New Lumen Bright Reflector. ... any info on them

Status
Not open for further replies.
Perhaps if he didn't come off so condescending some of us wouldn't take issue with him. Where was the name calling? Apparently you appear to be on the sensitive bus as well.

While I admit he offers valid data the method in which he offers it comes across as he is superior to anything we have to offer. We are mere peon's and wouldn't know **** if we had our heads buried up our asses.

This makes it difficult to have a meaningful discussion. Sure scientific evidence on a 3D grid will validate this entire discussion, however until someone does provide that for the Lumen Brights/Minis visual is all we have to go on and the difference of the same ballast bulb combo with a simple reflector swap.

It should pretty much go without saying that if you can VISUALLY see the difference in the light spread then obviously the reflector is making a difference.

With the mini's, of course the spread will be less than a reflector that is several inches larger in L, W, and H. Obviously more overall surface area is going to provide more spread and different PAR at different points.

My problem with Hahn is that he appears to think all of us are idiots and completely incapable of comprehending the empirical data that he keeps providing for the Lumenarc. I do not deny that it is an outstanding reflector. But each time he feels the need to attempt to belittle any poster with his scientific data he is essentially beating a dead horse.

Maybe the Lumen Bright will not measure up to Lumen Arc and the "16% better..." is nothing more than marketing figures which were obtained in a perfect world under perfect conditions. The point though is that it offers the consumer other options and at least companies are taking the time to try to make advancements on the design to provide better conditions for both the consumer as well as making the attempt to get just a little closer to offering competition to something that essentially at this point in time is a monopoly.
 
Perhaps if he didn't come off so condescending some of us wouldn't take issue with him. Where was the name calling? Apparently you appear to be on the sensitive bus as well.
Click to expand...
 Are you incapable of communicating without the use insults and personal attacks?

Perhaps you mistake condescension for conveyance of knowledge. Just because somebody has a deeper understanding and attempts to convey it does not mean that they are looking down their noses at you. You speak of sensitivity?

He is "beating a dead horse" because people keep posting dissenting opinions or attempting to show him to be wrong. As long as people are willing to debate or willing to attack his position then he is going to reply with what he feels are facts to prove his point.

Again, If you do not like what the guy has to say, then rebuke it with facts, not personal attacks. You have not done that here. Instead you have publicly called him a condescending-know-it-all (among other things) and tried to garner public sympathy if not a dog-pile to support your opinion and attacks.

I spoke up and said something because I am starting to see this more and more here at RC and in general day to day debates. It is bothersome to say the least.
 
Can you point out some specific area where I was condescending? Sure, I got aggrivated because I kept having to repeat myself, or re-clarify, but by no means was I condescending... unless you percieve others having knowledge beyond that of your own to be 'condescending'. I see that all the time. The woman speaks 5-6 languages, and when people hear that, they get this massive inferiority complex that is totally absurd and invalid. Here in the midwest, when an employer finds out she was a triple-major in business, went to law-school, and then got her masters... the management feels 'threatened' and so they wont hire her.

I say get over it. Some people seem to be taking issue with being open to the idea that there might be some marketing hype that is being bought into prematurely, basing your opinion on opinion rather than fact. You just spent money on some new reflectors, and all you want to hear is that they are the best thing on the market. I get it. Sorry for keeping an open mind. Ill be sure to not 'rock the boat' next time.

"It should pretty much go without saying that if you can VISUALLY see the difference in the light spread then obviously the reflector is making a difference."

Well, this is not always true. Your eyes play tricks on you because you have a 'focal area' which I doubt can take into accound the sum of all the light that a bulb makes. A reflector that has a larger spread will appear duller, but is it in the end? Another example: we cant see blue light as well as red and green (unless under low light conditions)... very poorly in fact. So we look at bluer bulbs and see them as duller, but the corals might in fact be living in a monochromatic blue world. Its these small 'claims' that keep getting snuck in that arent true is why I keep responding. Its as if to say 'okay, I know its wrong, I get it, but Im still going to cling onto this part still'.
 
