Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Someone should probably start a bright home lighting company (2019)

lincolnquirk.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

261–270 of 294 posts

Re: Someone should probably start a bright home lighting company (2019)

#261

Post by MengerSponge »

rattray wrote: post #210
nine_k wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Warmth" and "naturalness" are produced by high CRI index (90+). I have 8 lamps with CRI 90+ in my living room, at 5000K color temperature, 1500 lumens each. They produce nice light that seamlessly mixes with daytime sunlight from the window: they seem to have the same color. I also have a few LED strip installation over desks and tables, very bright at max dimmer setting. A diffuser is a must, even though it lowers…

Can you share a link / the name of the product?

I'm a big fan of Seoul Semiconductor's SunLike LEDs.

http://www.seoulsemicon.com/en/technology/sunlike/casestudy/

Re: Someone should probably start a bright home lighting company (2019)

#262

Post by voisin »

speakeron wrote: post #250
uoaei wrote: post #240

Earlier quoted context omitted.

All I've heard is the danger of calcium precipitating out of your blood and causing arterial blockages. Apparently D3 potentiates this so that the concentration of blood-borne calcium doesn't need to be as high for this to begin. I've always been wary of going up to max-dose levels for that reason.

You should take D3 with vitamin K2 (talk with your doctor first if you're on blood-thinning medications) to avoid calcium being dumped into soft tissues (K2 ensures it preferentially goes into bones). It's a good idea to get your vitamin D status tested yearly and aim to be at least 50 ng/ml (120 nmol/l), but not more than 80 ng/ml (200 nmol/l). As an example for dosages: I take about 7000 IU of vitamin D3 and 180 mc…

How did you determine that ratio of D3 to K2?

Re: Someone should probably start a bright home lighting company (2019)

#263

Post by conductr »

traceroute66 wrote: post #61

> Someone should probably start a bright home lighting company Such a thing already exists. Its called a lighting design company. People need to admit that lighting (like cryptography) is hard, and that if you're serious about "doing it right" you need to bring in a suitably skilled professional. Each house/apartment is different and every room within it is different, you'll never be able to magically buy good lighti…

I went this route on a home renovation and it was worth every penny. I’m overly picky about lighting in general. Temperature, direction, intensity, and especially shadows. I was recently at a friends house that did a remodel and while plating my food in their kitchen my own shadow was cast on my plate and the food in front of me on their countertop. I felt so odd like a mild inconvenience I forgot existed. I told him jokingly he needs a refund from his contractor.

Re: Someone should probably start a bright home lighting company (2019)

#264

Post by zargon »

uoaei wrote: post #242
teknopaul wrote: post #144

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I cant find it again but I read an article about how brightness goes up with technology and human spend roughly the same proportion of income on light. Kind of disproving the led efficiency is good for the environment argument. Not revolutionary, better to break that pattern.

You contradict yourself. If humans spend same proportion of income on lumens, and you get more lumens per watt, then you will use less wattage per the same proportion of income. Ergo LEDs are more efficient.

Are you thinking about the cost of the physical lights? Because what is being discussed is the cost of energy.

Re: Someone should probably start a bright home lighting company (2019)

#265

Post by Retric »

ghostly_s wrote: post #192
Retric wrote: post #179

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I spoke to a physiatrist who considered full spectrum light to be essential in the light boxes. Don’t know about the actual research on the topic.

The entire market of SAD lights was fluorescents pre-LEDs, they can be made just as "full spectrum" as LEDs are (by which I mean neither is capable of true full spectrum, just an approximation with appropriate phosphors).

Incandescents can actually produce a continuous spectrum, so I am guess this is and was just misuse of the term.

Re: Someone should probably start a bright home lighting company (2019)

#266

Post by kragen »

Retric wrote: post #265
ghostly_s wrote: post #192

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The entire market of SAD lights was fluorescents pre-LEDs, they can be made just as "full spectrum" as LEDs are (by which I mean neither is capable of true full spectrum, just an approximation with appropriate phosphors).

