Luminous Landscape Forum
Raw & Post Processing, Printing => Printing: Printers, Papers and Inks => Topic started by: Pete JF on March 02, 2017, 05:51:05 pm
-
I'm finally going to streamline my viewing area and about to order some Solux (black back) bulbs
What wattages are you guys using with, for example, the clamp on gooseneck style lamp holders?
Any of you finding that 3500 k is working well for you as a sole light source? (in my commercial days i would probably set up for closer to daylight but these days it's almost always a gallery wall or a home wall)
Wondering about fixture options..rigging a track isn't practical in my studio because I have 14 foot ceilings.
I wish Solux made it's screw in bulbs par 30's in 3500 and 4700 K..Wuld make my issues much easier. Is there a limitation
in color temp options because of they are 120v..guessing this is the case. But..like said before, if it feasible to only use
3500 k then I'm good with the screw in style in 120v
Anyhow..Wondering if any of you have any products you know of in a fixture that is clamp able or stand mountable..
Also interested a dimmer option that doesn't change the specs of the light.
Anything and everything idea-wise..I would rather source that is available in stores as far as fixtures go..if not then I'm fine with the Solux products
Thanks!
-
Also..are there other companies making similarly priced and similar quality bulbs?
Products that are available at lighting stores, electrical supply houses?
Mr-16 is a common standard, no?
-
LED lights is the way I would go...
-
Hi Robert,
Why? Everyone seems to love the Solux bulbs..
What type/brand of LED?
Thanks
-
I've been testing these from Lumicrest (http://lumicrest.com/product/high-cri-par20/). think I like them better than Solux, mainly because Solux tends to heat up my room.
So far I've just tried the 3000k bulbs. sounds warm, and maybe it is, but seems to work well. going to order a couple of the 4000k bulbs just to compare.
I just installed 100 of these in my gallery, and they work really well for that.
-
I helped a client install several of my largest sized prints. They used these bulbs...
https://smile.amazon.com/gp/product/B00RMJZQ4C
The presentation is stunning. 4000K from these leds looks very neutral and incredibly color rich, without the greenish tint one gets from claimed 4000K halogens. It is very vindicating to my battered photographer's soul. Haven't measured the actual CRI, but I can believe it's as claimed. The ceilings are high, the bulb to print distance is about 8 feet or 2 and a half meters and the print brightness is exactly to my liking, which is to say just enough over the room ambient light to stand out, without being glaring.
Beats the heck out of the 2700K lighting you will find in most homes, with CRIs and brightness best suited to long term dead-storage facilities, or to make the bananas look good at the supermarket. So what's a printmaker to choose, reality or beauty? When I personally make sales I make a pitch for good lighting so salve my conscience, and leave it at that.
-
I've been testing these from Lumicrest (http://lumicrest.com/product/high-cri-par20/). think I like them better than Solux, mainly because Solux tends to heat up my room.
So far I've just tried the 3000k bulbs. sounds warm, and maybe it is, but seems to work well. going to order a couple of the 4000k bulbs just to compare.
I just installed 100 of these in my gallery, and they work really well for that.
Wayne,
Are you using these as reference lighting for making prints as well as for gallery light?
Do you use a dimmer with them and if so, what kind..and do they hold spec well when dimmed?
-
I helped a client install several of my largest sized prints. They used these bulbs...
https://smile.amazon.com/gp/product/B00RMJZQ4C
The presentation is stunning. 4000K from these leds looks very neutral and incredibly color rich, without the greenish tint one gets from claimed 4000K halogens. It is very vindicating to my battered photographer's soul. Haven't measured the actual CRI, but I can believe it's as claimed. The ceilings are high, the bulb to print distance is about 8 feet or 2 and a half meters and the print brightness is exactly to my liking, which is to say just enough over the room ambient light to stand out, without being glaring.
Beats the heck out of the 2700K lighting you will find in most homes, with CRIs and brightness best suited to long term dead-storage facilities, or to make the bananas look good at the supermarket. So what's a printmaker to choose, reality or beauty? When I personally make sales I make a pitch for good lighting so salve my conscience, and leave it at that.
I'm guessing you're comfortable with using these as your reference lighting for a print station?
Good price too..
Same question as I asked Wayne..will these hold up to dimming? and do they require a special dimmer of any kind?
-
These Soraa LED units cost more than the ones Wayne mentioned. I bought one of the 10º units(for another purpose) and the 4000ºK meters at about 3800-3900ºK. I thought they'd make really good gallery/display lights for prints.
Soraa LED bulbs (https://www.1000bulbs.com/category/led-par20-high-cri-4000k/)
The only question is: How long until the color shifts due to the fading of filters/phosphors?
At the computer and printer, I use Kino Flo KF55 flo tubes in cheap 32Wx2 fixtures. These have run without issues for years. I figured the 5500ºK would closely match the NEC monitor, and in the summer I appreciate that they run pretty cool.
KinoFlos you can put in regular 32W fixtures (http://www.filmtools.com/kino-flo-true-match-fluorescent-lamp-32w-5500k-4-uncoated-483-k55.html)
-
I've been testing these from Lumicrest (http://lumicrest.com/product/high-cri-par20/). think I like them better than Solux, mainly because Solux tends to heat up my room.
