This seems like a thinly-veiled remark in response to my above comment.
Sure, I could break out color gels and fill lights and tweak the curves in Lightroom.
My point was, the camera sensor alone does not capture what your eye sees at all.
I think this High CRI is much more complicated that many people think.
My hypothesis is this:
You can get a pleasing beam with enough color from a low CRI LED from a good bin, with a pleasing tint
You can get a horrible beam (read too warm) from a high CRI LED
You can get a relatively bad beam (tint,color etc) from a high CRI from a bad bin, or with a low R9 reading
I totally understand that it's difficult to capture the differences in light, with a camera, as good as our eyes can distinguish. But that's also a problem from the other side, because that's how people are 'prooving' their high CRI to be superior. So what's up with that? Do cameras pick it up good or bad? Is it the user that uses 2 different kind of licht sources etc?
I don't think you can just say high CRI is superior as a blanket statement. But I know, it makes communicating so much more difficult. Because you're probably saying: I like my 1 flashlight with 1 high CRI LED that has pleasing results, while ignoring my warm Nichia 119 or 219 with high CRI but around 2700 which makes everthing warmer, and that's not something people are really looking for.
I get it.. it's a sensitive topic that has many nuances that we just can't always portray in the right way with the right words.
That would mean you'd have to write a full paragraph of why you like a certain emitter, from a certain manufacturer, from a certain bin, with a certain DUV, from a certain vendor, from a certain reel, from a certain year. You might bet a bad batch, or a bad tint, just above BBL, not the nicest DUV, etc. While still raving.
I can remember back in the day, when everybody was praising the XML T6 3C (I believe this was the one), and when I bought an Eagletac with this LED and was totally unhappy with it, because it was pretty green. The seller even told me that nobody complained about a green tint up till then. Did I get unlucky? Later I bought a T6 4D (I believe, could be 4C as well), and was pretty happy with it.
Same happened when everybody was raving about high CRI Nichia 219 and 119 probably 8 years ago?, and when I bought it: wow, that's pretty warm, and doesn't really show the colors very well.
I totally get that, so maybe everybody should accept that not all high CRI leds are great, and that not all low CRI are bad!
Anyway, something along those lines..
Let's continue the discussion...
At the end of the day who here runs their flashlight at full power and needs every last lumen? Oh, I love my D4 and it serves its purpose as a fun toy, but I don’t run it at full power when I USE it. As a result I very well could run a lower output led and get higher CRI and that WOULD provide more complete lighting. Necessary? No? But more complete? Yes
As far as home lighting goes you should always push for a higher CRI as it creates a more comfortable lighting. Not a massive difference but it is there.
I swear, those that fight against CRI do it out of some need to be contrary. Nobody needs over 70 CRI to see, we do just fine. Nobody who likes high CRI speaks in absolutes but those fighting against it sure do. It’s not about being ABLE to see, it’s about the light you do have providing a more accurate picture. Again, very very rarely do you need the extra 10-20% output that a low CRI light gives over a high CRI, and if you do you can turn up the power a little. So why fight so hard against it. I swear the anti CRI crowd takes this as seriously as politics
… and my flashlights will be over 95 CRI when possible and 4000 to 4500K CCT.
Then we can both be content, respect other people’s personal choices and live in peace and harmony, enjoying our own lights.
I’m glad you’ve found your ideal emitter preference! Ultimately, we are all here to get the most enjoyment out of our lights as we can. We all just have different ways of going out it.
FWIW, while I do prefer high CRI, I’m not some kind of high CRI zealot. I have many low CRI emitters which I like for various reasons such as beam profile or tint. It just depends on my intended use for the light.
A few months ago I went through my whole apartment and replaced all of my ~80 CRI warm white LED bulbs with 90 CRI bulbs. I see absolutely no discernible difference in color rendering, even in reds. I kind of expected this, since at 2700K, even the 80 CRI bulbs have a significant amount of red phosphor. I could probably see the difference if compared side-by-side, but since it’s not noticeable in day to day use, I won’t go out of my way to purchase 90 CRI bulbs again.
As far as flashlights, given the option between CRI values, I’ll take the highest available (after considering other factors such as CCT and tint of course). Peak output doesn’t matter much to me. I don’t go around blasting my lights on turbo. Even high CRI LEDs are plenty efficient enough for me.
Compared side-by-side, I can clearly see a difference between 80+ and 90+ CRI emitters in a flashlight. However, when compared apart, I’d have difficulty discerning one from the other. Comparing 9050 and 9080 LEDs gets even more difficult. Again, I can see the slight difference when compared side by side, but apart, there’s no way I’d be able to tell the difference. Walking the trails at night with a 4000K LH351D in a C8 looks just as good to me as a 219b sw40 in a D80v2. The very minor differences in CRI and tint aren’t noticeable at all when using them outdoors without having the lights side-by-side.
That said, I can very clearly see a difference between a 70 and 90 CRI flashlight by eye, even when not compared side-by-side. Case-in-point, I ordered a Zebralight SC64c that was supposed to have a 90+ CRI LH351D, but I received a 70+ CRI LH351D instead. As soon as I turned on the light it was immediately apparent to me. This was actually a factor in my decision to invest in a spectrometer (so I could confirm my suspicions). See my thread here if you’d like to read about that saga.
