Article: Future growing dim for incandescent bulbs
 

This is getting serious, some states/countries are passing laws to ban incadescent bulbs:

http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/...s/4798297.html

I was in a big store just the other day - WalMart I think - and noticed that the incandescent bulb selection was smaller than compact flourescent.

While I don't want the govt telling me what type of light bulb I can or can't use, it is kind of crazy that we shop for tungsten lighting the same way we shop for space heaters. Whether you need 2kw of light or heat, you're gonna end up with both.

I've heard of two or three places now that are considering a ban on tungsten lighting but the following comes to mind (not that I'm against banning tungsten mind you ;-) :

1). How will it be enforced? If one state doesn't sell it and the one next to it does sell tungsten, what's to keep you or I from crossing the state line and buying some.

2). Will video / film production entities be grandfathered in to use tungsten or will they be required to upgrade from tungsten lighting to metal halide, fluorescent and/or LEDs? Can you imagine the upgrade costs for all the studios that might be affected in CA alone?

3). Will stores simply quit stocking tungsten light bulbs?

4). Will people with dimmer circuits realize that they better switch over to regular on/off lighting switches or run the risk of burning out a CFL ballast.

It just doesn't seem terribly practical to legislate things like this. Remember the ban on freon. Right! Thank God, no one is using freon anymore. ;-)

I suspect that it will take quite a while to phase out ALL incandescent bulbs/globes/lamps. It won't take much to get rid of most E36 "Edison" medium-base tungsten bulbs as there are perfect substitutes for them in all situations a dimmer isn't being used. Dimmers aren't so incredibly prevalent in daily use that a workaround couldn't be found. Most of the time, dimmers are used on "full" or "off" with the occasional dim setting used in certain circumstances like movie watching or romantic dinners. Simply having multiple circuits can eliminate the need for a dimmer. Populate one with bright bulbs and the other with dim and you get dim/bright/very bright choices by eliminating or combining circuits with two switches.

The bulbs that will stick around and legislation won't be able to include for a while will be those used in specialty fixtures like MR16 halogens. There aren't any micro fluorescent bulbs, so small fixtures will likely be exempt for a while. LED will eventually replace those and the energy savings will offset the up-front costs. I don't think the half-dozen MR16 bulbs in the average house that will eventually need to be replaced with LEDs will bankrupt the consumer.

"Remember the ban on freon. Right! Thank God, no one is using freon anymore. ;-)"

In the U.S. almost nobody is using Freon anymore. One of my roommates is a refrigeration technician and practically everything has been switched to other gases. For the consumer, R134a is available for automobiles made after about 1993. Most cars before R134a are no longer on the road and even those can be adapted to the new gas using replacement orifices. Legislation does work to help the environment. If people continue to make poor environmental choices even though a good substitute is available, the government sometimes needs to step in. Sometimes legislation is needed to simply synchronize the inevitable switch. Fortunately, it looks like people here are starting to get the idea and voluntarily switch (where possible) to energy-saving bulbs.

Fortunately, at least in my case, the newer CFLs are better substitutes for interview lighting and keeping things cool. We still need tungstens and halos for backlit scenes, keys and projection. However, that may change as new laws will bring about more competition and money to improve designs.

I'm sure there will be some resistance from US manufacturers, as they may lobby for some breathing room in order to retool plants and redesign their product lines. Stiff competiton from overseas may also force early compliance.

We the customers will win, and there will be plenty more products to choose from. When you think that about $50 in CFL lighting will yield plenty of color correct lighting for what an equivalent $1200 lowel kit can do... Of course, that kit is more than just bright lights. But for the budget minded, you can start out on petty cash. This is good news.

Thing is, video renders color much different from our eyes. While you can white balance to CFL's, the color of most of the ones I've seen are pretty unpleasant around the house. I use them in places like the store room, front porch, crawl space, etc. But not in the living room, bedroom or bathroom. My house has dimmers on just about every fixture, and I prefer the warm glow of incandescent at a low level which is more like candle light.

