a word about lighting

[H.crispa]

Lighting is a subject of great debate and I would like to give a talk about this at the next meeting. We'll see.

I posted this on another thread outside of our club, but this is a constant source of aggravation for me because we all talk about lighting in terms of watts, lux, lumen and kelvin. Because of the reasons I post below, kelvin is almost useless (even though I use it too) and if anyone needs additional info, I'll post some links. Once we beat the kelvin horse to death, I'd like to discuss the difference between lux and lumen. Please though!!!! One element at a time. Here goes:

If you look around, you will see that kelvin temp on both MH and PC lights is actually very subjective. They should be labled "apparent" kelvin temp because none of them are a continuous spectrum. In other words, if you heat a solid block of black carbon to a certain kelvin, it emits a certain spectrum of light, which looks a bit like a rollercoaster rail smoothly going up and down but representing all wavelengths in the visible spectrum to some degree and smoothly flowing from one to the next. PC and MH lights are artificially constructed sources of light and the color of the light to us is dependent on how our eyes perceive it.

Both PC and MH sources of light are "interrupted spectrum" sources. This means that it is not a smooth transition from one wavelength to the next like a rollercoaster, but instead a series of sharp peaks and deep troughs-- kind of like an EEG or a scribble on paper that a child would make. Only certain wavelengths are represented. Some strongly, some weakly and some in the middle-- and some not at all. Our eyes percieve this as a certain "color temperature" even though it truely is not anything of the sort. This means that color temp, like common names vs "scientific names or binomial nomenclature", can be very loosely interpreted and manufacturers have license to call them pretty much anything they want! The only way to know what you are truely getting is to see the spectral analysis of a particular bulb-- and that varies with the ballast as well!!! This explains why every 10,000k bulb looks so different. If they were all truely 10,000k, then the color of the light they emit would be identical and the only difference would be intensity. But that just ain't the case.

Oh what a tangled web we weave!!!!

[LowCel]

Sounds like a good idea to me. However if you are going to discuss lighting I think that you definately have to get into PAR.

[H.crispa]

By all means, PAR needs to be discussed as it is the most important to coral growth. We keep reefs for many reasons but high among them is athstetics. So our lighting has to be pleasing to the eye as well as to make our corals grow and to make people understand the difference is paramount. Also in this mix is to have people come to an understanding of the differences not only between the different types of light systems, how they affect growth, appearence and health of corals but also what limitations various set ups have. Geez, we could go on and on for days about this but I think the best approach is to start basic and work up from there. That way I can give beginners a good foundation for more advanced areas of light and I can bore the living sh*t out of those who already know the basics... which is my ultimate goal! So its a win-win! JUST KIDDING!!!

Seriously, what I had in mind is to start with a basic discussion of the differences between PC and MH, how they work (very basically-- no snorefest), hit on lux vs lumen, basics of spectrum-- including PAR and "looks good light" which sometimes coincide-- kind of like a lighting 101. Then open up the floor to specific questions and just go wherever the members want. Then in future meetings, open up a new, more specific area.

Most people start out with PCs because they are cheaper. So that is a good place to start with the specifics. However, when you start packing the luminaire full of as many PC tubes as it will hold, overdriving them and remote mounting all the ballasts that it takes to drive them, then that cost advantage quickly melts away. Can you keep SPSs with PCs? Hell yes. Is it cost effective to do so? Hell no! There is a point at which MH becomes more cost effective. That is yet another topic.

I can easily build a fixture incorporating 12 x 55 watt PCs over a 75 gallon reef using two Icecap 660s to drive them. Let's do the math on this one-- 5 PC sockets= $60.00, 12 x 55watters=$360.00, 2 Icecap 660s=$358.00. A grand total of $778.00 without shipping or the cost of materials for the luminaire itself! I leave that off because the cost is the same whether you choose PC or MH

MH-- 2 x 250 watt retro kits= $192.00
2 x 10,000k MH bulbs= $90 (shipping included)
Grand total of $282.00

PC setup= 660 watts
MH= 500 watts
BUT!!! the MH has more lux, probably more lumen and almost certainly more PAR-- For far less $$. This explodes the MH is expensive myth. As a matter of fact, for the cost of the above sterroided-out PC setup, I can pack in 1000 watts of MH and still come out cheaper! The water will boil but oooh damn will that tank be lit up!

