Does anyone have experience with lighting a range and targets with LEDs instead of more traditional lighting, e . g. halogen, florescent, etc.? If so, what was done to give the same result as seen on typical ISSF ranges?
TIA
Stan
LED lighting for ranges?
Moderators: pilkguns, m1963, David Levene, Spencer, Richard H
I too have been making enquiries wrt LED lighting. I can confirm what Spencer has said about the blue\white cast of the most common units. those who have fitted them seem to have "cured" this problem by incorporating yellow units in the ration 3 Blue\white to 2 Yellow.
Apparently there is a spectrum specification that equates to daylight lighting and that is D65. Please don't ask me to explain that one, it's what I was told!
The other issue that has been reported is that although the lighting appears bright, when you look through the rifle sights things change and shooters have had to open up rear apertures to achieve a satisfactory sight picture.
A nearby club has just built a new airgun range and they have gone for a hybrid solution, LED panels for general lighting and metal halide floods on the targets. The reason for this was that they already had the floods in their temporary range and were pleased with the illumination. I haven't seen the result yet, but If I do so in the near future I shall post my impressions.
Rutty
Apparently there is a spectrum specification that equates to daylight lighting and that is D65. Please don't ask me to explain that one, it's what I was told!
The other issue that has been reported is that although the lighting appears bright, when you look through the rifle sights things change and shooters have had to open up rear apertures to achieve a satisfactory sight picture.
A nearby club has just built a new airgun range and they have gone for a hybrid solution, LED panels for general lighting and metal halide floods on the targets. The reason for this was that they already had the floods in their temporary range and were pleased with the illumination. I haven't seen the result yet, but If I do so in the near future I shall post my impressions.
Rutty
Well, the *potential* for excellent lighting is there with LED, it just requires some research and some capital outlay.
The Rijksmuseum in Amsterdam has just completed a major renovation in which they replaced all of their lighting with LED. One review said that it clearly demonstrated that "...LEDs have finally exceeded the quality of incandescent...". The museum director also has said that LEDs were primarily chosen for their light quality, apparently it's just like natural light.
Here's more information:
http://www.lighting.philips.com/main/pr ... museum.wpd
The Rijksmuseum in Amsterdam has just completed a major renovation in which they replaced all of their lighting with LED. One review said that it clearly demonstrated that "...LEDs have finally exceeded the quality of incandescent...". The museum director also has said that LEDs were primarily chosen for their light quality, apparently it's just like natural light.
Here's more information:
http://www.lighting.philips.com/main/pr ... museum.wpd
I think the ISSF say that target lighting must be of the right colour temp [Kelvins] and Lumens [brightness] evenly lit over the whole face of the target, Check the ISSF rules for the correct spec.
Generally we have found Halogen lighting on the target is not so good but 120w narrow angle spots [one over each target] very good with no complaints and using a lumens meter they conform to the rules.
Generally we have found Halogen lighting on the target is not so good but 120w narrow angle spots [one over each target] very good with no complaints and using a lumens meter they conform to the rules.
-
David Levene
- Posts: 5617
- Joined: Mon Mar 01, 2004 12:49 pm
- Location: Ruislip, UK
-
isuguncoach
- Posts: 99
- Joined: Wed Nov 16, 2005 1:49 pm
- Location: central illinois
- Contact:
LED range lites
Have new range, and put lLEDs on several lanes "just to see". Lanes do have a bluer caste to the lighting. However, shooters report much less eye strain during a full 60 shot match. Rear sight needs to be opened (as suggested here) and lanes seems to be a preference for many shooter.
With the wide variation in color temperature available (~2000K to ~6000K) there probably ought to be something in the rules. At least a range of color temperatures to stay within. There also ought to be a maximum lighting intensity (luminosity) so that no range is way too bright, or in particular, no target illumination is too bright. The new LED lighting in the target box on one of the brands (I don't remember which one) was found to be significantly too bright to the point that users had to disconnect half of the LED's to get to a reasonable level (I heard this somewhere, I think it was the new targets at Ohio State Univ.)
LEDs have the ability to be tailored to the light spectrum and intensity you desire.
It would be good if the ISSF set some standards.
Lighting is complicated, with different color temperatures (Kelvin) you may get eye strain even at the same brightness levels (Lumens). When considering lighting in "work" areas you should take into consideration floor, wall and ceiling colors, plus the size of the space.