It is not just this post that I have witnessed this in. The great thing about public forums is freedom of speech to a point.

In case you missed it I FREELY admitted that he provided accurate data and facts. It is the manner in which his writing comes across to obviously more people than just myself that offers the suggestion that we are morons.

I at one point even attempted to make a joke about something that was said and he decided to turn it into something else as apparently I bruised his fragile ego or he is completely void of a sense of humor.

I guess at this point lets just agree to disagree and leave it at that. There is no need to have a thread locked because we obviously have differing opinions.
deadhorse.gif
 
Just to get this thread back on course:

It is important to note that the Lumen Arc reflectors were originally designed and manufactured by Diamond Lighting which is no longer in business but was bought out by Pacific Garden Supply. The Lumen Arc reflectors were designed in mind for use in the hydroponics lighting market. The reflectors have been designed to cast a wide spread over the tops of plants. Reef hobbyists discovered the benefits of these reflectors about 4 to 5 years ago and they are now taking the place of parabolic spider reflectors. I made a call to Coralvue today and they did confirm that the spread is not as wide as the Lumen Arc reflectors. I was told they wanted to design this reflector specifically for going over aquariums and concentrating more light to penetrate light through the water and to the bottom of our aquariums. For me this really makes sense because after photographing Mike's(Acropora Nut's) TOTM a bunch of times over the last few months, I can tell after the LumenBrites were installed that it was much brighter in lower locations of the tank where previously I had a hard time getting bright photos.

One has to keep in mind when planning the lighting design of a reef system that you must decide based on your tank dimensions whether:

A. Spread is more imortant for aesthetic reasons and to compensate for an odd tank length. In this scenario you will probably be better off with the Lumen Arc. Just keep in mind that the Lumenarc was also originally rated for a 2x2 foot area. So you may get a little more fill light in your system however you have to keep in mind that that fill light will not measure as high par values as you may think. Like I said before as soon as you start moving away from the bulb the light intensity dramatically decreases. So even still if providing enough light is important to you for all your coral in a 5ft tank for instance, than you may still need 3 reflectors no matter which one you choose.

or whether:

B. Light penetration is more important for growing coral. If this scenario is important to you than the Lumebrite will be the best option also rated for a 2x2 foot area. So for most applications on a standard sized tank you will not have to worry about using a LumenBrite because it will fill that 2x2 foot area that you have. Again if you have an odd tank length like a 5ft tank for instance than 3 Lumenbrites would be optimal for all coral in the display

So basically, if you have an odd tank length you will need just as many LumenArcs as LumenBrites. The larger LumenBrite and LumenArc would be used for applications in a wider reef aquarium than 2x2 ft.
 
Thanks for trying to get us back on track. In the pictures I posted, and really made no comment about, if you look at them you can see the major lighting difference in the sand bed and that is on a 29" tall tank. Actually the sand bed, the anemone, the rock work, pretty much the entire 29x24 area.
 
<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=10953971#post10953971 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by bubbletip2
A. Spread is more imortant for aesthetic reasons and to compensate for an odd tank length.
Click to expand...

I just want to chime in to disagree with that statement. Spread is more and more about filling a need these days as more and more tanks are being built that are 3' and 4' from front to back, so a 3' or 4' spread is more a requirement than a luxury. And many states have rising electric costs to where putting 4 or 6 lights over a tank to overcome a reflectors inefficiencies is just not practical long term. But I agreed with pretty much everything else you had to say (which was mostly the important stuff).