Let's be frank here. Off the shelf PC setups are sleek, cool looking, they have fans built in etc but the amount of light you get for your dollar is pathetic. If you want to keep lower-light stuff and the PCs are adequate, then by all means, they are a viable option and certainly the way to go. However, if you plan in the future, on keeping corals that demand brighter light you are wasting money on PCs-- bite the bullit.

That said, I am NOT BASHING PCs!!!! I use them myself. I have a 20 hex with 4 x 28 watt PCs over it and the luminaire cost me about $282.00 to build. I had the Icecap already or this would never have been built! I had an odd shaped tank and a good ballast and Hamilton Tech had tubes that would work, so I built it. This 112 watts of PC is concentrated over a space about 14"x8". I can keep SPS under this light quite successfully but Geez for $300 I could have put 250 watts of MH over this tank. I just so happened to already have the ballast. Setting up a sterroid PC light is absolutely NOT worth it!!!!!!!!! And you still wont get the lux. Period. PC has its place and I love PC, but MH has its place too and I love MH as well. Bottom line is-- it just depends on what you are currently doing with your tank and where you intend to go in the next 12 months. Yes, plan 12 months ahead when it comes to lighting if you want to save money in the long run.

Oh GEEZ! will I please SHUT UP ALREADY??????? I'm sorry but I get going on a topic and I can't seem to stop. Oh well. My name is Jason......and I'm a reefgeek. We need to develop a 12 step program I guess.

[pappygonefishin2002]

Seeing how you want to go on and on , just keep going! lets go to bulbs 10k 14k and 20ks which one is best for an sps and softies tank? And then there is the sockets mogul , single , and double ended is this a big deal or just preference?

[1package]

Where are you getting the 250W MH 10ks for $90 (shipping included) and are they similar to the type Chris bought?

[firefish2020]

Pappy DEs are suppose to put out more radiance than moguls from what I hear. I can tell you these 2 150 DE look as bright or brighter than a tank with 200 moguls! For their size they can go in spaces far smaller than moguls and if you wanted you could probably build an awesome DIY DE lighting setup that would weigh less and use less power in the long run (depending on ballast), than a mogul system. Personal preference so far is 10,Ks the look is awesome when accented with some nice deep blue actinic (personal favorite T-5 like Bruce's setup has) Gives a well balanced color to your system. 20,000K are very blue and from what I hear 14Ks are great for SPS and provide a careful balance between blue and white. You left out 65K one of the first bulbs used and used quiet extensively in the hobby up until a few years back. They provide accelerated growth in coral with a trade off of color factor.
Jason it sounds like a very good topic and I say go for it, I'll post a date in a day or so and begin a thread for meeting 6, I will highlight the lighting discussion also. Also everyone when we do have this open discussion part, start asking questions that you think newbies need to hear answers too, most of them just wont ask anything and are there for the wrong reason.

[LowCel]

I'm still wondering when T5's will take off around here. I believe that they are the best lights for anyone not keeping an sps specific tank. However, a lot of people are keeping sps with T5's. They are a very efficient, low wattage bulbs. They are very slim therefore they allow for awesome reflectors that really use a high percentage of the light.

As for favorite color that is a personal thing. Plus, I believe Jason touched on this earlier, all 10k's are different colors depending on brand. As are 14k's and 20k's. 6.5k's as well I'm guessing. Right now I am running de Ushio 10k 250 watters with 2x54 t5 actinics and I really like them. My next bulbs are probably going to be Hamilton 14k de's though. Just to try something different. I know that I will like the color better, what concerns me is how well they penetrate 24" of water.

Also, I have priced a retro kit from www.hellolights.com for my next tank. I will be running 3x250 de mh's and 2x72" (not sure of wattage) vho's for actinics. The price w/o bulbs is around $575.

