LED floodlight

[Tomo]

I have to take Jivemaster to task when he asserts that LEDs output is only a fifth of a conventional filament lamp. He must have been viewing the spec sheet upside down. Light output of LED fixtures is several times that of an equivalent power in a filament lamp.

And I have to point out that Lm/W is not what Jivemaster was talking about, and quite frankly, in this industry it's usually irrelevant.

 

What matters in the REAL output, and even more importantly the quality of the beam.

LED softlights for TV/film will arrive fairly soon, as multiple distributed sources could be an advantage in this situation, but for theatre we want an even beam, and we HATE RGB colour-fringing.

 

LED fixtures are still much dimmer than their tungsten counterparts - and I'm surprised at your contention that a Palco is as bright as a CP62.

 

Having used both, I can tell you that for pastel shades and white it is a LONG way behind.

On the other hand, for saturated primary colour it is brighter.

 

You can see this for yourself if you watch GMTV - their cyc is lit by a set of Palco floods rigged about 1m from the top of the cyc. All the tungsten and discharge lights in their rig overpower the Palcos if made to compete - which is great for the shows they do of course, as it means they can mix almost any colour cyc they want and still project effects onto it.

Makes a pretty good Chromakey colour as well.

 

I'd say that the Palcos make extremely good cyc and architectural lights, but that's about it really.

[Graham Threader]

Dear Tomo

 

My point was that far from being only a fraction of the light output of a filament lamp an LED is usually several times the brightness when viewed on a watt by watt basis. It is important for potential users to appreciate the efficiency of LED fixtures. I would not pretend that a Palco wash on a cyc could compete with a rig of tungsten and discharge lanterns in a studio, but neither could a similar number of parcans. Equally it's usually the case that cyc lighting struggles against the general rig. Isn't it?

 

 

1 LED fixtures are still much dimmer than their tungsten counterparts - and I'm surprised at your contention that a Palco is as bright as a CP62.

 

2 Having used both, I can tell you that for pastel shades and white it is a LONG way behind.

3 On the other hand, for saturated primary colour it is brighter.

 

 

Above is a quote of part of your post. If you look at sentence 3 you state that under conditions when deep filtering is being used the Palco IS brighter. Where little or no filtering is used (sentence 2) the CP62 is brighter. I am happy to agree with that statement, but I would also point out that lanterns are used with filtering far more than they are without. If you re-read my quote I said 'roughly' to allow for the differences between additive and subtractive colour mixing without getting as involved as I am now. CP62/Palco = 1000/130 = 7.69, but I offered an efficiency factor of only 7 to understate the gain and make more of an allowance for working with some filter requirement for the CP62.

 

So compare sentence 3 with sentence 1, and you have contradicted yourself (at least under some conditions).

 

I do not pretend that LEDs in general, and the Palco in particular, are the 'be all and end all' of lighting now or in the future. They do have their uses, especially where power supplies are limited, are relatively easy to produce in waterproof versions, and are a boon where dimmer channels are in short supply.

 

You can run 20 Palco off a 13A supply, and I know you will agree with me that they would be a lot brighter than 3 CP62.