Comparative Lighting Study

[Chameleopatrick]

I know you are looking for a scientific study, but that is most definitely not what you will find on a forum, that takes money, time and a laboratory setting.

On a side note, ISO 9000 can be a joke, I have seen companies get it who no way deserved the so called prestige. Its a corporate standard that puts wool over many eyes. Just because someone says they are ISO 9000 certified or follow those standards, doesn't mean they are necessarily following it or running things better than someone who hasn't gone through the trouble to get certified or research the standards. I personally have recent experience with a company that was ISO 9001 certified and got shut down for serious violations after they passed their ISO audit.

I feel many use these terms to try to elevate themselves unnecessarily.

You are entitled to your opinion about ISO but, Boeing, Sikorsky, Northrup Grumman, the Freedom Group, GE, Spirit, Colt Defense and my company would say, You have a very limited understanding of quality process management. There is a reason its recognized by international companies as best practices. Im not saying a guy on a lizard forum should adhere to them but anything less is truly mom and pop. No self elevation is required. Results follow actions. The word " study" in this specific context, implies credible traceable research.

Regardless. Good luck on the observations.

 

[Mike Fisher]

Just because someone says they are ISO 9000 certified or follow those standards, doesn't mean they are necessarily following it or running things better than someone who hasn't gone through the trouble to get certified or research the standards.

Agreed, I once had some parts made by an ISO certified machine shop where none of the parts were in spec, and half were completely unusable. The defects were obvious to the naked eye, no micrometers needed. After a lengthy process of recovering my money, I invested in some metal working tools and now make that same part myself.

Before I hired them, their main sales pitch was that they were ISO 9000 certified and they had the paperwork to prove it.

 

[pigglett79]

You are entitled to your opinion about ISO but, Boeing, Sikorsky, Northrup Grumman, the Freedom Group, GE, Spirit, Colt Defense and my company would say, You have a very limited understanding of quality process management. There is a reason its recognized by international companies as best practices. Im not saying a guy on a lizard forum should adhere to them but anything less is truly mom and pop. No self elevation is required. Results follow actions. The word " study" in this specific context, implies credible traceable research.

Regardless. Good luck on the observations.

We can agree to disagree. There are many quality companies who are far from mom and pop without this certification. And you in fact did say that a guy on a lizard forum should adhere to them because you questioned it to a guy on a lizard forum.

 

[fluxlizard]

I know you are a college graduate and was hoping to see another member attempt present quality usable information to enhance chameleon care.

Just wanted to point out that usable information that enhances chameleon care does not necessarily have to come about from the meticulously collected data, nor from college graduates (scientific method is gradeschool level stuff anyway).

Much good husbandry and useful information comes about from simple trials and observation and some amount of speculation all along the way from hypothosis to conclusions drawn from experience .

Most of your own husbandry probably reflects your experience rather than careful scientific study. Yet I'm sure you feel confident in the value of your experience when you apply it to your own husbandry.

Conclusions drawn from real life experience and observation are definately of value to me, especially when they come from someone who has many years of husbandry experience under their belt, giving that person a good deal of experience to draw comparisons and conclusions from.

Keep in mind, knowledge that is not of apparant value to you simply because you are not confident in the method by which it was acquired or verified, does not necessarily mean that it is in fact incorrect or valueless. Or that it is not of value to some of the rest of us.

At the very least, experience might help some of us decide if the new fangled lights are worth investing in for a trial of our own or not. Or inspire someone such as yourself to take things a step further with a more scientific study.

 

[Chameleopatrick]

We can agree to disagree. There are many quality companies who are far from mom and pop without this certification. And you in fact did say that a guy on a lizard forum should adhere to them because you questioned it to a guy on a lizard forum.

First, I do agree. There are hundreds of thousands of quality companies out there without certs. More quality companies without certs by a hundred to one probably.

But what I asked were methods. Mike claimed he really didn't have any real metrics( and that's fine). Then I gave the example of ISO as the source of my reasoning for asking and possibly subtly suggesting ideas for measurement. I NEVER said he should. Please don't assume my tone.
In closing, as you can see, I ASKED what he was planning to utilize, not said he should.