I think you're right about LED's though, that's really where we're headed.

I can understand being use to the soft yellow of incadescents. After using some decent quality 5500k's to light my home office, my initial reaction was not very positive, it just didn't seem natural. However, over time, I've found it to be actually more pleasing and less eye strain and fatigue.

The thing I found was, after I got used to 5500K, I grew to like it very well and it get's to the point that you're not even really aware of it after a while. Most do get to feel it's a very natural light after time, and I agree about being more pleasing too.

Unfortunately, most all of the CFL's that are being, and will be sold if the conventional bulbs are banned, are the ones that are not pleasant to have on at all. They give a greenish tint to everything and are tough to get used to. I do use a few, like in my front porch lights. I even use them in my living room, trying to save a couple of bucks, as these are the lights I usually have on. But, that decision was made before I learned more about them.

What you are generally not told about these bulbs is the problems switching over would cause.

First, they contain mercury. They must be handled with care and you will not be able to just throw them away. They must be recycled and there are few places that take mercury right now. If broken, it may cost you a ton. In the news a couple of weeks ago, Brandy Bridges of Ellsworth, Maine dropped one while changing over and had to call in a hazmat team. The clean-up cost her $2,004.28. Switching over in the US would add 50,000 pounds of mercury to our environment here. Now if you dropped a bulb would you pay to have it cleaned up properly? And, what about all of those bulbs that will not be recycled properly?

Second, there are no manufactures of these bulbs here in the US, and for that fact probably most other countries. All of the bulbs we have come from China. If we are required to switch, the Chinese will have to build many new factories to handle the workload. China is the worst polluter in the world right now, as they use little or no pollution controls. So all of the energy and pollution reduction we see here will be more than offset by the pollution in China's manufacturing.

Personally I'm with Greg and think that LED's would be better and cheaper in the long run. I picked up a new camera light at NAB that is really neat! I'll post a review on it in time, but I think it will come in handy. It uses 48 LED's and puts out the equivalent of 50 watts and runs for 15 to 20 hours on three AA batteries.

Time will tell, but for now I hope they don't jump into mandating this change.

Mike

IMO governments really need to get onto the ball in disposing of fluorescent lights, batteries, and materials with lead in it (esp. old computers). There are and will be many people who just throw them in the garbage.

Banning incandescents sort of seems like a good idea, but it might be self-defeating when there is no convenient way for people to dispose of toxic materials properly.

actually, china is still second to the united states as far as greenhouse emissions go, but does seem to be gunning hard for first.

i would agree the options just aren't there yet, but i think peter's right. i welcome the kinds of conversations that inspire innovation as opposed to the same ol' way of doing things. here's to better, cheaper, and planet-friendlier.

The biggest or most immediate problem is that it's much easier to place regular trash on the curb, than having to remember to drive into town and find the obscure location to properly dispose the materials. We'd have to adopt a curbside or community hazardous waste collection plan (like we do with seperate containers for recycling). If made easy, folks will follow.

Off topic.

Mike

Actually there is an MR16 fluorescent. Very small and cute and actually not too bad but certainly not as bright as a halogen:

http://beautyshadow.trustpass.alibab...light_CFL.html

Some use cold cathode technology (neon) to allow them to be so small. The LED ones are definitely still a bit too expensive to replace halogens and the fluorescent ones are not commonly available yet.

I think LEDs have a long way to go to be accepted as a fluorescent replacement. The cost alone will keep most away for now. They are still in the position of not being mass produced enough to lower the cost yet--even with the tremendous amount of them produced now.

I visited an LED factory here in Shenzhen recently and I can tell you there is a lot of expensive semiconductor type equipment necessary and a lot of steps to making one. Until all that changes I doubt the cost will go down much. Also, lumens per watt are rising in LEDs but they still aren't as good as CFL figures. 20 to 30 lumens per watt or so is a pretty common figure for LEDs. Tungsten is 10 to 20 lumens per watt. In the laboratory some LEDs are obtaining 100 to 110 lumens per watt (Cree and Nichia are two pioneers) but they are a ways from being mass distributed and are super expensive. These things get so hot though they need massive heat sinks. CFL is 50 to 80 lumens per watt and being accepted more and more. My 60w LED that I've got on the bench only puts out 30 lumens per watt (1800 lumens). That LED is definitely too expensive to replace a CFL for household use.