[MattG]

the big advantage to DE bulbs over mogul is a more efficient reflector.

the big advantage to metal halide lighting in general is its a point source light so it penetrates deep into the water very well. you could place as many pc's/vho's as you want on a 24" tank and they will only penetrate so deep. the bottom will have very low par unless you are using halides. also you cant forget about the cool shimmering effect that is created from a point source light!

as far as bulbs all i can say is go with a quality well tested bulb. its really not worth going with some off brand bulb just to save a few bucks. color temperature wise as others stated its a personal preference. 10k is typically suppose to be white, 20k is purple/blue (looks much more like the color ive seen on a natural reef), and 6.5k looks yellow. as a general trend the lower k a bulb is the more par you will get. i prefer a 10k bulb with actinic supplimentation.

if you are looking for lots of lighting info/testing/references do a search for sanjoy joshi, he writes most all the lighting articles in
advanced aquarist (http://www.advancedaquarist.com). I do want to warn you most of the articles are technical but very informative

[MattG]

forgot to mention for anyone reading par is one of the most if not the most important aspect of lighting. if anyone doesnt know what it is its the amount of usable light that is produced for the coral.

[coralreefer]

Jason is there a reason you're not including VHO?

I'm still wondering when T5's will take off around here. I believe that they are the best lights for anyone not keeping an sps specific tank.

Bruce for me I already had both VHO and PC systems before T5's came out. You on the other hand started at the right time to utilize them.
So far they seem to be a pretty solid lighting option. If newer reefers do the same research :rolleyes: I imagine they should take off around here.
fwiw I remember when PC's were the new thing and the hype about how they would revolutionize reef keeping :D

[H.crispa]

Looks like I opened up a big can of bristle worms here.
First off let me address Pappy: The kelvin temperature of a light source is supposed to be the spectrum of light emitted by a block of pure black carbon when heated to a specific temperature in kelvin, which is celcius + 273 degrees (actually 273.16 but close enough)

A true kelvin color temperature (continuous spectrum) would have a spectral analysis graph like the ones seen here:
http://www.reefkeeping.com/issues/2002-03/atj/
Hence the "roller coaster rail" analysis

What we have when dealing with PC and MH is an interrupted spectrum that looks like the ones seen here:

http://www.personal.psu.edu/faculty/s/b/sbj4/aquarium/articles/ballast%20comparison/ballast-comparison.html

and here:
http://www.advancedaquarist.com/issues/feb2004/feature1.htm
Hence the "scribble or EKG" analysis

However, our eyes, sophisticated as they are, do not perceive all wavelengths of light, nor do they interpret the ones we do see in equal proportions. So, even though our artificial light sources are interrupted spectrum, our eyes are "fooled" into seeing them as if they were a continuous spectrum. That said, every human eye is different and your eyes may perceive interrupted spectrum light sources slightly differently then do mine. Therefore, whether a manufacturer chooses to call his PC or MHs 10,000, 12,000, 14,000, or 20,000 kelvin is very subjective. In theory I suppose, the higher the kelvin, the bluer the light but sadly this is not the case. I currently run some 7100 kelvin PCs over my 20 gallon hex. These tubes are in fact VERY BLUE! Quite similar to the "royal Blue" ones that Ron is so fond of. In this same fixture I also run some 10,000 kelvin tubes, which are very bright and as pure a white as a snow covered field on a bright sunny day. Should these not be ridiculously blue??? Or should the 7100ks be a lot more white???

Likewise, the 12,000 kelvin halides I was running over my 75 gallon were FAR BLUER than ANY 20,000k I have seen to date! So, the only way you can know what you are getting is to see it for yourself to know how the light will appear to your eyes, and to see a bona-fide spectral analysis graph (using the exact ballast/bulb combo you are planning to run if possible) to know what your corals will be "seeing". What is best for what? To truely know, you just have to wing it! That is the sad truth.