Also, for those that think Coralvue makes the LAs, it is just sad that you are propagating a lie that covers up what amounts to highway robbery of the "little guy", namely the rightful owner of that patent and the only ones who can legally make and sell the LAs, PGS. :(

And thanks Hahn for keeping with the scientific side of these reflectors, to most of us with larger tanks we live and buy by the real world metrics of such items :) (play on words/pun intended :))
 
I dont know bubbletip2, I agree, penetration is important for coral growth... I suppose, thats kind of an obvious statement, and the same can be said for spread, since if your corals exist outside the 'spread', then the intensity doesnt mean anything with the coral in the dark. So its really both. And, FWIW, I find the intensity increase when just going from a gullwing to a lumen-style reflector to be such a huge increase in the first place... giving up some intensity for spread isnt a bad idea. I see some people who switch their tanks to lumenarcs and the intensity jump is so much that its overkill on the corals. The small 'hot spot' that the lumenbright has in its center is a very small spot, and then it tapers off quickly (yeah, Ive seen some hard data now) can be a problem.

In our tanks, we have a problem with 'light gradient'. In the wild, a coral can grow up 2' and see a very gradual light change. In our tanks, that light change can happen in 2"... and thats just in the vertical component. If we add in the horizontal spread... lets consider for a moment a colony of coral that is say... 9"x9", and put under the light output of the lumenbright. It is highly possible that it will get nuked in the center, and not get enough light at the edges... much like how LED's can burn a hole in a shroom at one point, and not have enough light around that. Now, Im not saying these have as narrow of an output as a LED, but its still a pretty small 'hot spot'. The corals already have the challenge of overcoming the vertical light gradient... adding a horizontal one that is significant as this could be problematic. FWIW, for my 40B T5 vs. halide tests (same spectrum and wattage, same watter, flow on two identical size tanks), I ended up liking the T5s better in the end, and I would bet that part of the reason why corals did better was the lower 'light gradient'... I could put corals anywhere in the tank and the light levels woudnt vary much... all along the top of the rocks was 350-450. With the halides (one was a PFO mini, and the other was a Lumenarc mini), there were hot spots... light levels at the top of the tank would vary from 80-750... in the same areas as the T5s. Thats pretty dramatic. The T5s only had about a 7:10 variation, while the halides had a 1:10 variation. Just something to consider. Nothing in our tanks can even live in PAR levels as high as 750 (except crocea clams), so whats the benefit of the 'hot spot'? I would rather have the entire top of the tank lit with a lower light level (and so would the corals). FWIW, the lumenarc provided this more-so than the PFO, but it was just so dang bright compared to the PFO anyways... I could have gone down to a 150wattDE halide instead.

I have dealt with this problem in the past with other reflectors, its one of the reasons I now use a light rail (which does more for spread than any reflector could do when you think about it, so thats why Im not too concerned about not using my 'arc). The mini-pendants in particular tend to make such a spotlight... with light levels well above what any corals actually want up close to the surface, and then the corners get left in darkness. The abrupt transition is very difficult for corals to deal with (their are studies on how it distorts the coral growth), as well as for me cuz I have to place them. So for me, all things considered, Ill take the greater spread... esp since the output is so much higher in the first place over a spider reflector.
 
Last edited:
<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=10954559#post10954559 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by Sparkss
I just want to chime in to disagree with that statement. Spread is more and more about filling a need these days as more and more tanks are being built that are 3' and 4' from front to back, so a 3' or 4' spread is more a requirement than a luxury. And many states have rising electric costs to where putting 4 or 6 lights over a tank to overcome a reflectors inefficiencies is just not practical long term. But I agreed with pretty much everything else you had to say (which was mostly the important stuff).

Also, for those that think Coralvue makes the LAs, it is just sad that you are propagating a lie that covers up what amounts to highway robbery of the "little guy", namely the rightful owner of that patent and the only ones who can legally make and sell the LAs, PGS. :(

And thanks Hahn for keeping with the scientific side of these reflectors, to most of us with larger tanks we live and buy by the real world metrics of such items :) (play on words/pun intended :))
Click to expand...