Mass production of CFL is lowering the cost immensely. Quality and CRI is going up. I disagree with the statement that most of the bulbs give out green cast. That's old information. Peter, Marcus, myself and several others have shown what you can do with a common Home Depot N:Vision bulb of CRI 80 or so. Wallmart has been selling high CRI products for a while now too. Over time, as more sources for rare earth phosphors develop, the higher CRI products will be more common and drop in price. CRI is a common spec quoted on packages now and consumers will learn more about it over time.

When you have LED bulbs like this that are interesting for specialized uses like video but too expensive for household use...

http://cgi.ebay.com/Brightest-110-V-...QQcmdZViewItem

...then it's a while before they get wider use.

While I'm doing a lot with LEDs right now and love them, predicting the demise of the CFL at the hands of the LED is very premature. Look how long it took to get to this point where market share for CFL is rising. It was a combination of things that finally made it happen. Now consumers are slowly accepting the CFL for lifetime, energy reduction, more color temperature choices, E26 socket ease of use for replacement of other bulbs, etc.

I seriously doubt consumers will accept a $24 bulb for a while, especially if the lumen output isn't as great as even a CFL.

Let's stay with lighting please....
 

Drifting into different countries, their governments, what they are or aren't doing for the environment, isn't going to work at DVINFO. Talking about the different lights available, their benefits or disadvantages for video is fine.

Thanks for your understanding,

-gb-

Mike, looking forward to the review. Just curious... what's the make & model?

Bill

So, let me get this right. We're allowed to discuss incandescent bulbs, but not why they're being banned around the world?
And, we're not allowed to discuss environmentally sound ways of disposing of CFLs or share knowledge about good environmental practice in relation to lighting.

Could you clarify, I'm confused.

Kind regards,

Liam.

Although I believe that the conversation is fairly valid, we are drifting off of the topic of this post and not talking directly about lighting equipment. So I'll respect Greg's wish and drop the recycling part.

So, how about those LED's. Why are they so expensive? And, I'll try to post a picture and info on that LED light today if I have time.

Mike

Liam, Greg deleted a post which had nothing to do with lighting or responsible disposal of lamps. It was a wisecrack about about American society which which I would have deleted myself.

This discussion is indeed drifting off topic. Recycling and waste disposal is of course an important issue today, but DVinfo is the wrong place to discuss it. Talking about disposal of light bulbs is fine, but discussion of problems with your town's cardboard pickups and supermarket shopping bags isn't.

Hope this helps resolve your confusion.

Copy that, understood. Back to the topic of the original post...

I just want to know whether I need to sell all my incandescent fresnels whilst they're still woth something or indeed, whether, as a responsible citizen I should be using them at all.

Liam.

Liam,

I know Boyd already answered this, but I want to explain a bit more. DVINFO has a strong policy of 'neutrality'. There are other places on the internet where polarizing topics of discussion turn into all out flame wars and personal attacks. With that in mind, we as moderators look at any topic that might spiral into a heated discussion of for and against posts and take a fairly aggressive approach to stopping things before they can get started.

Chris also wants threads to stay on topic and for each post to have a positive contribution to the discussion at hand. His terminology is 'high signal, low noise'.

We do run a fairly tight ship and that has a direct benefit to everyone who comes here looking for relevant information. No wading through personal rants, politics, platform wars, etc. to find what you're looking for.

Best regards,

Greg Boston

As the primary arbiter of DV Info Net policy, allow me to help.

There's nothing wrong with discussing environmentally sound ways of disposing of CFLs, or sharing knowledge about good environmental practice in relation to lighting.