So far I've just tried the 3000k bulbs. sounds warm, and maybe it is, but seems to work well. going to order a couple of the 4000k bulbs just to compare.
I just installed 100 of these in my gallery, and they work really well for that.
Interesting concept, extra lenses for spot/beam lighting on them;
http://lumicrest.com/product/alternate-lens-par20/
Still one would like to see the spectral plot of the LEDs, the blue spike remains common.
Edit; sorry, overlooked this one;
http://lumicrest.com/pdf/Photometry/Apturi_Par20_4000K_95CRI_Report.pdf
Met vriendelijke groet, Ernst
http://www.pigment-print.com/spectralplots/spectrumviz_1.htm
February 2017 update, 700+ inkjet media white spectral plots
-
Very cool Ernst,
Focusing LEDs.
I'm working on building some large vertical shadow box frames for backlighting silk transparencies. I'm going to try several things. Right now banks of daylight led lights behind frosted plexi with the fabric suspended in front of that is what I'm trying for a self contained backlit module.
john
Interesting concept, extra lenses for spot/beam lighting on them;
http://lumicrest.com/product/alternate-lens-par20/
Still one would like to see the spectral plot of the LEDs, the blue spike remains common.
Edit; sorry, overlooked this one;
http://lumicrest.com/pdf/Photometry/Apturi_Par20_4000K_95CRI_Report.pdf
Met vriendelijke groet, Ernst
http://www.pigment-print.com/spectralplots/spectrumviz_1.htm
February 2017 update, 700+ inkjet media white spectral plots
-
Very cool Ernst,
Focusing LEDs.
I'm working on building some large vertical shadow box frames for backlighting silk transparencies. I'm going to try several things. Right now banks of daylight led lights behind frosted plexi with the fabric suspended in front of that is what I'm trying for a self contained backlit module.
john
The serial LED assemblies as used for signs could be a good source.
http://www.gelighting.com/LightingWeb/na/solutions/sign-lighting/tetra-edgestrip.jsp
Just one of the many types available.
Met vriendelijke groet, Ernst
http://www.pigment-print.com/spectralplots/spectrumviz_1.htm
February 2017 update, 700+ inkjet media white spectral plots
-
Interesting concept, extra lenses for spot/beam lighting on them;
http://lumicrest.com/product/alternate-lens-par20/
Still one would like to see the spectral plot of the LEDs, the blue spike remains common.
Edit; sorry, overlooked this one;
http://lumicrest.com/pdf/Photometry/Apturi_Par20_4000K_95CRI_Report.pdf
Met vriendelijke groet, Ernst
http://www.pigment-print.com/spectralplots/spectrumviz_1.htm
February 2017 update, 700+ inkjet media white spectral plots
Color output of LED"s stills challenging, but these seem pretty good. We really appreciate the ability to change out the reflector, as some locations we need to switch between spreads depending on what we're putting on the wall. The extra lenses are only a couple of bucks each.
Another LED bulb I'm finding working pretty well is this one from Soraa. (https://www.soraa.com/products/18-MR16-GU5-3#) (which I bought on Amazon). I bought them specifically to replace some MR-16 solux halogen lamps in one location. Side by side the output of the 3000k Soraa and the 3000k Lumicrest appear extremely close to the 3500k Solux bulb.
I tend to use the slightly warmer bulbs when preparing work because I think most situations the print will be augmented with light. In situations where the print may have much cooler daylight on it some of the time it still appears nice, but if I balance for daylight and then light it exclusively with much warmer artificial light it often appears to warm to my taste. Just my personal preference .
-
The serial LED assemblies as used for signs could be a good source.
Have you looked at LED ceiling tiles? They are 60cm square LED panel lights designed to drop into a standard office suspended ceiling. I used one for some back-lit photos and the uniformity was pretty good. Plus they're relatively cheap, since they're an industrial product without any pretense of adaptation to art...
https://www.amazon.com/LEDwholesalers-40-Watt-Edge-Lit-Glare-Free-2104WH/dp/B00776HLRU
-
Hi Robert,
Why? Everyone seems to love the Solux bulbs..
What type/brand of LED?
Thanks
I second the vote for the Hyperikon type bulbs. I don't have the right fixtures for the Solux bulbs but I've found these to be very good:
https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B0145Z0FGE
The package actually claims a CRI of 94 and better than normal fidelity with reds which is often a short coming of LED's. I like the light from the 5000K bulbs better than the 4000K bulbs and the 4000K bulbs only claim a CRI of 90+. The bluer light might be a little jarring in a living space light a den or family room but it seems appropriate for the hallway where I put my photos for evaluation. I don't have a proper viewing booth but I am happy with using these as a compromise solution. For my application the BR40's were definitely the right way to go since I don't have track mounted spot lights.
I am actually considering replacing all of the older 3000K Cree LED bulbs in my kitchen and living room with the Hyperikon bulbs because of the noticeable improvement in the quality of light from the Hyperikon's. I didn't test the 2700 or 3000K versions of the Hyperikon's. Again, they might seem more familiar in a living space but the yellower light is likely to impact how you perceive the prints matching your monitor.