I think a very good discussion has brewed here and I am not against differences of opinion. Again Sparkss, there are going to be different applications for each reflector. I did state in my last post that if you have a wider tank, then a large LumenArc or LumenBrite would suffice. The mini LumenArc or miniLumenBrite just won't cut it if coral growth is important to you 18" from the bulb in any direction. And if you have a 4 foot wide tank then please use two reflectors to cover this area unless you need to cut costs, spread is important to you for aesthetic reasons, and the coral outside the specs of the reflector is not an area where you are worried about growing coral optimally.

Just to add some science back into this thread here is a chart of the original Diamond Light provided by Sanjay Joshi in this article -

http://www.advancedaquarist.com/issues/mar2004/feature.htm

Figure 11: Small Diamond Light - Top View

fig11-small-diamond-light-top.gif


In these diagrams you will see both the difference in light intensity as the bulb is moved up from 6" - 12" as well as the amount of spread that is provided by the reflector. Please take not that at any distance from the top of the water, the spread that is 18" from the bulb or a 3ftx3ft area is purple - what does this mean - hardly any light of any worth.

Now in order to provide maximum spread with this Diamond Light you would need the bulb to be 9" from the top of the water to get any light intensity a foot away from the bulb. And I think most woudl agree that any lower may overheat and cook our tanks. Outside that foot from the bulb and the light intensity is non efficient and only around 9" away from the bulb or a 1.5ftx1.5ft spread is there any light with some intensity to grow SPS coral for example. If you are growing soft coral outside the spec of the reflector so be it - then the spread is effective. I just don't think people will keep SPS growing nearly as well and with as vibrant color if you keep them outside the spec of the reflector.

Again this is what I have been referring to all of this time. If the light is spread out and you can see it does not necessarily mean it is good for growing coral. These mini reflectors are spec'd for a 2x2 foot area so if you raise them high enough you can spread the light but will lose intensity at the surface of the water and an even greater loss at deeper depths of the tank. Also you will have light of little value outside the spec of the reflector.

So again if you have a 36" tank or wider you either need the big LumenArc or LumenBrite or in a 4ft wide tank I would recommend to mini reflectors if you plan on growing coral more than a foot away from the bulb.

And Sparkss I think I stated in my last post that the LumenArc was originally designed by Diamond Lighting that was eventually bought out by Pacific Garden Supply. I am sure everyone is clear at this point who manufacturers each reflector. And just for the record, I am not concerned with who makes what reflector or the politics behind the scenes. My main concern is growing coral as best as I can. I actually currently use LumenArc reflectors but am seriously considering the new LumenBrites because of what I have observed from them on Acropora Nut's tank. Just to note his tank has 5 LumenBrite reflectors currently on where he used to use 5 LumenArcs. His tank is 120"l x 32"w x 30"h. I will be going over to Mike's again this weekend and will have some pics for everyone on what these little babies can do.
 
Okay, I think I see what is going on here... I think your perceptions on efficiency might be skewed by what you think your corals need for intensity. That, and I think you are looking at the wrong part of the article for your information. Most corals, even acros, dont even want light levels above 400 microMol/m2/s. Many medium-high light corals do well in 200-250, and low-medium light corals do well in 100-200 levels (low light corals, like shrooms, rics, open brains, and RBTA's do well in 40-90).

That graph, FWIW, matches a friend's tank in my local club... Tom Obrecht (past TOTM here as well). His Lumenarcs w/ ReefLux 12,000K 400watters have a similar output to that bulb in the graph above. At the water, he is getting about 1000 microMol/m2/s of light as well right below the bulb... which corresponds with the above graph at 9" (which is about what his is at). Let me tell you though... the light levels in the top 6" of his tank are in the 500 range across the whole top of his tank. His tank is 3' tall, and his light levels at the bottom are in the 200 range right below the bulb. A Lumenbright would be even worse... most likely scorching anything directly under the bulb because the intensity would be too great, and in too concentrated of a beam in the center. He has to hide his new corals in the bottom edges of the tank (acros) just to acclimate them. I think wishing for more intensity beyond this is absurd, unless you have a very tall and narrow tank. Anyways, on his 3' tall tank, he needs to raise his lights up above 12" so his corals dont scorch. Not bad for 4x400's over a 400g+.

