Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 14 of 14

Thread: 445 requirements compared to 473 for mixing white

  1. #11
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Vancouver, Canada
    Posts
    327

    Default

    When I had my green turned up way too much, I noticed more the effects on the palette and number of available colours. White still seemed a pretty white, maybe a tad yellow. I have a feeling would have been much more visible in a side by side comparison.

  2. #12
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Amsterdam, NL
    Posts
    2,098

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by mccarrot View Post
    With 445 you need less power to get a white, but what about the brightness of the separate blue color only.

    Chroma shows:
    1W of 445nm gives 28 luminous flux
    1W of 473nm gives 70 luminous flux

    Yesterday evening I had my 445nm running at a safe 400mW but to me the dark blue looked almost as bright as my 150mW 473nm, tonnight I will put the next to eacht other and compare side by side.

  3. #13
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Eindhoven, The Netherlands
    Posts
    921

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by -bart- View Post
    @ smog
    Do you blame speaker builders for trying to approach a flat phase and frequency response and using the latest insights in acoustics ?

    We all experience music differently, so why bother looking at a frequency response of a speaker in the first place? Surely people should trust their eyes and ears when purchasing a new pair of speakers, and not look at graphs. But you can not deny that taste is subjective.?
    Using a flat phase/frequency response (just as using 6500K white in Chroma) is good for estabilishing a baseline, which you can then adapt to suit your perception best.

    Bluntly put, if I install a high-tech digital EQ in my stereo system, mike my living room and measure the frequency response from every end of the room, and hammer the EQ so my phase and frequency responses are as flat as they can be, the whole music experience is gone.

    Sure, from a mathematical, computational point of view, the response of my audio system is correct. But it's just those little quirks and oddities that give a sound system (player, amplifier, speakers) a specific colour, often to your taste. That's why you chose it in the first place.

    Lighting fixtures and lasers are no different. Some lighting techies really don't like the gobos or colour wheels on a Robe spotlight and are lyrical about Martins, and the other way round, just as some people here don't want anything but 473nm, argon, or mixed gas for their blue or full colour projectors.

  4. #14
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Norway
    Posts
    34

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Stoney3K View Post
    Using a flat phase/frequency response (just as using 6500K white in Chroma) is good for estabilishing a baseline, which you can then adapt to suit your perception best.

    Bluntly put, if I install a high-tech digital EQ in my stereo system, mike my living room and measure the frequency response from every end of the room, and hammer the EQ so my phase and frequency responses are as flat as they can be, the whole music experience is gone.

    Sure, from a mathematical, computational point of view, the response of my audio system is correct. But it's just those little quirks and oddities that give a sound system (player, amplifier, speakers) a specific colour, often to your taste. That's why you chose it in the first place.

    Lighting fixtures and lasers are no different. Some lighting techies really don't like the gobos or colour wheels on a Robe spotlight and are lyrical about Martins, and the other way round, just as some people here don't want anything but 473nm, argon, or mixed gas for their blue or full colour projectors.

    QFT!


    fifteenchars

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •