Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us
Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network
PhotoKB Home
Discussion Groups
Digital Photography
Digital PhotoDSLR CamerasZLR CamerasPoint & Shoot Cameras
Film Photography
35 mmLarge FormatMedium formatDarkroomFilm and LabsOther Equipment
Photo Technique
Nature PhotographyPeople PhotographyTechnique General
General Photo Topics
General TopicsAustralian PhotographyUK Photography
DirectoryPhoto Clubs

Photo Forum / Digital Photography / DSLR Cameras / January 2007

Tip: Looking for answers? Try searching our database.

Alternate lighting sources

Thread view: 
Enable EMail Alerts  Start New Thread
Thread rating: 
Alan Browne - 02 Jan 2007 20:17 GMT
Okay, this is a bit OT as it's really an energy savings article.

An odd hero has come to light in the form of Wal*Merde.

They're pushing compact flourescent lights real hard as CF sales are not
doing well in the US.  Yet the energy impact of this form of lighting is
not only 4X less energy for a given amount of light, but longer lasting
and a certain payback even in the areas with the cheapest power rates.

http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/2007/01/02/business/0102-biz-websubBULB.gif

The one bit that irks me is the implied lower total mercury emissions of
CF v. incadescent.  If your power source is hydro, then incandescent
will be lower in mercury emissions (damn near 0).  If your power source
is coal, then the mercury output will be higher.

For photo use: B&W, less power, no change in the image.
               Color film: greenish hue (use magenta filter)

Cheers,
Alan
Signature

-- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm
--        r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm
--      [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin
--                   e-meil: Remove FreeLunch.

tomm42 - 03 Jan 2007 13:45 GMT
On Jan 2, 3:17 pm, Alan Browne <alan.bro...@Freelunchvideotron.ca>
wrote:
> Okay, this is a bit OT as it's really an energy savings article.
>
[quoted text clipped - 22 lines]
> --      [SI] gallery & rulz:http://www.pbase.com/shootin
> --                   e-meil: Remove FreeLunch.

I've been trying to convert my house to compact fluorescents, in
Vermont you can buy 6 and get reembursed by the state. The problem I
have is that CFs have a high out of the box failure rate and are more
fragile than incandescent bulb. You also need a relativly tight fixure
to use them in bathrooms, as they are very sensitive to moisture.
Now are you sugesting to make banks of CF bulbs to do photography? A
lot of photographers use very expensive tube fluorescent banks with
scan backs and some video (very heavy). A hundred watt incandescent
equivelent (25 watt CF) isn't enough light to do much with. Get a bank
of 6 and you might have something. There is still the fragile
issue,though they are packing them in flood light configurations which
seem to be sturdier $4.50 at Home Despot. This is an interewsting idea.

Tom
 
Sign In
Join
My Latest Posts
My Monitored Threads
My Blog
My Photo Gallery
My Profile
My Homepage

Start New Thread
Enable EMail Alerts
Rate this Thread



©2009 Advenet LLC   Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.