RiverTrail Improvements Include NOT Lousy Lighting

[patric]

'"This is a long lasting light.  It has a strong watt bulb that will evenly light the area," said Tanya Pitzer with River Parks.'

Metal Halide only lasts half as long as traditional Sodium (which would have been easier on the eyes)  but they are leaps and bounds ahead of the Acorn glare bombs TU and DTU are so fond of.  

It's a step in the right direction.

[sgrizzle]

I checked them out "opening night/morning" and they do look a whole lot better. The trail looked extremely well lit and while I could see the light  from the fixtures while driving by, it was just reflection off the fixture and not direct light.

[cks511]

I certainly appreciated them being lit on my commute to work yesterday morning.  I thought they did the job well.  BUT, this morning the trail lights were dark AGAIN,....sigh.

[dsjeffries]

I have pictures I took on opening night.  I just need to upload them.  I was a bit disappointed at first, simply because they are so bright.  RPA should realize that because these fixtures are better and don't cast light up, that the lights don't need to be so glaringly bright.

[patric]

quote:Originally posted by dsjeffries

I have pictures I took on opening night.  I just need to upload them.  I was a bit disappointed at first, simply because they are so bright.  RPA should realize that because these fixtures are better and don't cast light up, that the lights don't need to be so glaringly bright.

AEP may have told them they need to be a minimum of 100 Watts to be "approved" so we need to work on that.
It's good that they are more efficient fixtures, but being more efficient also means you reduce the wattage accordingly.

Reducing glare is good, but overlighting creates safety problems of its own.  They definitely need to follow up on this before they install the rest of the lights, or well just have to pay to re-do them on our own dime.
Would be a shame to have thrown away a Kaiser donation because of a simple planning error.

[dsjeffries]

I merged a short exposure (0.125 s) and longer exposure (2 s) shot for this first image... By merging them, reduced the harsh glare, but there's still a lot of light that escapes the sides.  The brighter bulbs do create a lot of glare, as you'll see in the second shot.  



This is more of a close-up shot instead of looking down the trail at all the lights... and it shows what is actually a very harsh light.



They're a great improvement... we just need to reduce the wattage!

[patric]

quote:Originally posted by dsjeffries

They're a great improvement... we just need to reduce the wattage!

...And we need to do it before they install the rest, otherwise it will cost too much to fix later.

[dsjeffries]

quote:Originally posted by patric

quote:Originally posted by dsjeffries

They're a great improvement... we just need to reduce the wattage!

...And we need to do it before they install the rest, otherwise it will cost too much to fix later.

Tell me what I (we) can do.

[patric]

quote:Originally posted by dsjeffries

Tell me what I (we) can do.

I contacted the Riverparks spokeswoman, and sent a letter to my councilor CC: the Mayors office.
Would be fantastic if anyone else could do the same, or better, if they knew someone in the department.

[In2neon]

I haven't seen them yet but be aware metal halide comes on very strong for the first fire up of maybe a hundred hours or less then plateaus in output for a while then dies off and need to be replaced before they actually go out...
100 w mh is a pleasing white light not blue white at all (at least newer incarnations of the lamp) and the technology is steadily improving in the area of color stability and incandescent - like appeal...
I will take metal halide over sodium ANY day....
70 watt MH is fine but you will argue with a brick wall when trying to talk FACTS with PSO and its field reps...
They are like programmed machines to spout propaganda about sodium lighting and its so-called benefits when in actuality it is a more profitable light for them and the stockholders... let the lowly customer and his wishes for a white light be damned....

[patric]

quote:Originally posted by In2neon

I haven't seen them yet but be aware metal halide comes on very strong for the first fire up of maybe a hundred hours or less then plateaus in output for a while then dies off and need to be replaced before they actually go out...
100 w mh is a pleasing white light not blue white at all (at least newer incarnations of the lamp) and the technology is steadily improving in the area of color stability and incandescent - like appeal...
I will take metal halide over sodium ANY day....
70 watt MH is fine but you will argue with a brick wall when trying to talk FACTS with PSO and its field reps...
They are like programmed machines to spout propaganda about sodium lighting and its so-called benefits when in actuality it is a more profitable light for them and the stockholders... let the lowly customer and his wishes for a white light be damned....

