DSLR Photography Forum

These days everyone seems to be more environmentally aware, and pushing for lower energy consumption in the home. One of these areas is lighting, with products such as compact fluorescent (CFL), low voltage halogen spotlights/downlights, LEDs and other technologies. I must admit though, that most of the lights in my home are still incandescent bulbs with some halogen spotlights in our living areas.

I was reading though, that some people say that some of these lights, especially compact fluorescent, can be quite harsh on the eyes, and not condusive to a relaxing environment. The reason being that they emit light in a narrow frequency range, as opposed to incandescent which emits the full spectrum of visible light. Because of this, the quality of light appears harsher, and apparently the colours appears off as well due to the different colour temperature. That being said though, you can get bulbs in different colour temperatures, with manufacturers producing varieties such as warm, soft, bright, daylight, full spectrum, and more.

This got me thinking though - I wonder how these new technologies affect indoor photography? Is it just a simple matter of setting a custom white balance and shooting? Or are you potentially creating a difficult shooting environment with the lighting?

I pinched this royalty free image from wikipedia showing a comparison between different 60 watt bulbs:



* Compact Fluorescent: General Electric 13 watt, FLE23HT3/2/D, 6500°K
* Incandescent: Sylvania 60-Watt Extra Soft White
* Compact Fluorescent: Bright Effects, 15 watts, LBP16AM, 2644°K
* Compact Fluorescent: Sylvania, 14 watts, CF14EL/A19/3K, 3000°K

More interesting reading:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compact_fluorescent_lamp
http://science.slashdot.org/article.pl?s...20/1632204

What kind of lights do you have at home, and what have been your experiences?

I have tried the low wattage compact fluorescents, but I have to say that I don't care for the light quality. Even the natural "daylight" versions don't have a warm cast, and they don't appear to be as bright if they are behind a shade or in a ceiling fixture. Not to me anyway.

I use a variety of compact fluorescents in my apartment, from different sources and generations. Most of the ceiling fixtures are "daylight", which is a pretty good approximation, but doesn't photograph the same. I secretly prefer the standard 100-watt bulb in my living room. The best use I have for my CF bulb is a lamp that's on a timer, which will run for about eight hours a day.

4 x 60w halogen in a central unit in the kitchen, 5 x 60/100w tungsten in livingroom, 3 60w spots over dining table, 2 x 60w minature tungsten in the bathroom behind a shade, and low energy fluorescent for hall, top of stairs and bedrooms.
I have glaucoma, which neccessitates drops to control it. A side effect of the drops is to make your pupils smaller (stop down to f 22) . Outside in daylight no problem, but inside very gloomy with low energy lights.
For indoor photography I use the (set yourself) WB setting on camera.
(set yourself) = Why does my brain keep switching off?

NT73 Wrote:(set yourself) = Why does my brain keep switching off?

Because it's not on auto?

Last night I tried taking some shots of each of my different light bulbs at a fixed white balance. The card then wouldn't mount -- the first time I've had one fail. Scary. I'm still not sure what was going on, but the camera could read and write to it without incident, but the computer said it couldn't be recognized.

(set yourself) = Custom WB. With Canon you take a shot of something white (a sheet of A4) under whatever light you are using, and then set custom WB to the photo. :/ And apparently it works like a grey card, only differently.

I still could not remember, so I have just been downstairs to look at the camera settings.

Wow... interesting:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/17364944/

Quote:ast month, Australia's government announced plans to ban incandescent bulbs within three years, while a California and New Jersey lawmakers introduced bills seeking to do the same in those states.

Quote:The European Union is already encouraging its 27 member governments to promote the use of efficient lights on streets and in offices. The ELC Federation statement said its members "urge the European Commission to adopt a similarly proactive approach to domestic lighting," though they stopped short of calling for a ban on incandescent bulbs.

Banning something like a certain type of lightbulb is ridiculous and counter-productive.
I hate it when adults are treated like children by government.

A program of education, incentives, and free samples is a smarter way to go.
CFs are expensive--despite the energy savings, it's hard to convince people of their value when they can barely afford their other bills.
(It's a cash-flow thing)

If I hear a whisper of this silliness here I'll be stocking up on 100s my favorite tungsten bulbs.
They look better, photograph much better, cost less, and burn out all the time.

I use CFs more and more, starting with the lights that stay on longest like over the stove and sink, porch lights, etc.

Only for those living in the state of New South Wales in Australia, but the government is doing an amazing initiative - free energy saver light globes and water saving shower heads installed in every house...
http://www.ozbargain.com.au/node/384

If you think of the costs (bulbs, shower heads, labour costs for installation), it really is amazing on the part of the government. Kudos to them for doing something for the environment.

For those who live in NSW - book your appointment here: http://www.envirosaver.com.au/01_esp.html