FWIW
-
The CRI rating of these bulbs can be decieving because it's based on an average of 15 different color temperatures measurements. So a CRI of 90 can be achieved even if one of the spectral measurements is pretty weak. one reason I went with the Lumicrest is they publish their spectral plots. The bulb CRI is 95, which is pretty impressive. The R9 rating is 84, and while that sounds low, it's actually pretty good. As an example, one Hyperikon bulb which has a CRI of 90 and is a solid LED and terrific for interior home lighting, actually boasts that their bulb achieves a R9 reading of 70+. (this isn't the one mentioned earlier in this thread which i think has a better CRI).
The Soraa vivid bulb to me shows one of the best spectral ratings through all 15 temperatures (95) (https://res.cloudinary.com/soraa/image/upload/v1451091544/product_specs/mr16-gu5-3/00959/lm79.pdf) of any reasonably priced LED I've found so far , including a R-9 rating of 97 (for their 3000k bulb). They emphasize their bulbs produce light throughout the entire visible spectrum (https://res.cloudinary.com/soraa/image/upload/v1487606332/product_specs/mr16-gu5-3/00955/spec_sheet.pdf), where most LED"s fail to produce any light in the low range (violets) and are lacking in the high end (reds). I use the Soraa's in my evaluation area (not on a dimmer to answer an earlier question) to replace the Solux's but I chose the Lumicrest for my gallery because of the ability to change the degree of spread. (I would love Ernst's opinion of this data from Soraa)
Up to now good LED light sources have been challenging. Seem to be some decent choices now.
-
I wish Solux made it's screw in bulbs par 30's in 3500 and 4700 K..Wuld make my issues much easier. Is there a limitation
in color temp options because of they are 120v..guessing this is the case. But..like said before, if it feasible to only use
3500 k then I'm good with the screw in style in 120v
I bought and reviewed a Soraa Par30 long neck, 36 degree beam spread, 5000K Vivid LED bulb on Amazon that includes pictures I shot of colored objects and neutrals lit by this bulb. As one of the pictures comparing it to actual outdoor daylight shows, it's the closest to sunlight I've seen in an LED bulb.
https://www.amazon.com/gp/review/R22VCQ80NDEQDY?ref_=glimp_1rv_cl
I still don't know why the review doesn't show up on the product page which indicates no one has reviewed it since I posted mine.
There is now a 60 degree beam spread version here...
https://www.amazon.com/dp/B00PAUUTQU/ref=wl_it_dp_o_pC_nS_ttl?_encoding=UTF8&colid=2BWNAUMEU7GRN&coliid=I1PXJTN04O8VGC
-
The CRI rating of these bulbs can be decieving because it's based on an average of 15 different color temperatures measurements. So a CRI of 90 can be achieved even if one of the spectral measurements is pretty weak. one reason I went with the Lumicrest is they publish their spectral plots. The bulb CRI is 95, which is pretty impressive. The R9 rating is 84, and while that sounds low, it's actually pretty good. As an example, one Hyperikon bulb which has a CRI of 90 and is a solid LED and terrific for interior home lighting, actually boasts that their bulb achieves a R9 reading of 70+. (this isn't the one mentioned earlier in this thread which i think has a better CRI).
The Soraa vivid bulb to me shows one of the best spectral ratings through all 15 temperatures (95) (https://res.cloudinary.com/soraa/image/upload/v1451091544/product_specs/mr16-gu5-3/00959/lm79.pdf) of any reasonably priced LED I've found so far , including a R-9 rating of 97 (for their 3000k bulb). They emphasize their bulbs produce light throughout the entire visible spectrum (https://res.cloudinary.com/soraa/image/upload/v1487606332/product_specs/mr16-gu5-3/00955/spec_sheet.pdf), where most LED"s fail to produce any light in the low range (violets) and are lacking in the high end (reds). I use the Soraa's in my evaluation area (not on a dimmer to answer an earlier question) to replace the Solux's but I chose the Lumicrest for my gallery because of the ability to change the degree of spread. (I would love Ernst's opinion of this data from Soraa)
Up to now good LED light sources have been challenging. Seem to be some decent choices now.
The Lumicrest (3000K) has an impressive specification with CRI 95, R1-R15 93 and CQS 94 numbers.
My favorite independent testing source Olino.org tested some Pharox LED bulbs 3000K and 4000K that did not reach the level of the Lumicrest;
http://www.olino.org/us/articles/2016/03/14/pharox-pharox-400-ledlamp-dimmable-8w-40w-e27
I use that one next to halogens as a viewing light; 4006K, CRI 91.5, R1-R15 96.1, CQS 92.3
The Soraa is as impressive for an MR16 3000K, LED type. My calculation says R1-R15 93.4 which is better than the MR16s LEDs so far measured by Olino. They stay around 80 for the three standards mentioned here.
I still use the MR16 halogens for reproduction and evaluation; Osram Decostar, Cool Blue 51, 50 watt, 4000K (in practice), similar technology as the Solux but the Osrams were less expensive in Europe.
Edit; I see a "scientific" paper on the Decostar Cool Blue 51 appeared some years after I started using them. In Russia they pay 3x the price I pay for them.