What I actually said was.

"Couple more questions.

How are you verifying the D3 content and ratio thats going to be used?
Are you weighing the amount of D3 in conjunction with the weight of the individuals included in the Study?
If so what unit of measure will you be using? Grams? milligrams? IU?
Do you have a solar meter?
If so what brand and when was it calibrated?

These are ISO 9000 quality standards. Are you planning on using a specific testing standard?"


I've been preaching great lighting for a while, Mike will be joining the chorus soon enough.

 

[Yak]

hI Mike
I have no lights
I have no educational background or higher academic achievements
I am new to the hobby
heck half of the time I don't know what I am talking about... but for what is worth, you're a good guy and I support your idea.

 

[Provancha65]

If you would like to examine/include zoo-med or arcadia lights in your study we can supply you with zoomed 18" t8 bulbs, 22" and 34" t5 bulbs. If you are interested let me know since you are essentially our neighbor in regards to travelling distance.

 

[Mike Fisher]

hI Mike
I have no lights
I have no educational background or higher academic achievements
I am new to the hobby
heck half of the time I don't know what I am talking about... but for what is worth, you're a good guy and I support your idea.

Thanks Yak.

 

[Mike Fisher]

If you would like to examine/include zoo-med or arcadia lights in your study we can supply you with zoomed 18" t8 bulbs, 22" and 34" t5 bulbs. If you are interested let me know since you are essentially our neighbor in regards to travelling distance.

PM sent.

 

[Mike Fisher]

The package from www.lightyourreptiles.com arrived! Todd really knows how to pack professionally.

I didn't have time to set up correctly but the new fixture appears to be about 50% brighter than my old lights. That in itself is impressive.

I'll update the thread with some photos soon.

 

[Mike Fisher]

Time for a guessing game....Photos of each cage, one with the new lightyourreptiles fixture containing HO Arcadia 6% UVB and 6500K and one with my usual setup, a shop light fixture with two 6500K bulbs. One photo of each by themselves, and a photo of them side by side.

Can you tell which is which?

 

[Mike Fisher]

I milled my adjusted D3 supplement today. All ingredients are weighed on a NIST calibrated Sartorius digital laboratory scale with resolution to .01 gram.

My usual supplement is two parts calcium to one part magnesium in molecular weight, nutritional yeast for B vitamins and flavor and 20 IU/kg D3. I use it on feeders every day.

The adjusted supplement is the same except for the D3 cut in half to 10 IU/kg.

Photo is of my ball mill with ceramic media and milled powder.

 

[Chameleopatrick]

Mike, If you received a 36" T5ho fixture I can send you some 5000K bulbs that will blow away any 6500K bulb. The 6500K is dim and washes out the color in comparison . No charge. I had to buy a case of 50 so I have a lifetime supply.

 

[Mike Fisher]

Mike, If you received a 36" T5ho fixture I can send you some 5000K bulbs that will blow away any 6500K bulb. The 6500K is dim and washes out the color in comparison . No charge. I had to buy a case of 50 so I have a lifetime supply.

Patrick, thank you for the offer.

Todd sent a 24" HO fixture. I've always liked the 6500K's, I know a lot of people don't like the blue color, but I think it's nice. The plants like it better too. My LED spotlights in the rear of the cages are 5000K and they balance it out a bit.

You can see by the comparison photos that it is hard to tell the difference between the new and old, but in real life it is easier. No hints yet.

 

[Mike Fisher]

Nobody brave enough to hazard a guess eh?

My initial impression of the HO fixture was not quite what I had expected from all of the hype. I was expecting to be blown away by it. My actual impression was "this is nice". I did not have the impression that I had been living in the dark ages and just discovered the light. The visible light spectrum does look more natural than the cages next to it for sure.

You can tell it is brighter without a lux meter, I'd estimate somewhere between 25 and 50 percent. I'll be putting together a lux meter soon so I can get some numbers.