Is it a big deal or just a preference? A little of both I'm afraid. Lots of people prefer really blue lights because they show off the fluorescent properties of the corals they are keeping best. Unfortunately, actinic is not the richest source of photosynthetically active radiation. Lots of people want as close to real sunlight as possible for true color rendition and maximum coral growth. That would be the 6500 k bulbs (keeping in mind my tirade about the subjectivity of kelvin temps on PC and MH). I personally feel that the best compromise of the two is a 10,000k MH with royal blue PC actinic supplementation. But that is my preference and opinion. I feel it is close to full spectrum daylight for growth but still has the actinic in there for fluorescence. Also it is pretty well accepted by a vast majority of corals in my experience.

I hope that answers your question, even though I really didn't.:D

Package: I bought them here: http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&rd=1&item=4344085836&ssPageName=STRK:MEWN:IT
Are they similar to Chris's?? I have no idea but you are welcome to come by my house anytime to see them for yourself.

DEs vs moguls: Ron is correct. DEs are brighter watt for watt, they take up less space and I would prefer to use them for those reasons. However, they cost too much. When I can replace both of my moguls for less than the cost of one DE, I'll stick with the moguls for now. I'm sure that will change in the near future.

Lowcell: When are T5s going to take off around here? Beats me, I've been running them for years. They are much brighter than T8s and use less electricity. What I want to know is when is someone going to come up with a T3? or a T1? Imagine the intensity of those bad boys. Boy would they have about 8 coils or what though? Also, the bluer the light the deeper it penetrates. That is why everything looks so blue once you get down in about 60 feet of water. The reds go first, then the yellows, then the greens etc. Blue penetrates better, but I just don't think the PAR is there-- Case in point, my 12,000 ks.

Reefer: No there is not any particular reason I left out VHO. They just generally suck. I'M KIDDING!!! Really I ran VHO over a planted tank I had once-- that's where the Icecap I have came from. If there had been VHO available for the 20 hex I may never have started playing around with PCs. It just turned out that the Icecap was able to drive the PCs and there were PCs available in the right colors and intensities and lengths for a 20 gallon hexagon, so I went with it. Bottom line is that pretty much anything you can do with a PC, you can do with any other fluorescent out there including NO. Playing with spectrum, overdriving, using different reflectors etc. So really it would have been more fair of me to just say "fluorescents" instead of "PCs". However, because I think PCs are more common these days and I am WAY TOO LAZY to type out "fluorescent" instead of PC, I just went with PC. Nothing personal at all.

How's that for a long reply?

[mcox33]

what do you mean by overdrive a bulb. How do I know If it is overdriven?

[H.crispa]

If you have a ballast that will drive two 55 watt PCs and you put all the wires to just one 55 watt PC, then you have 110watts powering a 55 watt tube. It does make them a lot brighter. Somewhere on the order of slightly more than double the normal lumen. Coral reefer was telling me she had seen info indicating that you can overdrive up to three times normal wattage before the law of diminishing returns kicks in. In other words, going from 55 watts to 110 makes a big difference, kicking in another 55 watts for a total of 165 watts gives you an even brighter light but not as big as going from 55 to 110. If you put in yet another 55 watts, the gain is smaller than the last etc. etc. Until it does pretty much nothing. Overdriving a tube will cause it to go bad sooner but really not that much sooner. It also causes the tube to burn hotter, but not that much hotter. You are not going to boil the water or anything but they may feel a tad hot to the touch.

[firefish2020]

You can overdrive but it's a very advanced technique IMO and if done incorrectly it can damage your balasts. I could go into the all the technical reasons why you should be careful but lets just say balasts are not that cheap :)

[MattG]

typically when people are talking about overdriving bulbs its using normal output bulbs(NO) on a ballast setup to run very high output bulbs (VHO).

when i was running vho i was using 40 watt NO bulbs on a VHO ballast. this will drive the bulb close to VHO levels (110 watts), darn near 3 times the output. so for the 5$ the bulb costs you can get quite a bit of light. Amy was actually the one that informed me of the specific bulb at lowes. i believe its made by phillips and is 6.5k in color temp.