What is inappropriate, is when those discussions drift into political areas of what is right or wrong for the environment in general. For example, the topic of "why incandescent bulbs are being banned around the world." It's not a subject of debate here. I guess it could be a subject of report, from a practical perspective relating to videography, but it's not a subject for debate. There are two reasons for this.

First reason is, while incandescent bulbs are indeed being banned around the world for environmental reasons, those who oppose the notion are NOT going to change that fact by posting on a message board. The only thing that posting on a message board accomplishes for these people, is to vent their ire and frustration about this particular legislation. And you know what, I don't want that on my site. I don't want my name or my brand associated with that kind of political content. Let these people post their anti-government or anti-environment rants on their *own* message board, or blog, or whatever. I'm a firm believer in freedom of speech -- I wish some of these people would exercise their freedom of speech, instead of disrespecting mine.

Second reason is related to the first, but it's on a much broader scale. While those who oppose the notion of incandescent bulbs being banned around the world for environmental reasons can't change this fact by posting on my boards, neither can they change the minds of those who support the notion. Therefore such debates are pointless unless the purpose is to specifically disrupt the fabric of the community here.

In other words, to put it simply, stubborn people must realize that they cannot change the minds of other stubborn people. The only thing is stubborn person (i.e., a person of "strong political convictions" whether they're left or right) can accomplish here, is to drive others away from this site with their blow-hard political rhetoric. And I certainly don't want that to happen. Therefore we don't debate political issues here, as they accomplish *nothing* but the breakdown of an online community.

Those who have been following this thread will note that the moderators took a comment out of public view which criticized Americans. I want to make it clear that it's not the "American-ness" of the comment that was offensive. It's the generalization itself that was offensive, no matter which nationality it referred to. There are folks from countries all over the world that gather here on a regular basis, so let's please try to remain friendly, polite, courteous and respectful to *everyone,* no matter where they come from... but especially those from weak, struggling, poorly developed third-world nations such as Canada.

Hope this helps,

Liam sell them all right now while you still can! ;-) But seriously, how often are you using hard light now for the stuff you're doing? If you're doing interviews and narrative type stuff, soft light for key/fill and hard light for background definitely makes a lot of sense.

Right now for soft light it's fluorescent and collections of LEDs on a panel or some such configuration.

For energy efficient hard light (such as cookie use and other kinds of background lighting) it's some kind of instrument from the metal halide family. Eventually when the super high wattage LEDs of 50w and higher come down in price then you'll have a really interesting portable solution there too. Metal halide is still a bit hot though as well as the high wattage LED.

It seems when we get to the subject of hard light of any kind then the heat comes up again. We're generating more lumens per watt with metal halide so its more efficient in that respect but we're still needing a bit more air conditioning to displace the heat so while its better than tungsten it's still far from ideal.

I don't see any truly "cool" point light technology on the horizon right now with what's known about, but maybe one will be discovered.

Chris, Greg, Boyd, message received, loud and clear. Having missed the offending posting, I was worried the humor police may have taken over but given your comment above, I'm considerably cheered and I completely concur with your policy on this matter.

Now that we've cleared all that up, can we get back on topic?

Richard,
I use hard lights on virtually every shoot I do. Nearly always in combination with soft lights. Though, I've just finished shooting a job that took us all around the UK and to that third-world nation, Canada (Chris's comment, not mine). As I was directing and shooting we took just one fluorescent fixture (your Coollight CL-455) and a couple of large California Sunbounce reflectors. Footage looks knockout (my editors comment, not mine). BTW, the CL-455 stood up to a severe pounding - nearly two thousand miles by road, nine hotels and five plane journeys.

I've got about a dozen Arri fresnels of various shapes and sizes. If they get banned in the near future are metal halide fixtures going to do the job?

Cheers,

Liam.

"I've got about a dozen Arri fresnels of various shapes and sizes. If they get banned in the near future are metal halide fixtures going to do the job?"