I remember a while ago there was also some question as to whether the XHP35 HI 4000K in Simon’s shop were actually 90+ CRI bins. I purchased some and after reflowing one into a light, I could immediately tell it was low CRI (which I later confirmed with my spectrometer). So yes, there are noticeable visual differences, and whether these matter to you is really just a personal preference.
After all, why would someone go through all the trouble of creating a CRI system and later greatly expanding on it with the newer TLCI standard if it didn’t matter at all? 
Some of your statements of how LEDs work seem to contradict your personal color blind position. The biggest glaring issue that a lot of people are overlooking here is the glare when you get to 5000K and above. That is hard to effectively communicate and how and where and what obstructions are in your view as people use lights comes into play. Higher CCT headlights are a major problem with glare for other drivers. There is some information out there that people that are color blind have better night vision. So it’s very clear that what you see and what 90 odd percent of the population sees is different. So you can have your views but when you try to justify your preferences as the best solution for everybody you’re going to get some severe push back because you are frankly not seeing things the way 90% of people see things. This is a complicated subject. It is not just about cri as you seem to want to isolate it. In the end though none of your views, or I should say preferences, about CRI or CCT matter to the 90% of people that are not color blind. EDIT I’m not saying you should not contribute here. When you start blending facts and opinion some of us are going to have problems.
Happy New Year!
Sunrise 2022
Real CRI 
.
Lol CRI 
.
Watt CRI? 
.
Ah, now I understand CRI! 
End of story.
I think you’re trying to pull a fast one here. I want to see the time stamp on that photo. I suspect that’s a sunset, not a sunrise. Insert emoji here.
Oww. Not there.
As someone who lives in NM as well, I can vouch for the fact that some mornings here bring sunrises that do rival the most glorious of sunsets. The only way I can tell one of my sunrises from my sunsets is by the shape of the mountain range in the distance. 
I visited New Mexico for 10 days therefore I have first-hand experience. I was never awake for a sunrise therefore I do not believe you. Insert emoji here. No DON’T.
I’m actually interested in seeing the results of ChibiM’s thread. I might not switch on to high cri as I’ve already got them and they are just another light to me but I’m curious to get other people’s impressions on direct comparisons.
In the future I might gain some kind of appreciation for it but I don’t have a specific use so it’s still just a light.
I prefer lights with a temp at 6500k or above, <70 cri, tinted above the bbl, and visible pwm. And since that’s what I like and it’s all I need, what everyone else likes is wrong and dumb and totally unnecessary. People who would pay even a cent more for anything else are MORONS and obviously part of a brainwashed cult. Fight me.
/sarc
Nice! 
I’ll bite
Even in a sarcastic post ^ the argument is spread across multiple factors which renders the cri as useful as this post.
Do I win what’s my prize 
Are you secretly here to promote Olight?
I put forth a theory here a year or two ago, and yes it’s only a theory so it may be wrong and there may be exceptions. The theory is that those that prefer temperatures above 5000k live in cities or are otherwise constantly around low cri and high temperature lights, probably many fluorescent lights etc. They never get to experience good darkness and see the Milky Way. Or they grew up in that environment. Basically some sort of environmental issue. My theory does not address the color blind issue. Edit, joke, I think they should have to wear a special colored name tag. We won’t tell them it’s a special color and they will never know. End joke. Also a lot of people pick lights based on size, shape, functions,etc. Until very recently there were not a lot of lights that had multiple LED options, cri and temp differences. When the fw3a came out and you read through the comments plenty of people picked LEDs based on Max lumens, cct and cri be damned. I suspect there’s a lot of people out there that haven’t really spent time with a warm hi cri light in their pocket and actually used it in different environments for more than a day or two. Having the same host is part of that equation though or at least a host that you like. If you bought a single light with a warm hi cri but you didn’t like the UI then you’re probably not going to use the light much.
Oli, hate to break your theory but while I do live in the city I remember what it was like to see the Milky Way when my closest neighbor was 1/2 mile away. (During the pandemic I really miss that property! Hoping to be done with that soon so I can go back to enjoying the city.) Recently gifted a couple of IF22a to people who live out where the stars shine bright. Both of them love the 6000k. I prefer warmer. My warmth preference changed after moving to the city. When I was in the country I was an early pioneer of CFLs I used to love that 6000k plus light. Wife always wanted incandescent. Cool did not bother me a bit back then. The efficiency was where it was at. Plus daylight is not a bad thing. These days with highly efficient LEDs, high CRI, and 4000k tint my preferences have changed completely.
Side note about the extremes of CRI:
I will never forget being in the dark in a parking lot under negative CRI low pressure sodium. I may not see colors all that accurately and may not be sure the full effect of CRI but I certainly was amazed when I looked at the cars in that parking lot and they all looked the same color. Fairly close to the 1967 Rebel I remember from childhood days.
My theory has so many variables that you can’t possibly prove or disprove my theory. You should have listened to your wife. Tell her you were wrong.