Incandescents can actually produce a continuous spectrum, so I am guess this is and was just misuse of the term.

Yeah, I assumed you were saying that the physiatrist was insisting on the use of incandescents for that reason. I don't know why someone would interpret you as saying that LEDs were superior to fluorescents, since obviously neither one produces full-spectrum light!

Re: Someone should probably start a bright home lighting company (2019)

#267

Post by seltzered_ »

lazide wrote: post #253
seltzered_ wrote: post #227

I used to think about this deeply, and have flipped the idea around - why can't we be doing more work (including writing and other computer work) outdoors? As a start, I've started https://www.reddit.com/r/ErgoMobileComputers/ and been going on stretches of doing laptop work outside more. By having a setup where you've either got the screen closer to the face (less glare) or an e-ink display, I've managed being outsi…

The issue I have is that being outdoors is distracting due to constantly changing environment. If I'm trying to deep focus on something, it doesn't help. Even worse if the environment is somewhat uncontrolled (wilderness, city cafe) as there are potential safety issues if I truly deep focus. If I'm doing meetings, talking to folks, churning through a bunch of bs tasks, etc. then it's nice.

So far I've been learning this takes time to get used to (i.e. trying for multi-day streaks of trying to work outside), and:

- The ergonomics / screen setup really make a difference in whether you can tolerate being there for 1 hour versus 4 hours.

- I've been pretty intentional about finding spots that have are quiet with some constant (e.g. creekside babbling), if really needed headphones can help deal with wind noise.

- If going to a coffee shop/bar look for places with outdoor seating in a rear area where you're not going to be distracted by cars driving by.

- You'll need some old thin wool gloves with finger cutouts to deal with coldish days.

Re: Someone should probably start a bright home lighting company (2019)

#268

Post by uoaei »

zargon wrote: post #264
uoaei wrote: post #242

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You contradict yourself. If humans spend same proportion of income on lumens, and you get more lumens per watt, then you will use less wattage per the same proportion of income. Ergo LEDs are more efficient.

Are you thinking about the cost of the physical lights? Because what is being discussed is the cost of energy.

Watt-hours are energy. If cost of energy is decreasing and you get more lumens per watt with LEDs then the benefits stack, they do not cancel.

Re: Someone should probably start a bright home lighting company (2019)

#269

Post by oliveshell »

pbhjpbhj wrote: post #254
BoxOfRain wrote: post #223

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wonder how much the traditional British pessimism has to do with the fact our winters are an SAD magnet if there ever was one, very short days due to the high latitude and the kind of grey soul-penetrating dampness of it being just cold enough to make you miserable but not cold enough for the ground to ever properly freeze for long. I definitely found taking vitamin D supplements helps with the seasonal blues, I'd…

Would you tell us a little about your photophobia, I've never heard of anyone having that before. Thank you.

I’m not the parent commenter, but I’ve heard ‘photophobia’ used to refer to the sort of extreme light sensitivity experienced by migraine sufferers: not a ‘fear of light’ per se, but rather the perception of bright light as an unpleasant or even painful stimulus.

Re: Someone should probably start a bright home lighting company (2019)

#270

Post by rattray »

MengerSponge wrote: post #261
rattray wrote: post #210

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can you share a link / the name of the product?

I'm a big fan of Seoul Semiconductor's SunLike LEDs. http://www.seoulsemicon.com/en/technology/sunlike/casestudy/

Thanks! Looks like they make the GE Sunfilled bulb, which is available for $2.57/bulb right now at Lowe's: https://www.lowes.com/pd/GE-GE-SUNFILLED-60W-A21-5000K-1CT/1...

They claim to have a CRI of 97. They're dimmable and claim to be circadian-rhythm-friendly by not having a "blue spike", but don't claim to dim to a warmer tone.

Bought 21 of them for use with the 7-bulb splitter that Ben Kuhn now recommends, linked elsewhere in this thread: https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B01FKIE6M4/ref=as_li_ss_tl...

Post reply on HN