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/277326193_Qualimetric_Researches_of_Educational_Resources_Standardizing_of_Light_Conditions_in_the_Light_Booth
Met vriendelijke groet, Ernst
http://www.pigment-print.com/spectralplots/spectrumviz_1.htm
February 2017 update, 700+ inkjet media white spectral plots
-
Just bought the 4000K BR30 Hyperikon on Amazon just to see the light quality of 4000K since most of the reviews state the 5000K is too blue. But also got it just to have for comparison against the 5000K Soraa since I've never had a 4000K light.
I've always suspected 5000K as it was with Solux and now Soraa white balance appearance leans more toward 4600K to 4700K. And my camera's AWB picks up on the Soraa's magenta component that attempts to filter green/cyan spikes as I noticed Philips applying to its T8 "Natural Light" flotubes. ACR's "As Shot" green/magenta slider shooting AWB shows the over correction toward green where CFL's force a huge over correction toward magenta like say +30. Soraa's 5000K reads more like 4700K/-10 tint toward green.
-
Hello all,
Definitely a lot of very interesting and helpful info in this thread. For many years my business has consisted mainly of printing for professional as well as serious amateur photographers, both "C" printing and B&W(Silver), and for the past 12 years inkjet of course. My light source for viewing/judging my work has always consisted of fluorescent bulbs in the range of 4800 to 5000K with an intensity of approximately 500 to 600 LUX. I am now in the process of moving my business to my home location, and in doing so, also exploring the various lighting possibilities for judging prints. Again I come back to my original comment concerning the wealth of information presented thus far in this thread. However, I have not yet come across any sort of discussion concerning the actual intensity of lighting that should be used for such viewing/judging of the printed work. I guess what I am asking for is a sort of consensus among the group here as to an average intensity number in LUX for such a light source. In my search I did find a rather old reference in the "Kodak Encyclopedia Of Photography" series, volume 3, which is a s follows: "For good viewing, a light source should provide an illuminance of 100 + - 50 foot-candles(= approx 600 to 1200 LUX). 50 foot-candles(approx 600 LUX) should be considered a minimum level. The colour temperature of the light source should be 4000K + - 1000K. A colour temperature of 3800 to 4000K serves well as an average of various viewing conditions". I then found another set of numbers on the x-rite sight as follows:
Light Intensity
Prints and Proofs
Casual Viewing (exhibition)—800 lux
Judging—2000±500 lux (required)
Judging—2000±250 lux (preferred)
Color temp. - D50 = 5000K
These are somewhat higher LUX numbers than I had anticipated, hence my reason for asking your help on this matter before I make a final decision on the light source and intensity I will be using in my new location. Your input would be very much appreciated.
Gary
-
Tested out the Hyperikon 100watt equivalent 4000K LED flood (Model:HyperBR40-402) and I have to say I'm quite impressed not only with its color rendering but amount of broad spread of light. It's much brighter than the Soraa Model 00807. Just one Hyperikon flood lit up my 12x15ft. bedroom at night enough to not require any other lights.
And it doesn't run as hot as the Soraa.
To Garnik I don't know the lux of the Hyperikon or the Soraa. Don't have measuring instruments, but the sample images below shows that I had to raise the print about a foot closer to the Soraa installed in the bathroom sink overhead track light fixture which is 4ft. above the sink. I can say that one Hyperikon LED flood lit up the vanity sink enclosure area with almost as much light as the 4 Walmart 100watt 5000K LED bulbs.
-
Hello all,
Definitely a lot of very interesting and helpful info in this thread. For many years my business has consisted mainly of printing for professional as well as serious amateur photographers, both "C" printing and B&W(Silver), and for the past 12 years inkjet of course. My light source for viewing/judging my work has always consisted of fluorescent bulbs in the range of 4800 to 5000K with an intensity of approximately 500 to 600 LUX. I am now in the process of moving my business to my home location, and in doing so, also exploring the various lighting possibilities for judging prints. Again I come back to my original comment concerning the wealth of information presented thus far in this thread. However, I have not yet come across any sort of discussion concerning the actual intensity of lighting that should be used for such viewing/judging of the printed work. I guess what I am asking for is a sort of conciseness among the group here as to an average intensity number in LUX for such a light source. In my search I did find a rather old reference in the "Kodak Encyclopedia Of Photography" series, volume 3, which is a s follows: "For good viewing, a light source should provide an illuminance of 100 + - 50 foot-candles(= approx 600 to 1200 LUX). 50 foot-candles(approx 600 LUX) should be considered a minimum level. The colour temperature of the light source should be 4000K + - 1000K. A colour temperature of 3800 to 4000K serves well as an average of various viewing conditions". I then found another set of numbers on the x-rite sight as follows:
Light Intensity
Prints and Proofs
Casual Viewing (exhibition)—800 lux
Judging—2000±500 lux (required)
Judging—2000±250 lux (preferred)
Color temp. - D50 = 5000K
These are somewhat higher LUX numbers than I had anticipated, hence my reason for asking your help on this matter before I make a final decision on the light source and intensity I will be using in my new location. Your input would be very much appreciated.