The other thing is, those 3D graphs only tell half the story. If you look at the charts, the efficiencies are not all the bad...

S Diamond Light Total Incidental PAR 3x3 area... 6": 27308, 9":24705, 12": 23837. Thats a very small loss with distance. This is why many people mount their 'arcs more than 12" from the surface. Compare how the other reflectors degrade with distance in that comparison... and you will see how well the 'arcs carry even at greater distances. Its because of their larger dispersion field BTW.
 
Diamond Light also makes a smaller reflector (called LA3) which is more suited for 250W single ended mogul lamps (it does not accommodate the 400W lamps as they are too long to fit in this reflector). The small Diamond Light reflector's results are also shown here. Unfortunately, when this reflector was tested the only available 250W lamp on hand was a Vion 250W lamp (not the best lamp in its class and is no longer being sold). So this data cannot be directly compared to the 10000K lamps and reflector systems, however, the % distribution plots of this reflector would provide useful data for comparison purposes.
Click to expand...

I have read that article several times and I have looked at the comparisons numerous times and while it does give a decent idea of what to expect even the article itself, as I quoted, points out that it is with a less than ideal bulb, and there was never a 400watt test done. I would like to see what the plot looks like if a better 250 bulb was used as well as a 400.

Nevertheless I am upgrading my current lighting scheme, which has proven to be adequate, to a full Lumen Bright setup. Maybe they aren't quite as good as the Lumen Arcs. Hahn(I swear no attempts at discrediting you or argument attempts) has done an excellent job with ton's of empirical data on why the Lumen Arcs are, at least up to this point, a fantastic reflector with unmatched results by any other company. Hands down without a doubt I will 100% agree with you that the LA was without a doubt the way to go if you had the room and wanted the best of the best.

I firmly believe there is a new player on the block and I always like to guinea pig items that have potential. That is exactly what I am doing. A simple visual test may not be the best type of test. But I posted the visual as a starting point. I do not own nor do I plan on purchasing the equipment needed to get the results to prove beyond a shadow of a doubt whether the Lumen Arc or the Lumen Bright is a superior product.

As with anything I think the application it is going to be used for is probably more of a determiner than which product is to be used.

What I mean is, perhaps if it found to be that the Lumen Bright is an inferior product at least as far as obtaining the best of the best coral growing conditions, people may still want it because of the aesthetics it provides with its fairly unique spread or simply the way it actually looks, with its octagon shape, hanging over a canopyless tank.
 
This is all kinda just speculation until someone gets out there par meter. Anyone planning on testing these guys?
 
Its already been done, but not independent, so they dont want to release the results since people might discount it as marketing. There is an independent test being done right now though.
 
It will be great to see that once released. Bottom line, both will work fine, which one is better is all in what your going to use it for, size, depth and preference.
 
Being the owner of a couple of lumenbright reflectors (large and mini) and a light rail, my deciding factor over the LA's was the shape. With a square LA and a relatively enclosed space, there was a chance that a cable could get looped under the corner while moving, and I really don't want to know whether the reflector would beat the motor on the light rail or not. Not that likely to happen with good cable management, but if something were to work loose (and it is surprising what can happen over time when something is being moved backwards and forwards a couple of hundred times a day) the chance is there. With a lumenbright's rounded shape, this cannot happen, and I can sleep easier at night.

Plus, with a light mover, if there really is a spot with 16% more PAR than a LA, then that love gets spread around the tank more. I'm not sure there is anyone out there that can definitively answer whether that is a good thing or not, but it kinda sounds good for some reason. At least the fish seem to have acclimated to the sun moving in the sky.