If you are using an icecap/URI ballast there is nothing special that needs to be done to overdrive flourescents. just replace the vho bulb with a no bulb :D gotta love that.

[firefish2020]

Yes but each bulb technically creates a resistance (load) on the balast. I thought balasts were made for a specific load? It seems in theory that it would cause a stress on a balast, I don’t know Im way new to this subject it just seems like it could cause problems. Kinda like when people come in and buy 65 watt pc bulbs for there 55 watt light. It will run the 65 but it will shorten the life of the original 55 balast. Likewise a 55 can be run from a 65 but also it will damage the original balast in the light at least that is what one of our electrician customers told us. Like I said I have no clue. :) By the way great topic.

[MattG]

check out http://www.icecapinc.com/rev1.htm for info on overdriving with an icecap ballast. There is no problem at all overdriving when using an icecap ballast.

A regular magnetic ballast doesnt drive the bulb the same as the icecap so i could see problems arising.

moral of the story is if you are thinking about setting up flourescents icecaps are the way to go :D

[firefish2020]

very cool thanks :)

[coralreefer]

Originally posted by MattG
typically when people are talking about overdriving bulbs its using normal output bulbs(NO) on a ballast setup to run very high output bulbs (VHO).
If you are using an icecap/URI ballast there is nothing special that needs to be done to overdrive flourescents. just replace the vho bulb with a no bulb :D gotta love that.

Yep
Icecaps used to be well known for overdriving NO...actually they underdrive VHO but that's another story.

When my 75 gallon was set up I ran 2 NO 65k bulbs from Lowes and 2 URI VHO super actinics. Started out using T8 actinic but the VHO only cost 2 dollars more and didn't wear out as fast.
I ran a DIY icecap set up like Jason described above...a T8/4 ballast overdriving 1 bulb.

Kinda like when people come in and buy 65 watt pc bulbs for there 55 watt light. It will run the 65 but it will shorten the life of the original 55 balast. Likewise a 55 can be run from a 65 but also it will damage the original balast in the light at least that is what one of our electrician customers told us. Like I said I have no clue.

Ron I've heard you say this before and I'm curious about it for a couple of reasons.

Hellolights lists these as 55/65 watt bulbs
From their site:
Works in any standard 55W OR 65W fixture of the same pin configuration.
Note: Some bulbs are stamped "55W", but they will work fine in 65W fixtures. It's the ballasts that drive the bulbs.

The Advance REL 2P60 ballast is recommended to run either bulb
Two 55W or 65W bulbs (http://www.inlandreef.com/diy.html)

When 65W bulbs first came out Matt from inlandreef (NH not WV)
found they were just relabeled 55w :eek: (actually had a 65W sticker over the 55W factory stamp) for more money.

If you could find out more about how it harms the ballast or bulb it would be great to share on this thread.

[firefish2020]

Not a problem I will get all the specs for you on this but the guy swears it will shorten the life of the balast on the 55/65 PCs. I'll also let you know what we find out as we are testing this theory ourselves at the shop on one of the prop tanks.

[firefish2020]

Ok had a talk with him today he says that running a 65 watt PC on a 55 watt rated ballast (example using 65 wt in the 55 AGA PC hoods), will damage the ballast and shorten it's life. However if it is a ballast that is rated at 65 watts running a 55wt bulb it will do no harm to the ballast, it wont produce anymore radiant energy and may shorten the life of the bulb but it wont do any harm to the ballast in his opinion. Ive been trying to get him to drop by here and let everyone know the specs on it but he has been way to busy. I'll keep trying though :)

[H.crispa]

I over drove the crap out of a 55watt PC for quite a while with no ill effects until it exploded and burned down my whole neighborhood. I'm kidding! Nothing happened. By the way, If anyone is wondering what the helI is a T5, T8, T10, T12 etc, That is refering to the diameter of the fluorescent tube in eighths of an inch. Por ejemplo, a T5 is 5/8ths of an inch, a T8 is 1 inch and a T12 is 12/8ths or 1&1/2 inches in diameter (T12=a regular tube you see in shop lights). Generally the smaller diameter tube, the brighter the light.