Gary
Gary,
Similar figures in this article, what you question is valid;
http://www.aardenburg-imaging.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/11/AaI_2009_0118_TA-01.pdf
In my opinion for a viewing light next to the calibrated/profiled monitor you can not use 1200-2000 Lux on the print/original. In the first place it will not represent the usual display light level of the print later on and it will not suit the level of the monitor. Without a monitor and judging the quality of a reproduction print to the original, higher Lux numbers and a shift to D50 from 4000K is recommended. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kruithof_curve. In a studio with a lot of unavoidable light all the levels will/should be raised towards that 2000 lux / D50 level but will still not represent the usual display light levels later on. That casual viewing light 800 Lux number is at least twice what musea use, recommended the levels can be as low as 200 Lux. Even 50 Lux + 2700K is not rare for light sensitive art. Compromises on the viewing light are unavoidable.
Met vriendelijke groet, Ernst
http://www.pigment-print.com/spectralplots/spectrumviz_1.htm
February 2017 update, 700+ inkjet media white spectral plots
-
Gary,
Similar figures in this article, what you question is valid;
http://www.aardenburg-imaging.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/11/AaI_2009_0118_TA-01.pdf
In my opinion for a viewing light next to the calibrated/profiled monitor you can not use 1200-2000 Lux on the print/original. In the first place it will not represent the usual display light level of the print later on and it will not suit the level of the monitor. Without a monitor and judging the quality of a reproduction print to the original, higher Lux numbers and a shift to D50 from 4000K is recommended. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kruithof_curve. In a studio with a lot of unavoidable light all the levels will/should be raised towards that 2000 lux / D50 level but will still not represent the usual display light levels later on. That casual viewing light 800 Lux number is at least twice what musea use, recommended the levels can be as low as 200 Lux. Even 50 Lux + 2700K is not rare for light sensitive art. Compromises on the viewing light are unavoidable.
Met vriendelijke groet, Ernst
http://www.pigment-print.com/spectralplots/spectrumviz_1.htm
February 2017 update, 700+ inkjet media white spectral plots
Hi Ernst,
Thanks for the reply, I've been following your posts for many years. I totally agree with the first sentence, the higher LUX would definitely not be suitable for a viewing system in close proximity to the display. However, I have never depended on my calibrated NEC displays to offer an image that will ultimately match the profiled printer(s). Long ago I arrived at the conclusion that a match between display and print was a dream I could chase until the day I produce my last print, and likely never experience such a match. My background is Type "C" printing in custom colour labs and eventually my own lab. The idea of making small test prints was instilled into my workflow long before digital printing arrived, and it is still my preferred method. Obviously a properly calibrated display and profiled printer does make the testing process a lot more efficient, but I still deem the test to be a very important and necessary part of my printing procedure. It took quite a few years to finally find a person whose background and advise I respected would also admit that a true match between display and print was next to impossible. I will not mention his name here, but all of you folks are familiar with his work I'm sure. And after all, we are not in the business of selling the image on our displays. No, we sell the prints that we make, both for ourselves and for others. Therefore, the print is the final product, not the displayed image. I realize the quote I took from the Kodak source was rather old and perhaps somewhat outdated, but it has served me and my customers very well for many years, both with "C" and digital printing, as well as B&W(silver) and digital. I suppose what I am putting forth here is my opinion, based on my own experience. And as we all know, if the viewing/judging light it too high in intensity the print will probably be too dark under "normal" intensity lighting, and vice versa. That's why I am now trying to find a middle ground, since I am in the process of setting up a whole new working environment. I will be able to take some of your numbers and perhaps come to a final conclusion, but I will likely still be looking for that perfect system as far as light intensity is concerned for viewing/judging prints. We can not possibly print for every lighting situation, so we have to somehow find an even ground to stand on at some point.
One other point I would make here that might clarify my testing procedure is as follows. Since my customer base also consists of a number of "semi-serious amateurs", true colour management is often a phrase that is not part of their vocabulary, nor would I expect it to be so. Therefore, the need for testing becomes much more obvious, no matter what the display image looks like. In that case it is indeed simply a good starting point in most cases. However, the pros I print for(some of them) will often provide an image file that definitely shows me that they take CM seriously, in which case the display image does indeed get me much closer to the final print with a minimum of adjustment and a maximum of one small test. In my case it's usually a matter of trying to find the best approach to any situation. I immediately know that the "amateur" photogs file will probably require more tests to get to a final print.
Thanks again Ernst,
Gary
-
My background is Type "C" printing in custom colour labs and eventually my own lab. The idea of making small test prints was instilled into my workflow long before digital printing arrived, and it is still my preferred method. Obviously a properly calibrated display and profiled printer does make the testing process a lot more efficient, but I still deem the test to be a very important and necessary part of my printing procedure.
Gary
So what light source back then and now were you using to judge the test prints?
The 8x10 print of the deer in my test image demo above was printed on a Fuji Frontier DL600 dry lab inkjet in sRGB and I didn't run any test prints mainly because the Fuji 8x10's cost $3 a piece. I understand in a pro lab scenario with larger prints a small test print is good insurance. I just wonder what looked off in your final prints that led you to make test prints and whether it was caused by the light or the ink or C-print dye fluorescing.
I've found not all printer's ink/paper combos reflect their colors the same depending on the formulation of pigments/filters used in various light sources regardless if it's technically daylight from some CRI number or prints viewed under the bluish flotubes at Walmart's Fuji dry lab. I've now seen enough of these variations to fully appreciate any new daylight LED innovation that attempts to reduce this fluorescing of ink on paper.