Dave
 
<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=10957568#post10957568 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by hahnmeister
Okay, I think I see what is going on here... I think your perceptions on efficiency might be skewed by what you think your corals need for intensity. That, and I think you are looking at the wrong part of the article for your information. Most corals, even acros, dont even want light levels above 400 microMol/m2/s. Many medium-high light corals do well in 200-250, and low-medium light corals do well in 100-200 levels (low light corals, like shrooms, rics, open brains, and RBTA's do well in 40-90).

That graph, FWIW, matches a friend's tank in my local club... Tom Obrecht (past TOTM here as well). His Lumenarcs w/ ReefLux 12,000K 400watters have a similar output to that bulb in the graph above. At the water, he is getting about 1000 microMol/m2/s of light as well right below the bulb... which corresponds with the above graph at 9" (which is about what his is at). Let me tell you though... the light levels in the top 6" of his tank are in the 500 range across the whole top of his tank. His tank is 3' tall, and his light levels at the bottom are in the 200 range right below the bulb. A Lumenbright would be even worse... most likely scorching anything directly under the bulb because the intensity would be too great, and in too concentrated of a beam in the center. He has to hide his new corals in the bottom edges of the tank (acros) just to acclimate them. I think wishing for more intensity beyond this is absurd, unless you have a very tall and narrow tank. Anyways, on his 3' tall tank, he needs to raise his lights up above 12" so his corals dont scorch. Not bad for 4x400's over a 400g+.

The other thing is, those 3D graphs only tell half the story. If you look at the charts, the efficiencies are not all the bad...

S Diamond Light Total Incidental PAR 3x3 area... 6": 27308, 9":24705, 12": 23837. Thats a very small loss with distance. This is why many people mount their 'arcs more than 12" from the surface. Compare how the other reflectors degrade with distance in that comparison... and you will see how well the 'arcs carry even at greater distances. Its because of their larger dispersion field BTW.
Click to expand...

Hahn,

I am not trying to argue with you but to debate the points that have been made already. I really don't feel my perceptions are skewed in any way shape or form. I do understand how much light SPS, LPS, and softies need(after 12 years of reefkeeping), which is why I am so interested in these reflectors.

Just to give everyone a litte more background on these types of graphs it is important to note that the microMol/m2/s that are listed are what these reflectors are showing at the "surface" of the water. When you break the surface of the water, things change in a big way.

So again, when you look at these graphs you will see that when you start moving "away" from directly under the bulb you are losing light intensity significantly. If 3x3 spread is what you are looking for again for "aesthetic" reasons, just know that 1.5ft away from the bulb produces a light intensity of 100-200 microMol/m2/s at the surface of the water.

What do you suppose it would look like at the bottom of a 24"-30" tank a 1.5ft away from the bulb? This is the point I am trying make Hahn. Unless you have your rock at the surface of the water 1.5ft away from the bulb, anyone will have trouble recreating optimal conditions for growing SPS and most LPS with this set up. The hobby has changed quite a bit leaving the "wall" of rock behind and opening up the aquascape for pillars and open sand to grow SPS and Clams for instance. The LumenBrites were designed with this in mind as an aquarium hobby product and not to stretch light over the tops of plants. I do feel the LumenArcs have been a great welcome to the hobby and will have their applications - obviously as I own two. I like the fact that over the past few years the technology has taken off in this hobby to better serve us in our ultimate goal, "to grow coral" which is why the LumenBrites were designed.

If I remeber correctly Tom Obrecht has an 8ft tank and has 4 LumenArcs over the display. I am not surprised by the results you posted because this is what the Lumenarcs are spec'd for, a 2'x2' area. If he is wider than 24" than I am sure he has the large LumenArcs or should if he does not already. And also giving data of 200microMol/m2/s at the bottom of his display right under the bulb does not tell me much because I would expect this with 400w 12K bulbs and especially with a large LumenArc. Have Tom measure 1ft to 1.5ft away from the bulb on the bottom and we will see what it shows.

