Rice or Nice: Red gauge lighting.
#31
Rennlist Member
![Default](https://rennlist.com/forums/images/icons/icon1.gif)
xtaC, looks nice! I wouldn't go with blue myself, but I always liked the look.
Ninefofo, I like what I see so far... not too ricey, imo, but a photo from further back would be nice. Personally, I would have put the lights together somewhere, not spread out... with the different colors, you can tell what they are. I might have tried to put them under a section of smoked glass or something, so they are hidden when not lit up. Of course, I don't have the know-how to do this to begin with!
+1
Interior bulbs are silly cheap in bulk, LEDs cost a lot more... when you build millions of cars, that adds up quickly. Plus, regular bulbs have an semi "infinite" dimming range.
Ninefofo, I like what I see so far... not too ricey, imo, but a photo from further back would be nice. Personally, I would have put the lights together somewhere, not spread out... with the different colors, you can tell what they are. I might have tried to put them under a section of smoked glass or something, so they are hidden when not lit up. Of course, I don't have the know-how to do this to begin with!
![bowdown](https://rennlist.com/forums/graemlins/bowdown.gif)
Originally Posted by billthe3
Not to mention that I have not heard of any car using led's for gauge lighting from the factory.
Interior bulbs are silly cheap in bulk, LEDs cost a lot more... when you build millions of cars, that adds up quickly. Plus, regular bulbs have an semi "infinite" dimming range.
#33
Instructor
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Kloof S Africa
Posts: 109
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
![Thumbs down](https://rennlist.com/forums/images/icons/icon13.gif)
Totally disagree on the statement that blue lighting destroys night vision. My wife's
VW has that annoying red lighting all over the place and I find it bugs the hell out of me having that in my peripheral vision. I also have the blue Jaeger led kit and
find the effect quite restful on the eyes.
VW has that annoying red lighting all over the place and I find it bugs the hell out of me having that in my peripheral vision. I also have the blue Jaeger led kit and
find the effect quite restful on the eyes.
#34
![Default](https://rennlist.com/forums/images/icons/icon1.gif)
The soft blue lighting is easier on the eyes, but its a scientific fact that red doesn't affect night vision. Thats why the watches they sell people in the military have a red backlight to them.
#35
Rennlist Member
![Default](https://rennlist.com/forums/images/icons/icon1.gif)
Originally Posted by CameronKame
The soft blue lighting is easier on the eyes, but its a scientific fact that red doesn't affect night vision. Thats why the watches they sell people in the military have a red backlight to them.
#36
Addict
Lifetime Rennlist
Member
Lifetime Rennlist
Member
![Default](https://rennlist.com/forums/images/icons/icon1.gif)
PURKINJE SHIFT
Rods and cones are not equally sensitive to visible wavelengths of light. Unlike the cones, rods are more sensitive to blue light and are not sensitive to wavelengths greater than about 640nm, the red portion of the visible spectrum.
The Purkinje shift is the relatively greater brightness of blue or green light, compared with yellow or red light, upon shifting from photopic to scotopic adaptation. For example, in a darkened room, if one looks at two dim lights of equal illumination (one red and one green) that are positioned closely together, the red light will look brighter than the green light when the eyes are fixating centrally. If one looks to the side of the dim lights about 15-20 degrees, the green light will appear brighter than the red. Central fixation involves the cones and photopic vision while fixating eccentrically involves rods and scotopic vision. The cones are more sensitive to yellow and red, but the rods are more sensitive to light of the blue and green wavelengths. The most sensitive wavelength for cones is 555nm (yellow-green). That is why the "optic yellow" tennis and golf ***** are, in fact, easier to see under photopic conditions. The most sensitive wavelength for rods is 505nm (blue-green). Thus, blue-green lights will generally look brighter at night than red lights. The sensitivity of the eye changes from the red end of the visible spectrum toward the blue end when shifting from the photopic to scotopic vision.
You can disagree all you want, however.
Rods and cones are not equally sensitive to visible wavelengths of light. Unlike the cones, rods are more sensitive to blue light and are not sensitive to wavelengths greater than about 640nm, the red portion of the visible spectrum.
The Purkinje shift is the relatively greater brightness of blue or green light, compared with yellow or red light, upon shifting from photopic to scotopic adaptation. For example, in a darkened room, if one looks at two dim lights of equal illumination (one red and one green) that are positioned closely together, the red light will look brighter than the green light when the eyes are fixating centrally. If one looks to the side of the dim lights about 15-20 degrees, the green light will appear brighter than the red. Central fixation involves the cones and photopic vision while fixating eccentrically involves rods and scotopic vision. The cones are more sensitive to yellow and red, but the rods are more sensitive to light of the blue and green wavelengths. The most sensitive wavelength for cones is 555nm (yellow-green). That is why the "optic yellow" tennis and golf ***** are, in fact, easier to see under photopic conditions. The most sensitive wavelength for rods is 505nm (blue-green). Thus, blue-green lights will generally look brighter at night than red lights. The sensitivity of the eye changes from the red end of the visible spectrum toward the blue end when shifting from the photopic to scotopic vision.
You can disagree all you want, however.
#38
Burning Brakes
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Orlando,FL (formerly UK)
Posts: 1,215
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
![Default](https://rennlist.com/forums/images/icons/icon1.gif)
This is ABSOLUTELY incorrect.
An LED can dim infinitely. Their brightness is dependant on the RMS current flowing through them.
The REAL problem is that the dimmer circuit in these cars is a low-resistance rheostat, and therefore does not provide significant current reduction. If you replace the dimmer circuit with either a PWM dimmer or a variable voltage follower, they WILL dim.
A simpler (though mroe wasteful) mod is to add a high-wattage, low value resistor in parallel with the LEDs, which will cause the rheostat to drop more volts.
Keith
An LED can dim infinitely. Their brightness is dependant on the RMS current flowing through them.
The REAL problem is that the dimmer circuit in these cars is a low-resistance rheostat, and therefore does not provide significant current reduction. If you replace the dimmer circuit with either a PWM dimmer or a variable voltage follower, they WILL dim.
A simpler (though mroe wasteful) mod is to add a high-wattage, low value resistor in parallel with the LEDs, which will cause the rheostat to drop more volts.
Keith