The really nice thing is the smaller bulbs allow a smaller fixture. It takes up less room on top of the enclosure and the "Tropic Blaze" fixture is well made and looks good in black. Yes, better than my white powder coated shop lights.

The most important thing is assessing how the chameleon responds to the new lighting. So far, she has been spending a lot more time toward the front of the enclosure whereas before she stayed in the back most of the time. She seemed a little freaked out by the new fixture at first, but that is typical of any new changes to their environment.

I introduced the male to her cage today because I believe she would be receptive and wanted to see how the male would act. He's been stubborn about breeding under lights but has no problem in sunlight. Well, no change on that front. He is still not in the mood.

I'll give it a few more days before I reveal which cage photo(s) have the new lights. Pics below of my camera shy female Kinyongia multituberculata under the new lights. No flash used.

 

[Venutus1]

When we had talked about it, we were hoping actually some other companies / people would offer up some lights/ bulbs or something to get a few different types going.

Since I personally would LOVE to have the comparisons out there.

But so far, no body else has chimed in.

To be fair, it is not like they are all being solicited to participate.

So if anyone knows somebody who knows somebody who may want to send Mike a light to use in this exercise...
Feel free to put the "bug" in their ear.

Thank you.
Todd

ps.
speaking of bugs...
big thank++ you to all those that have wished me well privately and publically (I have been quite under the weather (w/ a very bad bug), but doing better. That is why you haven't seen me post in while.
I appreciate your kind words and encouragement.

Sorry Mike. I misunderstood.

I saw "comparative lighting study" and thought, GREAT!



Im not judging, just clarifying.

I know you are a college graduate and was hoping to see another member attempt present quality usable information to enhance chameleon care. I also know that you are busy with other important things going on. As a fellow business owner I get it.

Really though, words matter. People come here to learn, including me. Unfortunately so many people just want to offer information that they don't even know themselves to remain relevant. I have even offered to others( a moderator) my own resources to prove theories, but when it came down to it, it was easier to just post assumptions or made up theories rather than prove them. We're all busy.

I only mentioned ISO standards because I know you get it. ISO practices ensure credibility (as you know). It may come across as the chameleon police when I ask questions but in all honesty we need more members questioning not less.

I hope you do get the time eventually to invest in a real study. Sincerely.

 

[Mike Fisher]

Time for the reveal....

Pic number two is the Tropic Blaze fixture, and the cage on the left in the third pic. Easy now isn't it?

I have the parts to build my lux meter on the way so we can get some comparison numbers on them. It won't be a super fancy one that will break down the spectrum spread, but it will give visible brightness. I'll post specs on the chip I'm using when we get to the test.

Right or wrong, I have always believed that proper diet and supplementation can compensate for lack of UVB, but there is no substitute for lumens. Eventually I will be assembling a high power LED fixture so that I can compare the light output from all three setups.

And Todd is right, I'm not out there begging for light bulbs, that's not my style. If any other company wants in on this somewhat subjective comparison, they'll have to contact me. Kudos to Todd for recognizing the validity of an honest comparison by someone who has burned a lot of bulbs and is somewhat set in his ways.

 

[Mike Fisher]

Test fixture

I assembled a quick test fixture (an empty cage)with an Arduino and TSL 2561 light sensor. The light sensor was located 16 inches from the fixtures.

This first test was with just the florescent fixtures for a direct comparison. The lightyourreptiles.com fixture tested @ 84 visible, 1296 lux. My shoplight fixture tested @ 62 visible, 892 lux. Roughly 30% difference, so that correlates to my eyeball guess of 25 to 50 percent.

First pic shows my caveman test fixture, second is the HO test (in blue), third is my shoplight test (in green), and the fourth is a graphic for the light sensor chip.

Sorry for the poor readability, I should have used longer leads to get the LCD screen out of the bright lights.

 

[Mike Fisher]

For the next test, I added basking lights that mimic my current setups.

