I wouldn’t call high CRI a lie, like I said before, I think people just put WAY more emphasis than they should. Going by some posts on this thread it seems that 70/80 CRI makes the world black and white and people can only differentiate colors from 90+…Guess that exaggeration is what leaves the taste of “cult mentality” pointed by fogofwar.
LOL, you heard the reverse of what I meant
If someone keeps repeating that High CRI does not matter (to them), eventually some people will believe it. Even though there is zero evidence.
Repetition of a Lie, leads some people to believe the lie. The Lie is that High CRI does not matter. Couple that with a few well chosen insults, such as the title word Hype, and accusations of being a Cult, and soon we will be arguing whether or not the Lie is true.
It is a lie that High CRI is not important. It is a lie that people who appreciate High CRI are a cult.
The accuser is the perpetrator of the Lies. This thread is Disinformation, started by someone who is color blind.
Haha, what you said could be interpreted in both ways, depending on which side of the fence you’re on.
And rayfish is only partially colorblind, no? I would have to read back a few pages to be sure, and my lunch is starting to smell pretty good, so, that’s a discussion for another time… 
Oops, I wasn’t aware a camera can capture the difference so clearly.
can you explain how that is possible?
very curious about that one!!
wle
Aah, but beauty is in the eye of the beholder.
I notice a number of people’s attitudes are like this - “I think this way, so I must be right and everyone has to agree with me.” That’s not limited to this forum either, my dad is like that too.
.
Oh I see…so Straw-Man argument then? Mmk.
What I said was in the context of much more than this one-liner. But you chose to respond to this only so you can twist it and act like people are just being closed minded about low CRI. That is simply not true. Respond to everything I said in the context in which I said it instead of just casting it off without providing anything pertinent to the conversation other than indignation. “You’re wrong but I can’t provide anything meaningful to prove this so I will just be offended and resent you”. Again…mmk.
If we were to apply your lojik to other enthusiast communities, you would sound like an uneducated hater that hates only because you refuse to give credence to the idea that there are indeed levels to this shit. And the level you are saying is the most ideal one is literally the lowest level of beauty in this community, it’s not really about the beholder, it just is. That’s like saying a 150-inch TV is better just because it’s bigger, even though it has easily the ugliest picture of all TV’s. And then when people that can actually tell you about the quality differences try to tell you, you insist on not seeing and you just call them snobs and say “but it’s bigger”. So forgive us if we don’t take this seriously simply because some people refuse to develop any taste and are openly against developing any because they claim it’s useless.
People that have a problem with high CRI must have the same problems with flavor in coffee as it just isn’t important right? Only yield or how efficient a bean is to grow is all that matters right?
Even if we apply your lojik to something simple like batteries. So what? If someone prefers lower amp/longer output batteries, anyone that wants brute initial force is a snob? Is that how this works? The parameters for which you seem to want to have this conversation in are clearly disingenuous. No one is making it up that well tuned High CRI LED’s or well tuned 4K HDR TV’s are beautiful, but you’re saying we’re all snobs for disagreeing with you that Tube TV’s should be considered beautiful enough.
Feel free to respond within the actual context of the conversation this time, hope I’m not being too much of an elitist snob for making this suggestion.
Out of respect to sb I’ll not respond. You can twist that however you like 
m
Rayfish jumped into another thread and literally said. “High CRI is garbage for flashlights” and left.
Like are you serious? You come to a flashlight enthusiasts forum and yell things like that in every thread and you’re not just begging for drama and attention? Surely he couldn’t think he’s fooling anyone right?
P.S. Kirk > Picard
Perfect color accuracy for an emitter means it is on the black body curve. However, a light could be on the black body curve but primarily emit from the infrared region. Our eyes cannot see infrared even if it is perfectly color accurate, hence it’s useless as a flashlight.
Our eyes are the most sensititve to the 5000-6500k color temperature range. Therefore, a standard 70CRI 5700k emitter can be more useful and contain MORE color information than a 95CRI 3000k emitter - although the 70CRI emitter is technically not as color accurate as the 95CRI emitter. The 95CRI emitter at 3000k would emit very little blue (see graph below).
A dark blue object illuminated by the 95CRI 3000k emitter would look black even if it is very color accurate. However, the 70CRI 5700k would make it look lighter blue which is not as color accurate but more vibrant to our eyes.
At the same color temperature, a higher CRI emitter will have better color rendition, but again there are usually other tradeoffs such as price and brightness. Point me to a 6500k, 98CRI+ emitter, with 4000 lumens, and under 10 dollars.
Technically every object, including your body, is a radiator of infrared light on the BBL, unless the object’s temperature is absolute zero which is theoretically impossible. But I digress
Point is, I’m 100 CRI
And that’s the case with incan bulbs? High CRI, but the low color temperature ends up making everything yellower, therefore becoming inaccurate to the way our eyes perceive colors?
Yes very hard to differentiate dark blue, purple, and black with a 2700k 100 cri incandescent. People preferring warm white during night is totally an evolutionary thing though, since we evolved using fire to light things up for the longest time.
I don’t find that I have any trouble recognizing colors under 2700K overhead lighting when my eyes are adjusted.
I work in a semiconductor fab. There are filters on all the lights to remove blue and UV wavelengths so it doesn’t interfere with the photolithography process. I modded my work flashlight with a 90+ CRI 3000K emitter because I need to be able to see colors of wires, resistor bands, etc. Under that filtered amber overhead light, my flashlight appears brilliant white. The appearance of a particular CCT depends on how your eyes have adjusted to the ambient lighting.
You will lose color information if you go to extremes, e.g. 2000K, 10000K
I will agree that it is easier to differentiate certain colors at different CCTs. Just as black and dark blue may appear closer under 2700K 100 CRI, dark red and brown will appear very similar under 6500K 100 CRI light. Of course with the sun, there’s enough intensity so this isn’t a problem. If you had a 2700K light that could put 50,000 lux in your living room, it wouldn’t be hard to see that dark blue.
Those are a pain sometimes but…in a modern high tech fab? That’s almost comical. 
It depends on what you are working on. Some high-power components still use through-hole components. Also, not all of the machines are brand new. There are some tools still in use that have been around for decades. Similar to the military/government mindset of “don’t fix it if it’s not broken.”
When I was in the Navy ten years ago, we still had old green CRTs and vacuum tubes.
The user who opened this thread,
(The OP) has been removed by: sb56637
(deleted-220109) ” rayfish ”