You wont catch me beating the AEP drum, but there are a lot of instances where it's better to use Sodium lighting than Metal Halide.

Sodium is easier on your eyes at higher levels than Metal Halide.  By higher levels I mean Photopic Vs. Scotopic vision.  The jogging trail is lit at Photopic levels using a bluish light source that performs better at lower (Scotopic) light levels (think pre-dawn light).

Metal Halide is 3-4 times more likely to cause skyglow than Sodium because of the way blue light scatters in the atmosphere.  This is more  of an environmental, biological or eco-tourism concern, but if you wanted a clear night sky, Metal Halide would be a bad choice.
 
Despite Sodium's orangish color, the light can evoke a more warm and inviting feeling than the coldness of Metal Halide (an important point for architects).

You get more Lumens-per Watt with Sodium than Metal Halide,
And last but not least, Sodium is the choice for streetlighting because the lamp life is twice that of Metal Halide, which translates to better maintenance economy (have to change them only half as often).

But in2neon is correct that most high-intensity light sources are brighter in their first 100 hours (initial Lumens) than the rest of their lamp life (maintained Lumens), including Fluorescent lamps.  How much their intensity depreciates depends on the type of lamp.

[sgrizzle]

quote:Originally posted by patric


You wont catch me beating the AEP drum, but there are a lot of instances where it's better to use Sodium lighting than Metal Halide.

I'm pretty sure someone at AEP just fell out of their chair, nonetheless.

[In2neon]

(quote)
Sodium is easier on your eyes at higher levels than Metal Halide.  By higher levels I mean Photopic Vs. Scotopic vision.  The jogging trail is lit at Photopic levels using a bluish light source that performs better at lower (Scotopic) light levels (think pre-dawn light).



I respectfully disagree....
While technically what you say may be true,  my overall perception says different...
If I have been driving in sodium light for a while and then arrive to a place like DT Dallas where it is  lit with Metal Halide,  and my eyes and my psyche seem to have a weight lifted off of them ...
Instantly things are recognizable and the light seems to agree with life itself, similar to  sunlight color and looks more natural...
Same driving around interchanges in Tulsa where sodium is on the lower cobraheads on the highway stretches and the exits are lit with MH tower lights (which are sodium fixtures re- fitted with MH due to vibration issues with the HPS ceramic arc tubes) and there is the same relief when you go into the white light ...


(quote) Metal Halide is 3-4 times more likely to cause skyglow than Sodium because of the way blue light scatters in the atmosphere.  This is more  of an environmental, biological or eco-tourism concern, but if you wanted a clear night sky, Metal Halide would be a bad choice.


I think a clear night sky in the city is not a likely scenario since this is a free country and people and companies can light their property, and will, no matter how ugly ... Even if I personally do not like the looks of someones lighting scheme (and I HATE the shotgun approach to lighting for the record) My only recourse is if they trespass light onto my property without my permission...
 
(quote)Despite Sodium's orangish color, the light can evoke a more warm and inviting feeling than the coldness of Metal Halide (an important point for architects).


I am not sure where you are getting your info from or what metal halide lamps you are looking at, but the metal halide lighting I have seen is not like the 80s bluish MH but VERY warm almost incandescent in appearance and not blue at all...Look at some spectrum charts of new color MH and see just how  much better and fuller the spectrum of useable light is...




(quote) You get more Lumens-per Watt with Sodium than Metal Halide,

If you were thirsty, even VERY thirsty, would you prefer a glass of clean, clear water to drink, or a gallon of dirty water to quench your thirst...
I'll take a lower light level of quality lighting than a higher nember of unuseable lumens anyday..

think "glass of clean water"
as opposed to "bucket of dirty water"...


And last but not least, Sodium is the choice for streetlighting because the lamp life is twice that of Metal Halide, which translates to better maintenance economy (have to change them only half as often).

Not entirely true without a few comments...

HPS (orange) starts out with a golden white appearance and in some situations it is just barely tolerable and only sometimes pleasant...
since most outdoor lighting is relamped only when is goes out, HPS is allowed to go on living after it turns an obnoxious pinkish color for a long time til it dies...