Here is another graph using a 400w XM10K bulb which I am sure is plenty strong enough for most people's tastes. I realize it is a double ended bulb but should be comparable to say the least.

image016.gif


This graph was taken from Dr. Sanjay Joshi's article here:

http://www.advancedaquarist.com/issues/dec2004/feature.htm


Hahn,

also you have included some graphs in past posts but did not link any information about how those are related to the LumenBrite or LumenArc in a factual situation. Are these graphs your own creation and speculation or are they referenced from somewhere as concrete data in regard to either the LumenArcs or LumeBrites?
Again, I am not trying to pick a fight. I think we have good conversation going here and just want to know if what you are showing is referenced from something factual or if it is your own speculation.
 
I think you are misunderstanding things... So you really believe that the LB's are designed to 'grow coral' better than the LA's? Thats where you and I differ. BTW, Im the one who took the readings in Tom O's tank, and I can tell you what the light values were at any level in his tank (actually, I thought I did already in the last response) with my PAR meter. Lets just say that that if he had LB's on his tank, the problems he had would be even worse, as he would have a beaming hot-spot from top to bottom under the center of each bulb, but the sides would be left in the dark. Pretty much what I am saying is 'thank goodness' that as you move away from a LA it loses intensity... since its way too intense otherwise. You think that the Lumenarc loses intensity as you move away from it? Well, it loses density, yes. But it you will stop trying to get your info from the graph, and look at the stats in that article, you need to compare the total incidental light at various distances (provided in my last post as well), to see that the conservation of light with distance with a lumenarc is perhaps the best on the market. That 'bright patch' that a LB has isnt a bonus, its a problem, IMO. With corals, you dont want a reflector with such 'hot spots' in its output... you want the one with a more even spread.

Im tellin you... the LB is no better than the LA... its most likely worse. I was suspect of it at first just upon seeing it, but after seeing the reasouts, now I know its for sure...
L3vsLBgraphs.jpg


"The approx. 16.5% brighter spot is directly in the center, then goes quickly down from there. At 6" away from center it's about even, then the Lumen Bright tapers quickly off. We'll be taking more spreads from different heights in the near future, but this first one is at 2' away, perfect for an 18" deep tank, with the lights 6" above the water.
Note that even the lumenarc loses approx. 50% of it's light by the time it gets out to 2'X2' spread. The Lumen Bright loses approx. 75%, which is approx. 67% less light compared to the Lumenarc which doesn't start as bright in the direct center. 33% light vs. 50% light at 2' X 2', approximately."

The greater 'spread' of a Lumenarc, if nothing else, allows it to be mounted closer to the water surface, because it can cover a wider area and still be closer to the water... to maintain its intensity as you would say. So either way you want to interpret it... also, keep in mind that these are all 'open air' tests, and that the angle of refraction of the water will bend all the light coming in to be more focused anyways... so even the LA's will be more concentrated when you add water to the system. All light entering at 45 degrees will travel at 30 degrees (from vertical) under the water, so the hot spot of the LB's will be even smaller with water, and the LA's information will be slightly different as well.
 
Last edited:
The graphs show a spotlight. Not only that, but one that trails off in intensity very quickly.

Notice the Depth of the larger bands on the 3D distributions. See the yellow and pink bands and the difference in overall footprint?

Very telling...

I could care less either way, as I do not (and likely will not ever) own either reflector.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

xclusive252
Kessil help please
Replies
4
Views
230
wvned
wvned
whyapollo
Radion XR30w G2.. still useable?
Replies
3
Views
184
griss
griss
H
Top crown snails
Replies
2
Views
265
griss
griss
Dogs442
New Build xxl900 lighting question.
Replies
2
Views
187
Dogs442
Dogs442
T
New Deltec Skimmer
Replies
1
Views
163
Vinny Kreyling
Vinny Kreyling
Back
Top