FYI - more than you want to know.
In the past the type of light dictated the character or temperature of the light. Standard incandescent bulbs produce a yellow "warm" light at around 2700K, white light is produced at 4000K. The "cool" white fluorescents are about 4200K. The blue spectrum starts at about 4500K and "Daylight" or Hylux Metal Halide comes in around 5500K.
Simply put the color white actually looks:
yellow at 2700K
white at 4000K
blue at 5500K
It would be good if the ISSF set some standards.
Lighting is complicated, with different color temperatures (Kelvin) you may get eye strain even at the same brightness levels (Lumens). When considering lighting in "work" areas you should take into consideration floor, wall and ceiling colors, plus the size of the space.
FYI - more than you want to know.
In the past the type of light dictated the character or temperature of the light. Standard incandescent bulbs produce a yellow "warm" light at around 2700K, white light is produced at 4000K. The "cool" white fluorescents are about 4200K. The blue spectrum starts at about 4500K and "Daylight" or Hylux Metal Halide comes in around 5500K.
Simply put the color white actually looks:
yellow at 2700K
white at 4000K
blue at 5500K
Certified Safety Instructor: Rifle & Pistol
They that give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.
~ Ben Franklin
They that give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.
~ Ben Franklin
Thanks to everyone for the informative responses.
The point about the ISSF specifying more about lighting is well-taken.
I would like to hear from competitors about the ranges with lighting that they liked the most. And then possibly inquire with those ranges about the specifics of their lighting arrangement. Hopefully, the end result will be a reasonably good lighting profile for planning either future ranges or re-working the lighting on existing ranges.
For example, two well-lit ranges I have seen are the former Olympic range in Atlanta (RIP) along with the range in Hannover.
Recommendations anyone?
Stan
The point about the ISSF specifying more about lighting is well-taken.
I would like to hear from competitors about the ranges with lighting that they liked the most. And then possibly inquire with those ranges about the specifics of their lighting arrangement. Hopefully, the end result will be a reasonably good lighting profile for planning either future ranges or re-working the lighting on existing ranges.
For example, two well-lit ranges I have seen are the former Olympic range in Atlanta (RIP) along with the range in Hannover.
Recommendations anyone?
Stan
I have just come back from shooting in the British Airgun Champs at Bisley. The main Air range upstairs is actually very well lit overall with the permanently installed Sius Ascor targets lit by incandescent (or possibly FCL replacements as standard tungsten type bulbs are now illegal to be sold in the UK) in fittings above each target pretty much as shown in the ISSF rules. This range was built for the 2000 Commonwealth Games. It was really nice to shot on (Rifle) especially compared to my clubs range which is probably about 1/8th as bright at least.PaulB wrote: The new LED lighting in the target box on one of the brands (I don't remember which one) was found to be significantly too bright to the point that users had to disconnect half of the LED's to get to a reasonable level (I heard this somewhere, I think it was the new targets at Ohio State Univ.)
The finals this year were shot in a separate Finals Hall, which was part of the downstairs 50m Range firing point. This is not as well lit generally as upstairs as it is usually open down one side, which lets quite a bit of natural light into the range. Of course the Roller doors were down so it was about half as bright as upstairs, so not really too bad and I am sure within the ISSF regulations. The targets used for this were from Mega-link. These are actually portable units, with each target unit in a white tower. The targets themselves are recessed within the units and the target lighting is also limited to within the recess. This did seem to be very bright in comparison to the surround area. This gave a very bright square area with a very dark looking aiming mark in the centre, surrounded by a much darker appearing white surround. Using an 18mm foresight unit the tunnel just fitted within the lit area so the sight picture was odd but not too bad. If I had had the option I would have turned down the brightness a little, maybe you need to actually use these units a bit to get used to the sight picture. 8 min Sighting and prep is not really the time to start playing with the setup.
By the way our club range is lit by only 6 foot fluorescent tubes, mounted 6 - 8 feet from the targets (with a metal baffle to stop them getting shot) and behind the firing points. With very pale green/white walls.
Alan
-
john bickar
- Posts: 618
- Joined: Wed May 05, 2004 3:58 am
- Location: Corner of Walk & Don't Walk
HULK SMASHIPshooter wrote:For example, two well-lit ranges I have seen are the former Olympic range in Atlanta (RIP)
Damn, losing that range still makes me angry. Atlanta was a great range for 10m and 25m; I shot a lot of great scores there.