I guess length is not as important as width after all!!!!:lol:

[H.crispa]

Here are a few shots of the sterroided-out PC light I built for my hexagon. I have not put the finishing touches on it yet and I may never do so. I just don't care that much right now. It works and that's all I care about. First is a shot of the tank itself. Not much stuff in there these days. It all made its way into my 75 gallon.
http://www.netpix.org/pix/01/01/05/hextankweb.jpg

Here are shots of the front and sides to give you an idea of dimensions.
http://www.netpix.org/pix/01/01/05/front-light-web.jpg
http://www.netpix.org/pix/01/01/05/side-light-web.jpg


And my bubbletip! Ain't she purdee???
http://www.netpix.org/pix/01/01/05/rose-web.jpg

Here is what you see when you look at the light straight on. By the way, these are T5s not T8s. Put your sunglasses on folks.
http://www.netpix.org/pix/01/01/05/bright-lite-web.jpg

Here is a shot of the ballast with the top of the light removed. I could have made the light shorter if I had chosen to remote mount the ballast. Nah! Screw it!
http://www.netpix.org/pix/01/01/05/ballast-web.jpg

And finally, a shot with the picture dimmed down so you can see the color mix on the tubes. The two outside tubes are 10,000k the white one in the center is 6500k and the blue one is 7100k. Yeah, I think Lord Kelvin would be pizsed to see such a blunder too.
http://www.netpix.org/pix/01/01/05/color-mix-web.jpg

As I stated in a previous post, only a fool would build such a light because I could have made a halide cheaper. Oh well, I already had the ballast.

[H.crispa]

Folks, I was looking forward to giving a talk on lighting at the upcoming meeting; however, I will be out of town on business at the time of the meeting so it looks like I'll have to do it next time.

I know you are crushed, in tears, sinking into a deep depression, feeling as if I have abandoned you and well.... I have actually. You know what they say... money talks and B.S............. However if you need counseling just call ron and aggrevate him ad nauseum-- OK that might not be such a good idea.

Really though, I'm joking but, if any of you actually were hanging on my every word and you actually ARE really upset that I won't be giving the talk until next time....I gotta tell you....just between you and me.... You really DO need help! I'm not that great. OK... I AM actually that great, but no one knows it but ME.:D

[LowCel]

h.crispa - I was just checking out your hexagon and it says the lights are t5's. Every T5 I have ever seen, including the t5 lights that I have owned have long narrow tubes, about 1/2" wide and single tubed.

Could you describe the bulbs you are using? They look like pc's.

[firefish2020]

I have a question, I dont know anything about T-5s but what is the true difference in a T-5 and a PC? I mean are they not the same size just the PC has been bent? Serious question guys I need to understand lights better esp. T-5s.

[odoprelude]

I thought t-5's were just the next steps up from VHO's, where PC's were just smaller, more powerful flourescents... Just my understanding...

[LowCel]

Pretty much. T5's are much narrower than the VHO's are allowing more efficient reflectors. Every pc I have ever seen is "U" shaped.

The biggest advantage to the T5's is that reflectors can be used to direct just about all of the light to the tank. If high quality reflectors are not used then you would pretty much be wasting your money buying T5's.

[H.crispa]

Yes, I know what you mean lowcell. Actually, the "T" in any flourescent refers to the diameter of the tube in 1/8ths of an inch. So, what is commonly referred to as a "T5", which is a double ended T5 is what you have and is what is being referred to when most folks talk about t5s. However, I am looking at it from the perspective of the true meaning of the "T" value. My PC lamps are infact, 5/8ths of an inch in diameter and they are therefore T5 tubes. Just not what most people are talking about when they talk about "T5"s. Sorry for any confusion.

There is a link to an article by Sonjay Joshi on DIY PCs in my aquarium frontiers thread. It explains in great detail exactly what all the letters and numbers on a fluorescent tube mean.

[LowCel]

Cool, thanks for clearing it up. :)