MH indeed has a lesser lifespan but also should be replaced before it actually dies for the sake of light output and color...
However, the new (somewhat of a breakthrough) pulse start (and most lower wattage MH lamps already are) lamps have longer life and more stable color and lumen output...
In my opinion it is more likely a third less useable life and I would gladly replace lamps more oftem (slightly) and have quality lighting than a lot of light that is poor quality...
Woodland Hills started out with 1kw HPS fixtures in the 70s and changed out everything a number of years ago and the facility has a much more pleasing appearance now, than then, even if a lot of light is wasted through too high wattage distribution, that's another rant...
Walgreens @ 31st & Harvard recently changed out all HPS to MH and what a difference on how appealing the area without increasing wattage and maybe even lowering light levels...
They just changed the color..


But in2neon is correct that most high-intensity light sources are brighter in their first 100 hours (initial Lumens) than the rest of their lamp life (maintained Lumens), including Fluorescent lamps.  How much their intensity depreciates depends on the type of lamp.

[TheArtist]

I prefer a golden glow to outdoor, night lighting. You dont need or want bright white or full spectrum outdoors at night. Its not as though its an indoor office space or a museum where you need sharp light to see everything by or to pick up all the colors in a painting. Soft, full spectrum outdoors would be better than some harsh white or blue light though.

I put one of those twisty halogen bulbs in my hallway fixture just yesterday, then took it right back out lol. It screamed WHIIIITE!, harsh, cold... just horrible. I promptly put an old bulb back in lol.  My house is old world Italian and the lighting should be warm and cozy, not contemporary, or stark and "institutional". lol

[patric]

quote:Originally posted by In2neon

While technically what you say may be true,  my overall perception says different...
If I have been driving in sodium light for a while and then arrive to a place like DT Dallas where it is  lit with Metal Halide,  and my eyes and my psyche seem to have a weight lifted off of them ...

Perceptions can change.  Just trust your eyes.

You can experience the same type of "relief" when transitioning from the harshness of Metal Halide back to the muted colors of Sodium, so you may be really just enjoying periodic changes of scenery.  

quote:
I think a clear night sky in the city is not a likely scenario since this is a free country and people and companies can light their property, and will, no matter how ugly ...

Yet there are a number of Tulsa-sized communities that do successfully regulate outdoor lighting to eliminate wasteful practices  like glare, light trespass and skyglow.  They remain not only a free society but enjoy a higher quality of life, safer easier-to-see streets, pay less taxes for their municipal lighting and sometimes benefit from tourism that comes with a clear night sky.
I would be happy if we were able to reign in the out-of-control spending on wasteful city lighting.  What could we do with a couple of extra million?  Keep pools open in summer?  Head off utility rate hikes?    

quote:
MH indeed has a lesser lifespan but also should be replaced before it actually dies for the sake of light output and color...
However, the new (somewhat of a breakthrough) pulse start (and most lower wattage MH lamps already are) lamps have longer life and more stable color and lumen output...
In my opinion it is more likely a third less useable life and I would gladly replace lamps more oftem (slightly) and have quality lighting than a lot of light that is poor quality...

Wholesale changing out of groups of lamps near the end of their life (rather than playing catch-up one-at-a-time when they start dying) is  they type of Lumen Maintenance that professionals often do with Sodium, Metal Halide, Fluorescent, etc.  But with Metal Halide you should expect to do it twice as much as with Sodium.    

quote:
Woodland Hills started out with 1kw HPS fixtures in the 70s and changed out everything a number of years ago and the facility has a much more pleasing appearance now, than then, even if a lot of light is wasted through too high wattage distribution, that's another rant...

I fully agree that when a more efficient technology comes along, you should use the opportunity to save the electricity while maintaining the illumination level, but electric utilities and greedy merchants instead take the approach of burning the same Watts but increasing their illumination levels, even if it accomplishes nothing more than to say "look at me!"  

We may very well find that the new Riverparks lighting, while superior to other glary lighting along the parks, may be overlitlit out-of-scale with it's surroundings (even after the lamps settle in).  AEP wants municipal lights to burn a minimum amount of watts to load down it's off-peak system or they wont "recommend" Public Works approve them.  So we are left with the question of do we force ourselves to adapt to AEP's needs or should it be the other way around?