super controlled environment in which both sources of light have the exact same CCT and Duv.
I saw an awful lot of ORs and hospitals/clinics during a brief stint as a machine tech. I’m sure it depends on region and hospital size/profitability but generally they’re all still running primary fluorescent lighting with secondary lamps most often still compact HID units. I think the same is still true for dentists but I know they have delved more into high quality LED units. The medical HIDs are crazy expensive, as is the servicing on those (to include simple bulb and ballast replacements). I really don’t know what typical CRI is on HID bulbs but I suspect it’s quite high…they normally give out pretty wonderful light once they’re warmed up and provided that some hack hasn’t combined them with awful reflector designs. Maybe somewhere, but in my limited experience LEDs don’t seem to have come anywhere near to taking over those two lighting products but there are for sure lots of them in newer fixtures throughout lobbies and hallways, and of course all the handheld lights.
A lot of people around here do rave about their high CRI 2200K/2700K/3000K lights and how well they make things pop and taste.
All colors being represented accurately is now seen as undesirable ?
...and you admit to being color blind ...
We aren't really having a discussion are we ?
Things just look and feel nicer to me with higher-CRI lights, but I’m not going to crucify someone for preferring a certain CCT - or not caring. I love high-CRI but turning it into a cult is just creepy.
Do you understand what a strawman argument is?
I like nice tint and high cri, but I like high output and a nice beam more, so if I can get high CRI, high output, and a nice beam, well winner, winner chicken dinner.
I wouldn’t sacrifice output over cri, but again, I think it depends on the application. I could care less if a thrower is high crib, bit an EDC light would be nice in high cri.
That’s a pretty funny comment but somewhat pertinent. Some make it sound like the be all and end all of emitters, despite it being only a subtle difference.
But, This one goes to Eleven!
I’m talking about the firms that manufacture the LEDs such as Luminus, Osram, and Cree. These OEMs make LEDs for all sorts of applications such as street lamps, interior lighting, and car headlights. Likely less than 0.1% of the manufactured emitters end up in flashlights.
Posts like these clearly show the cult-like mentality. There are always tradeoffs. If the high CRI light is half as efficient and twice as expensive it should still be preferred? Maybe by some but definitely not by all.
It’s ironic that some who push hard for CRI don’t even really understand what it measures. For one, CRI also should never be discussed independently of color temperature. One example I like to give is that you can buy a 100 CRI light that is squarely in the infrared and completely color “accurate” but it would be completely useless for illumination.
As the indoor grower can attest, the two best HID lights are: Metal Halide and High Pressure Sodium. These light sources are a joy to work under and I would guess that surgeons demand such quality in their OR’s. The most uncomfortable lights I’ve ever seen are: Low Pressure Sodium and Mercury Vapor, used to light up highways and parking lots. Lots of lumens but no spectrum. Ugly lights but useful I guess. Wondering if I will ever see an HID flashlight. Can’t beat that kind of efficiency.
Low CRI makes people say crazy things, without any supporting evidence… LOL
the difference is far from subtle:
.
.
For those who understand, no explanation is necessary.
For those who cannot understand, no explanation will be sufficient.