Nobody is going to ban tungsten video fixtures in the near future. The only thing that is likely to get banned is the SALE of new tungsten household (in the U.S. known as medium "Edison") bulbs. Tungsten video lights, especially those used intermittently like location lights, have a negligible impact on the world's energy use. A few billion tungsten household bulbs DO make a big impact. Fortunately, there is a fairly easy replacement available in CFLs so we can all start to migrate. I suspect many people will make the switch before any legislation can be implemented anyway.

The metal halide are essentially just what is known as HMI lights today. Think of it this way: How would you like the price of $8,000 HMI lights to fall below $1000? It sounds much more appealing that way, doesn't it? Once a few more kinks are worked out of metal halide, they will replace tungsten naturally without legislation. Check out Richard's coollights site to see how to do it yourself.

I have a feeling that video production would be grandfathered for a while. What other industry do you know of that has such a huge investment in fixtures? Yes, warehouses and grocery stores, malls, etc. all have lots of fixtures but they don't cost the kind of money that a video/film light does. Also, if you want to try your hand at DIY, you'll be able to convert your fresnels with a bit of work when you get ready to. You probably saw my article on the subject.

Anyway, yes, I think metal halide will be looked to as a replacement for tungsten in many cases. In addition, we'll probably be getting more and more choices in the future that will lead to higher CRI's and color temperatures that we like--namely 5600K and even 3200K. It's interesting that the 3200K has been available in metal halide for some time but the CRI is pretty low. I think this will change too. All a company (like Cool Lights for instance) has to do is make a fairly large order and you can specify exactly what you want--including lifetime, color temp and CRI.

I guess the standard in HMI has been daylight for so long that no one really ever decided to offer a 3200K choice there. It just means another bunch of bulbs to stock and there probably wasn't much enthusiasm about that.

This is exactly where we're at. I would already have them ready if it weren't for the fact that a 1200w metal halide takes a bit more attention to build a fixture for than the lower wattage ones. We've got a 575w solution we can offer now. On a 1200w, the ballast is more of a monster and the fixture has to be a bit "beefier."

I doubt I'll offer a fixture larger than 1200w in the near future though because I think most of my customers are operating off household/office type current and once you get to the next logical size up (2500w) then it starts to get more of a challenge to find reliable power for it that won't blow a breaker. Once we get these out though and get some experience with them and user feedback we'll see what else would be interesting to offer.

"We've got a 575w solution we can offer now."

Details please!

How many lumens on that 575W? What would make a good backlight for an interview with the CL-455 as a soft key? Would the 575W be overkill? I'm guessing that a CL-455, a hard light as a backlight, and a reflector bouncing a bit of the key and backlight would make a nice portable interview kit. With it all being daylight balanced, it could all be used to fight the sun in a backlit outdoor setup.

Well, I guess we can always go back to arclights :-). I've always wanted an excuse for that, and they clearly don't count as incandescents.

Seriously, although there is discussion on this topic, I don't expect a ban on incandescent lamps anytime soon. Even if there is, I expect that Marcus is right about the focus being on household bulbs rather than specialized fixtures. Although it's a big deal to us, the number of quartz halogen lamps for video fixtures sold by an entity like GE is a tiny number.

The lumen output of a 575w metal halide is about 43000 (about the equivalent of a 2K instrument). It's really way overkill for that kind of stuff in my opinion. I think people are really going to be surprised at how bright these things are. The 150w test fresnel I have is incredibly bright at 13000 lumens (which is about like a 650w tungsten). The original 150w test par I have is seemingly much brighter though when you look at it. I think the difference is a great special par lens and a much better parabolic reflector than you normally find on a fresnel.

It's hard to fight people's perceptions and what they're accustomed to though. I decided the 150w instrument I offer should be a fresnel because that's what most are used to using in portable situations. I think that's what you'd want to use in most interview situations for back lighting. If you're "fighting the sun" though it's possible the 575w might come in more handy.