-
So what light source back then and now were you using to judge the test prints?
The 8x10 print of the deer in my test image demo above was printed on a Fuji Frontier DL600 dry lab inkjet in sRGB and I didn't run any test prints mainly because the Fuji 8x10's cost $3 a piece. I understand in a pro lab scenario with larger prints a small test print is good insurance. I just wonder what looked off in your final prints that led you to make test prints and whether it was caused by the light or the ink or C-print dye fluorescing.
I've found not all printer's ink/paper combos reflect their colors the same depending on the formulation of pigments/filters used in various light sources regardless if it's technically daylight from some CRI number or prints viewed under the bluish flotubes at Walmart's Fuji dry lab. I've now seen enough of these variations to fully appreciate any new daylight LED innovation that attempts to reduce this fluorescing of ink on paper.
Hi Tim,
To your question - I believe I had mentioned that for many years I have been using fluorescent 5000K, CRI 90+ bulbs for viewing both the tests and final prints. Also mentioned that my background is in custom colour printing, which means producing the best possible print from the negative, transparency and now the digital file I am presented with. My start in the business dates back to the late 60s with a custom lab in Toronto where we took care of many professional/commercial photographers, film processing and printing. We also produced separation negs and dye transfer prints, a real PITA, but the final product was the best available at that time. Also some very large prints and display transparencies, all of which involved testing of course before hitting the final print/tranie. Back then the video analyzers for printing were just being introduced, but the price was almost prohibitive for many labs, and one could never rely totally on its ability to produce a first final print, hence the need for at least one test print of an indicative area of the image. Basically the same procedure that has followed me into the digital age of printing. However, as I mentioned previously, if the file I am presented with has been processed in a properly colour managed environment, it will likely only require only one test before the final full sized print. Again, it's not necessarily the colour temp of the lights that I'm concerned about as much as the intensity, meaning of course that in my opinion a 5000K +- light is still the way to go for such purposes. As far as the Walmart scenario is concerned, I would never advise anyone to get their printing done at such an establishment. Simply put, it is not even close to what most of the people on this site would be producing within their own printing setup, either amateur or pro. I'm not saying that the possibility isn't there, but the maintenance of the equipment and the knowledge of the operators is definitely sub-par in my opinion. As far as your Deer Print is concerned it's not bad, but could certainly be warmer when viewed on my calibrated and profiled NEC display, and that's taking into account the web issues involved in displaying such images.
"I've now seen enough of these variations to fully appreciate any new daylight LED innovation that attempts to reduce this fluorescing of ink on paper". This is exactly what I am referring to, the variations in lighting, both colour temp and intensity. If we can't agree on some sort of average in both of those areas the field is wide open, anything becomes good enough. And as we all know, "good enough" is never as good as it could/should be. The experience of cutting my printing teeth in a custom lab where 5000K was the standard for all commercial printing and reproductions gave me a background that has stuck with me to this day, and I too will be exploring some of the new innovations in LED etc. bulbs available now for such applications. For that reason I have found this thread a helpful start to my next bout of research.
Gary
-
I misspoke. I knew what lights you used. I really wanted to know what you kept seeing in the final print under any reference lighting that made you want to do test prints. What colors did you find were off?
The reason I ask is to confirm whether you've experienced strangeness in these 5000K fluorescent bulbs that might have brought out fluorescing caused by particular brands of printer ink and dye formulations.
That Walmart print of the deer looked horrendous under their standard fluorescent tubes that I demanded a reprint which didn't fix it. But after viewing them under my newer 5000K LED bulbs like the Soraa/Hyperikon including the not so accurate daylight CFL bulbs, I couldn't believe how much better they looked so much so that I suspected the Fuji ink formulations are overly sensitive to non-full spectrum light that it got me to rethink and have doubts about your quote here...
And after all, we are not in the business of selling the image on our displays. No, we sell the prints that we make, both for ourselves and for others. Therefore, the print is the final product, not the displayed image.
To press the point even further the commercial press ink printed magazines on the nearby Walmart magazine rack looked correct under the same lights. That was puzzling!
I guess I'm having doubts that with newer inkjet technology that there may not be a middle ground reference print viewing light if there are these kind of appearance extremes of prints sold to customers who may use wonky lighting that reacts differently to certain brands of printing ink and paper.
-
I beliebe one should take the kruithof curve also into account: https://nl.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bestand:Kruithof_curve_2.svg
-
I misspoke. I knew what lights you used. I really wanted to know what you kept seeing in the final print under any reference lighting that made you want to do test prints. What colors did you find were off?
The reason I ask is to confirm whether you've experienced strangeness in these 5000K fluorescent bulbs that might have brought out fluorescing caused by particular brands of printer ink and dye formulations.
That Walmart print of the deer looked horrendous under their standard fluorescent tubes that I demanded a reprint which didn't fix it. But after viewing them under my newer 5000K LED bulbs like the Soraa/Hyperikon including the not so accurate daylight CFL bulbs, I couldn't believe how much better they looked so much so that I suspected the Fuji ink formulations are overly sensitive to non-full spectrum light that it got me to rethink and have doubts about your quote here...