Bulbs are a PAR38 Toshiba 20.3W LED rated 1000 lumens, and a PAR20 Sylvania 50W halogen rated 550 lumens. Both bulbs are in standard aluminum reflectors resting on top of the cage near the back corners.

That brought up the numbers in the HO test to 259 visible, 2639 lux, and the shoplight test to 194 visible 1906 lux.

So with the added lumens from the basking lights, the difference in visible cage brightness is roughly around 25 percent.

So the more lights you add, or if you use higher wattage bulbs in addition to the florescent fixtures, the less the disparity between the two. Just simple physics there, but I am really surprised that the disparity is not higher.

Now this only addresses brightness, not UV content or spectrum differences. Nor does it address intangibles like how your chameleons and plants look. I really like how everything looks under the new HO fixture from www.lightyourreptiles.com much better than my old shop lights. Not surprising really, since they are old technology that I have been able to supplement with new LED and halogen technology in my basking bulbs.

First pic is the basking bulbs used. Second pic is the HO test (in blue). Third pic is the shop light test (in green). Again sorry for the poor LCD readability under the bright lights.

 

[Venutus1]

Hi Mike,
Just something to keep in mind as far as visible light and brightness goes...

I know you know this but just so readers do too--

Our eyes can not see UV A, but the animals can,
UV A/B bulbs in general all will seem less bright.


on an Arcadia t5 bulb, as well as any other UV a/b tubes that are not junk...

ALL the electricity is not going to produce just "visible" light like a non UV emitting HO t5 tube does.

Thus, they can seem less bright to our eyes and/or any instruments that are just calculating "human eye" visible light.


30% +/- is in the UV A Range
6% (or 12% in the D3+ tubes) is in the UV B Range

So as far as our eyes go--
the ho t5 arcadia bulb is only emitting around 55-60% of its total LIGHT OUT-PUT in the visual range that our human eyes can perceive.

I hope that made sense...

Thank you Mike.




now, a bit more about UV A~

From John Courtney- Smith

Top UV and Reptile expert and author:

"UVA:
Unlike humans, who have ‘trichromatic’ vision, enabling us to see only three primary colours - red, green and blue, we now know that many reptiles, amphibians and other species, have ‘tetrachromatic’ vision. This enables them to see the shorter UVA wavelengths (320-400 nm) of the spectrum that form a part of natural sunlight. Reds are redder and greens are greener – life without UV would be the equivalent of us seeing everything in black and white, only worse. This UVA, or fourth primary, can be critical for behaviour and even affect appetite. A reluctant feeder may need UVA light to stimulate its appetite. UVA is also needed to induce reproductive behaviour. Lizards have been found to possess ultra violet reflectance patterns on their skin, which indicate reproductive glands in particular. Female panther chameleons seek out UV light when preparing to lay eggs. Depriving a reptile of UVA light would be like making it live in a darkened room."

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

For the next test, I added basking lights that mimic my current setups.

Bulbs are a PAR38 Toshiba 20.3W LED rated 1000 lumens, and a PAR20 Sylvania 50W halogen rated 550 lumens. Both bulbs are in standard aluminum reflectors resting on top of the cage near the back corners.

That brought up the numbers in the HO test to 259 visible, 2639 lux, and the shoplight test to 194 visible 1906 lux.

So with the added lumens from the basking lights, the difference in visible cage brightness is roughly around 25 percent.

So the more lights you add, or if you use higher wattage bulbs in addition to the florescent fixtures, the less the disparity between the two. Just simple physics there, but I am really surprised that the disparity is not higher.

Now this only addresses brightness, not UV content or spectrum differences. Nor does it address intangibles like how your chameleons and plants look. I really like how everything looks under the new HO fixture from www.lightyourreptiles.com much better than my old shop lights. Not surprising really, since they are old technology that I have been able to supplement with new LED and halogen technology in my basking bulbs.

First pic is the basking bulbs used. Second pic is the HO test (in blue). Third pic is the shop light test (in green). Again sorry for the poor LCD readability under the bright lights.