I don't have a picture of the 150w fresnel yet because I haven't finalized the fixture. I had a fixture I found and really liked, very much like a 300w arri but it's just a slight bit too small to put the 150w single ended bulb in without major modifications so I'm searching for another suitable fixture, keeping in mind compactness, weight and portability.

The 575w par is in a really attractive package. This is not a cheap and thin pressed aluminum par 64 can mind you. It's a cast aluminum, really tough fixture that can take some punishment. I've included a picture of the prototype unit. There will probably be a regular par lens on this unit in the final one with a choice of some other lenses. The ballast is attached to the yoke on the other side of the unit. I've included a profile picture. The bulb goes in at the back. The entire back piece comes out with the bulb attached. Just replace the bulb, put the socket piece back in and you're ready. Transporting the fixture with the bulb inside appears to be no problem as I've done it several times.

A neat surprise happened yesterday. I had requested a sample 150w single ended bulb from another manufacturer and they sent me a 3000K version with CRI 85. We knew there were these choices available but typically the CRI is really low on those 3000K units. Now we'll have a choice, at least on the 150w model of a tungsten color or daylight as we do on our fluorescent models. People will be pleasantly surprised when they find out they can get an HMI type unit in 3000K also ;-) to match their other lighting.

When I was in college in Waco, I had a part time job in the Baylor campus auditorium. We had two large arclight spots. The entire team took turns on who took what post during a show. I always hated running those spots. The smell, the heat, changing the rods, being up high where the girls couldn't see us ;-), etc. I for one don't miss that at all. Of course, all the spots now use these metal halide type bulbs--pretty much the same one's I'll be using in the 575w and 1200w fixtures.

"Now we'll have a choice, at least on the 150w model of a tungsten color or daylight as we do on our fluorescent models. People will be pleasantly surprised when they find out they can get an HMI type unit in 3000K also ;-) to match their other lighting."

That sounds great!

" I had a fixture I found and really liked, very much like a 300w arri but it's just a slight bit too small to put the 150w single ended bulb in .."

If the 150 puts out as much light as a 650 tungsten maybe you should use those fixtures for a 100w or 75w, something that would approximate a 250 or 300w tungsten.

The picture of the par looks great, very slick. Can't wait to check out the fresnels.

Hi Mark,

Yes I thought about 70w or 100w bulbs too. It's just a question of getting too scattered out in product offerings. There are really infinite choices I could make available and if it wasn't for differences in the sockets necessary for different size bulbs and ballast wattage outputs, we could have total choice of wattage in all the fixtures. I can definitely visualize a super small fresnel with a 70w bulb in it at some point. The 70w G12 single ended bulb puts out about 5600 lumens but unfortunately it is the same exact size as a 150w. Yes, it means they can be used interchangeably with the right ballast choices too but because the size is the same it doesn't mean you can necessarily put the 70w in a smaller package than you can the 150w if you see the dilemma. But there may be other, more compact bulbs out there that I haven't discovered yet.

Heck, look at the market and let it make your decisions. Don't let us kooks decide everything. What is the most popular type of portable light? I think everyone would agree that the Arri 650 is pretty much ubiquitous. It sounds like you are on the right track with the 150W MH being a small (but not micro) fresnel fixture. It also seems that the larger 575W MH is a good idea because it will be powerful enough to fight solar backlight but won't blow a circuit breaker. If people need more light than that, they cal always buy two. :)

One of the big problems with carbon arc lights is that they emit carbon monoxide, and therefore need to be in an area with good ventillation. I always found this a little scary, since fire codes generally mandated them to be in enclosed booths. A ventillation system failure could be bad...

Yes I know about this now but we didn't know about that back then. It got seriously stuffy in that room and now I know why. Before I thought it was just the heat. Carbon arc is one technology I don't miss...

Interesting article comparing CFL to incandescent:

http://www.popularmechanics.com/home...99.html?page=1

Good article Marcus. Interesting that the Home Depot N:Vision which I've been recommending for some time got an "A" in the comparison test so it ranks up there as the highest in quality rating across the board. No A+ on any bulb yet though.