The best-lit indoor range that I remember shooting on was Bellingham, WA, which had high ceilings and fluorescent tubes running longitudinally down the range. Too many ranges have task lighting on the firing line, task lighting on the target, and nothing in between. There's something better about bright, even light throughout the range.
For open sights, nothing beats standing outside under open sunlight, à la Canton or Camp Perry.
Hi John,
It's good to hear from you. And, you're too humble. You've shot great scores on lots of ranges!
One point you made is a good one. Having a large amount of light difference between the targets and firing lines compared to all of the surrounding light is a bad thing. This is particularly true for pistol shooters using open sights. Generally speaking, a well-lighted range is conducive to good scores.
The info from everyone else is also great. Please keep the posts coming. Maybe we can settle on some lighting specifications that most everyone will like.
Stan
It's good to hear from you. And, you're too humble. You've shot great scores on lots of ranges!
One point you made is a good one. Having a large amount of light difference between the targets and firing lines compared to all of the surrounding light is a bad thing. This is particularly true for pistol shooters using open sights. Generally speaking, a well-lighted range is conducive to good scores.
The info from everyone else is also great. Please keep the posts coming. Maybe we can settle on some lighting specifications that most everyone will like.
Stan
D65 as described in this wiki article is light with a colour temperature of 6500K.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Illuminant_D65
It is the "Open Air" standard lighting. There is a nice GIFF showing how the spectrum changes as the temperature increases. Note how the peak shifts further to the left hand end as T goes up. Blue is about 400, Green is about 550 and red is about 650 nm.
White LED lighting has a phosphor coating over the different coloured LED source (but usually blue 'cos that fluoros better) inside it and this speads the light over the colour spectrum. This is similar to fluorescent lighting
Here is an artilce about LEDs that iclude how they make "white light". There is a graph of a "White LED".It shows how the blue gets "spread" over the visible spectrum
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Light-emit ... hite_light
There is no doubt that LEDS will take over lighting. I see that BMW is now installing headlight LEDs in one of their latest models. That is a BIG step!!!
The ability to control the colour illuminating rooms, ranges etc will change.
"Colour Standards" have all been based on incandescent lighting and the photopic curve of a group of people whose colour sensitivity was adopted way back in 1931. LED are certainly a "disruptive technology" and these lighting standards will need to change to meet it.
Care needs to be taken as to what LEDs to use. I would recommend those with a diffusing screen over the LEDS as that will not give a "patchy" illumination on the targets. Most "higher powered" LEDs have multiple sources within them that without the diffuser will point their output all over the place.
Beware also that lightmeters calibrated with tungsten sources will not read the same numbers under phosphor LEDs. Again, consideration of what is being measured needs to be taken into account.
Regards the "overall lighting of ranges". You will note in the ISSF rules that they have (again) altered the lighting rules. The earlier rules stated that range lightin was to be at least 300 lux and on the targets between 900 and about 1100 lux. Full sun daylight is about 100,000 lux. So you can see we are playig with quite dark light. As someone pointed out, the lux value needs to be up above 300 for the rest of the range but the important factor regardless of what lighting is used, is the contract ratio between the targets and the rest of the range. This is 3 or 4 to 1. Humans have a very poor contrast accommodation. It is only about 3 or 5 4 to 1. And this is the reason why the rules state both target and range lighting levels.
After flirting with lots of light on the target - and don't worry about the range - the ISSF have reinstigated maximum levels depending on what is on the target. The ratio in the rule book does not exceed 5:1 for 10m Air Rifle. That is, I read the "Recommended Minimum" is intended to keep the ratio sane. Please don't be tempted to crank the targets up to the detriment of the rest of the range. The high contrast scenes are very tiring on the eyes.
PS: I work at New Zealands Measurement Standards Laboratory (ie our version of NIST). I have access to lighting specialists and have been keeping a close watch of range lighting over the years and have contributed to shooting mags and forums over the years.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Illuminant_D65
It is the "Open Air" standard lighting. There is a nice GIFF showing how the spectrum changes as the temperature increases. Note how the peak shifts further to the left hand end as T goes up. Blue is about 400, Green is about 550 and red is about 650 nm.