To press the point even further the commercial press ink printed magazines on the nearby Walmart magazine rack looked correct under the same lights. That was puzzling!
I guess I'm having doubts that with newer inkjet technology that there may not be a middle ground reference print viewing light if there are these kind of appearance extremes of prints sold to customers who may use wonky lighting that reacts differently to certain brands of printing ink and paper.
"I misspoke. I knew what lights you used. I really wanted to know what you kept seeing in the final print under any reference lighting that made you want to do test prints. What colors did you find were off?"
Not sure what you mean by this. I guess the only way I can answer is to again state that it's next to impossible to match a display with a printed image, so the testing process is an intermediate step using the displayed image as a very good starting point. I look carefully at the test and determine what needs adjustment - density, contrast, colour etc. As I also mentioned, a properly colour managed file is not as much of an issue, so there is usually a minor adjustment for the paper I'm printing on, using soft proofing of course.
"The reason I ask is to confirm whether you've experienced strangeness in these 5000K fluorescent bulbs that might have brought out fluorescing caused by particular brands of printer ink and dye formulations." The answer to this one is NO, I have never seen what you are referring to with the 5000K Fluorescent bulbs, although they do tend to drop in colour temp and intensity over a period of time. Therefore I think from this point forward I will try to set up a totally different viewing/judging lighting system, hence my original question(s).
"To press the point even further the commercial press ink printed magazines on the nearby Walmart magazine rack looked correct under the same lights. That was puzzling!" I agree, that does seem rather puzzling, although in my opinion there's one word that explains all of this - "Walmart" , not exactly your go-to lab for accurate printing. I have never used the Fuji inks or papers, no am I about to do so, therefore I cannot comment on their possible metameric issues.
"middle ground reference print viewing light" Interesting comment Tim, you may be correct in that assumption. Good food for thought!
Gary
-
I beliebe one should take the kruithof curve also into account: https://nl.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bestand:Kruithof_curve_2.svg
Interesting chart. Wonder what it says about adaptation.
The image below I just shot of the same vanity sink area I demo'd the deer print/CCchart comparison but now have both 4000K Hyperikon and 5000K Soraa turned on side by side that shows these subtle tinting variants. I chose a bold font color temp label in 255RGB white to allow comparison to any 6500K calibrated monitor. Funny how it looks warmer than the OBA white porcelain sink which has R=G=B neutral readouts on the 4000K side.
I'm also testing if I can use these as grow lights for the mint & basil herbs shown in the sink.
-
Lots of great technical information here but, on the practical side ...
A couple of years ago the Australian government tried unsuccessfully to ban incandescent light globes. However I would say that they will disappear within 5 years for lack of interest anyway. LED is now almost as cheap to buy, far cheaper to run and gives to most people a better light. I can see all galleries and households moving to them. I run a whole wall of lights on a small transformer.
So although i have Solux globes in my print station I am sort of wondering why, as the gallery is LED and most customers will be LED.
-
So although i have Solux globes in my print station I am sort of wondering why, as the gallery is LED and most customers will be LED.
Exactly... so far as I can see, the ideal viewing light is whatever print will eventually be viewed in. 2000 Lux D65 might be nice for picking faults or matching packaging materials, but I'd suspect most in-home viewing is closer to 200 Lux. For commercial purposes, whatever conditions it will be sold in... :)
-
Lots of great technical information here but, on the practical side ...
A couple of years ago the Australian government tried unsuccessfully to ban incandescent light globes. However I would say that they will disappear within 5 years for lack of interest anyway. LED is now almost as cheap to buy, far cheaper to run and gives to most people a better light. I can see all galleries and households moving to them. I run a whole wall of lights on a small transformer.
So although i have Solux globes in my print station I am sort of wondering why, as the gallery is LED and most customers will be LED.
Continuous spectral white light from LEDs is not easy to create and what is available as white light LEDs is made by several methods; 2 or 3 color LEDs, one or more phosphor coatings, quantum dot coatings etc. If it remains unpredictable which white LEDs will be used for display then the full spectrum halogens in your printing station are still a sound solution.
When everywhere a more standard full spectrum white LED will be used this approach can change, my bet is on the very small quantum dot coating types as researched in the Vanderbilt University:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Light-emitting_diode#cite_note-121
Met vriendelijke groet, Ernst
http://www.pigment-print.com/spectralplots/spectrumviz_1.htm
February 2017 update, 700+ inkjet media white spectral plots
-
Exactly... so far as I can see, the ideal viewing light is whatever print will eventually be viewed in. 2000 Lux D65 might be nice for picking faults or matching packaging materials, but I'd suspect most in-home viewing is closer to 200 Lux. For commercial purposes, whatever conditions it will be sold in... :)
I have a little different take on this. I've been printing since the 70's including owning a pretty large photo lab, and a properly lit viewing area is something I've dealt with for decades. To me the critical component of a viewing or evaluation station is to make sure I don't have any weaknesses in any part of the spectrum or that some parts are over represented. A print that looks good in such a viewing area will generally look just fine no matter what light is used on it in the final location. I think trying to match the light that might be used when the print is displayed is a rabbit hole that doesn't really have a good answer and really doesn't lead to any where useful. Additionally many prints end up with lighting that varies through the day.
