> Craig wrote: > four-pack of 100 W equivalents.
<rant> I'm not really picking on you, Craig, 'cause your earlier email stated, "1600 lumens" but I get really annoyed with the "watts equivalent" rating because the light output for a 100 W incandescent is NOT standard! I have chosen to ignore that number as marketing hype - which it usually is - and instead look at lumens. A lumen is a measure of the total light energy output (as perceived by human eyes - it is a weighted scale) with no regard for direction or distance to what is being lite. It is, in my opinion, the right way to compare lamp types because adding a reflector, or shifting the light output to one side only will not change the lumen output. In practice, if I would like a bit more light than my 500 lumen 40 watt incandescent puts out, I can look at all the choices of 700 lumen lamps and pick the one with the lowest watt rating if I want to save on operating costs. In summary, I wish the packaging would _decrease_ the confusion and report the light output based on a light output measurement - not a comparison to the power consumption of of a light of arbitrary efficiency. </rant> _______________________________________ http://www.okiebenz.com To search list archives http://www.okiebenz.com/archive/ To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to: http://mail.okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com
