New lighting tests. Interesting resutls. as per usual.

[stephane]

Originally posted by StirCrazy:
on another note there is a suspision arizing that the results of this test could be bogus. Steph let me make this clear befor you start arguing with me I AM NOT SAYING THAT THEY ARE...

I am only saying that there are some very valid points that have been brought up about the effect of heat on the PAR sensors. as it has been stated in the original post I think a retesting at a distance of 18" would be the best thing Dana could do, but we can only hope this happens.

Steve

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">I will not argue whit you again Steve I tink it get us nowere

For my self even before that test I was convience about the respond and I know people alway try to
disculp or get suspisius other by someway to get them right (I dont talk about you here)

There more evidence that all that DE mania is fake and even then people want to belive it.

The only evidence that give the DE is a test who Sanjay have run but even himself tell that this test is confusing + R&B If you call it evidence :(

I tink I beter believe in Santa Closs than this
Maybe Im rong but until more proof are show all this DE ting is simply fake!!!!!!!and useless to anyone.

It shure more attractive to belive a 150 will do a 400 job but I need a lot more proof to andorst it and putt 1500$ on a giesman fixture yes they are nice VERY NICE but as to get them superior than other I need proof I see the giesman 250 setup over a tank yesterday in front of a iwasaki one at le corail they even have a very nice color even by them self better than the iwasaki (for coloration) no doubt but it is my only conclusion for now even if coloration for me now is the most important ting I will not get in it now at this price no way But I tink for people who are not DIY a bit and have the $ this is a nice set up in 250 watt but in 150 I dont tink so

Even manufacturer dont endors those claim so I tink it is for now only a legend. A manufacturer of bulb who will find a miracle like this will be
a lot more present in testing and showing spectacular result but IMO they stay silent because all this polimic is good for there sale :D

[reefburnaby]

Hi,

Hmm...the spectral results are up and I guess the SE lamps have quite a bit of energy in the greeen/yellow bands. So, the useful reefPAR is actually not dramatically different from the 150W DE bulbs and the other SE bulbs. Anyway...looks cool.

FYI...I don't think a MH is a point source at 3.5". This is because the MH ARC is about 1 to 3". So, your point source extrapolated numbers while be pestimestic (i.e. lower than actual). For a more accurate calculation, you would need some calculus and an integral.

- Victor.

[DJ88]

Victor,

The inverse law I suggested is just for an approximation. I seriously doubt that anyone here is going to sit and do the calculus involved. I can help out anyone wanting to if they so decide to. :rolleyes:

If we were to get into specifics the only way a MH could be concidered a point source is if it were either being measured far enough away that the radius of the light source wouldn't measurably change as we moved the sensor. At that distance we'd be wasting our time and energy.

[ 19 June 2002, 15:06: Message edited by: DJ88 ]

[reefburnaby]

Hi,

Yupe I know that its an approximation. I just wanted people to be aware when they compare numbers (say between these and Sanjay's).

Usually point source approximation isn't a problem (like a measurement 18" away from the bulb)...but 3.5" is going to have significant amount of error.

- Victor.

- Victor.

[stephane]

Finaly another test to validate that those double ended 150watt are notting more than a 150 watt an a mogul of the same power will put as much light as those double ended

http://www.advancedaquarist.com/issu...002/review.htm

[ 21 September 2002, 23:30: Message edited by: stephane ]