One issue that I've been dealing with lately however are clients that have a lighting to illuminate the print, but are using some very low quality compact fluorescent. I think I'm to the point of modifying the hanging tips handout I include with a piece to address this and offer some ideas on where to obtain better quality lights for these circumstances.
-
The Hyperikon 5000K 110º flood arrived yesterday and thought I provide a comparison to the Soraa and 4000K version with a more non-changing scene of the bathroom vanity sink area in my home.
The Hyperikon has a slightly pinkish blue color temp next to the Soraa but I couldn't rule out adaptation between the two as the cause. The 5000K lit print sample's white balance tinting is a bit different from the full scene of the same bulb above it deciding to error on the side of staying true to what I saw of the print to my display. All of these lights induce a slight bias in this way when changing focusing points between screen to actual scene if viewing one over the other too long. The Solux MR16 4700K was no different.
All of them rendered color pretty close visually to my 6500K calibrated display.
-
As a printing novice, my question is the same as Garnick's bur more elementary. What practical (and hopefully simple) lighting system will best allow me to evaluate prints in my study?
Thanks
F.
-
As a printing novice, my question is the same as Garnick's bur more elementary. What practical (and hopefully simple) lighting system will best allow me to evaluate prints in my study?
Thanks
F.
A simple lamp fixture. I thought the photos made it clear how simple it can be. Just get any of the bulbs I've shown, screw it in the lamp and your good to go.
Maybe I'm missing something in your question like maybe your study doesn't have a place to put a lamp. Not sure.
Here's all three 4000K & 5000K installed in an $8 lamp stand.
-
A google search fro "high cri led" turned up a company called Yuji who seem to be talking our language:
http://www.yujiintl.com/high-cri-led-lighting
https://store.yujiintl.com/collections/high-cri-led-module/products/vtc-series-d50-5000k-high-cri-mcpcb-led-module-unit-5-pcs?variant=25955916551
Anybody heard of them?
William Chitham.
-
Haven't heard of them, but the CRI numbers are pretty impressive, 98 CRI but better yet between 94 and 98 so very consistent across all colors tested.
Certainly worth testing, but would need to find a manufacturer that uses their modules in their lights? they seem to sell modules but not actual fixtures other than one that appears to be a standard bulb replacement.
-
Haven't heard of them
solux, yuji, soraa and some others were discussed in a long topic about dcamprof camera profiles creation tool here... in terms of the spectrum quality...
-
they seem to sell modules but not actual fixtures other than one that appears to be a standard bulb replacement.
https://store.yujiintl.com/collections/high-cri-led-lights/products/yamada-lighting-z-80pro-high-cri-led-desk-lamp-brightness-adjustment-eye-friendly-lamp-multiple-shadows-prevent-unit-1pcs
-
Called up a Hyperikon CSR about why they have Amazon send an automatic email request twice asking for feedback after the product arrives when they already have 995 reviews on the bulbs I just demo'ed here. He said that it's just part of their customer service style and that I can unsubscribe within the email.
He mentioned Samsung as primary provider of the bulbs components and didn't know much more. I asked him why their bulb has so many reviews and Soraa has none when they've been in business as long as Hyperikon (4 years). He said he never heard of Soraa. After I heard him over the phone confirming of Soraa's sparse supply of both product and reviews on Amazon, he told me he couldn't explain it.
From the price of the Yuji LED and I'm beginning to think this is just a wild west business model on who can come up with better CRI numbers over the other and have the high price reflect it and make believers out of an unsuspecting public.
The Hyperikon 5000K bulb is slightly weak in accurately rendering cyan but not by much that adaptation would take notice. I viewed an an over saturated Fuji Frontier drylab cyan ink dump error on a print whose cyan extends beyond AdobeRGB and it looked quite intense.
-
https://store.yujiintl.com/collections/high-cri-led-lights/products/yamada-lighting-z-80pro-high-cri-led-desk-lamp-brightness-adjustment-eye-friendly-lamp-multiple-shadows-prevent-unit-1pcs
yeah, also saw a regular incandescent style bulb. But most of us want a bulb to be used in a fixture we already have, such as a PAR 20 or 30, or MR 16 style bulb.
-
Wonder why I'm getting "Your Connection Is Not Secure" warning from Firefox clicking on the store.yujiintl.com link? I didn't get this yesterday.
-
Hi Folks, OP here,
I ordered both the 3000 and 4000k Hyeprikon Par 30 bulbs.
I like the 3000 for what I do..the 4000 is a bit dodgy for me
Nice even speed and distribution of light.
Even with the pleasing 3000k color I still feel the LED 'thing'..for lack of a better description..I guess it has to do with how the spectrum gets represented..don't know enough to say more but I see that.
Thanks for the tips..I'm going to read through this thread and test a few more of the suggested bulbs..
-
... But most of us want a bulb to be used in a fixture we already have, such as a PAR 20 or 30, or MR 16 style bulb.
Wayne, you nailed it. I'm running MR 16 4K LEDs in my old Solux track. The halogens looked good but switching to LEDs enabled me to use 6 MR 16s instead of 4. I like the extra light and not burning myself when I accidentally touched a halogen bulb is a nice bonus.