White LED lighting has a phosphor coating over the different coloured LED source (but usually blue 'cos that fluoros better) inside it and this speads the light over the colour spectrum. This is similar to fluorescent lighting
Here is an artilce about LEDs that iclude how they make "white light". There is a graph of a "White LED".It shows how the blue gets "spread" over the visible spectrum
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Light-emit ... hite_light
There is no doubt that LEDS will take over lighting. I see that BMW is now installing headlight LEDs in one of their latest models. That is a BIG step!!!
The ability to control the colour illuminating rooms, ranges etc will change.
"Colour Standards" have all been based on incandescent lighting and the photopic curve of a group of people whose colour sensitivity was adopted way back in 1931. LED are certainly a "disruptive technology" and these lighting standards will need to change to meet it.
Care needs to be taken as to what LEDs to use. I would recommend those with a diffusing screen over the LEDS as that will not give a "patchy" illumination on the targets. Most "higher powered" LEDs have multiple sources within them that without the diffuser will point their output all over the place.
Beware also that lightmeters calibrated with tungsten sources will not read the same numbers under phosphor LEDs. Again, consideration of what is being measured needs to be taken into account.
Regards the "overall lighting of ranges". You will note in the ISSF rules that they have (again) altered the lighting rules. The earlier rules stated that range lightin was to be at least 300 lux and on the targets between 900 and about 1100 lux. Full sun daylight is about 100,000 lux. So you can see we are playig with quite dark light. As someone pointed out, the lux value needs to be up above 300 for the rest of the range but the important factor regardless of what lighting is used, is the contract ratio between the targets and the rest of the range. This is 3 or 4 to 1. Humans have a very poor contrast accommodation. It is only about 3 or 5 4 to 1. And this is the reason why the rules state both target and range lighting levels.
After flirting with lots of light on the target - and don't worry about the range - the ISSF have reinstigated maximum levels depending on what is on the target. The ratio in the rule book does not exceed 5:1 for 10m Air Rifle. That is, I read the "Recommended Minimum" is intended to keep the ratio sane. Please don't be tempted to crank the targets up to the detriment of the rest of the range. The high contrast scenes are very tiring on the eyes.
PS: I work at New Zealands Measurement Standards Laboratory (ie our version of NIST). I have access to lighting specialists and have been keeping a close watch of range lighting over the years and have contributed to shooting mags and forums over the years.
Only got feedback from some pistol shooters at last weekend's International GP competition (didn't have time available to ask any rifle shooters):
- some did not notice there had been a change
- nobody I spoke to complained about the LED lighting
- most agreed with my experience, when concentrating on/at the front sight they did not notice the LED lighting
-the fall off of light level between the top and bottom of the target face seems more noticeable with the new lights in the same gooseneck fittings.
- some did not notice there had been a change
- nobody I spoke to complained about the LED lighting
- most agreed with my experience, when concentrating on/at the front sight they did not notice the LED lighting
-the fall off of light level between the top and bottom of the target face seems more noticeable with the new lights in the same gooseneck fittings.
Spencer noted: "-the fall off of light level between the top and bottom of the target face seems more noticeable with the new lights in the same gooseneck fittings."
That comment elicited (in my feeble brain) an interesting idea that LED lighting effects may be usefully applied to these types of gooseneck light holders. That is, the opportunity to fit multiple LEDs within such a light fitting.
The light falls off in intensity as "1 over distance squared". This means to drop the intensity of light by 4 times on an object, you only have to move the object twice as far from the light source. There is quite a measurable difference in the distance from the light source to the top of the target and the distance from the light to the bottom of the target. This means there is quite a substantial intensity difference that arises merely from the inverse light law.
If someone could build up an LED source that preferentially supplies more light to the bottom of the target then it may be possible to illuminate such lighting systems more evenly.
The further away from the light source the target is, the less the difference in intensity. (The ratio of top to bottom distance is close to 1) But as the light is brought closer to the target then the difference is increased (The ratio of top to bottom is (much) greater than 1.
Any takers who want to experiment??? It would be nice to have a light fitting that plugged / screwed in to the original fitting.
That comment elicited (in my feeble brain) an interesting idea that LED lighting effects may be usefully applied to these types of gooseneck light holders. That is, the opportunity to fit multiple LEDs within such a light fitting.
The light falls off in intensity as "1 over distance squared". This means to drop the intensity of light by 4 times on an object, you only have to move the object twice as far from the light source. There is quite a measurable difference in the distance from the light source to the top of the target and the distance from the light to the bottom of the target. This means there is quite a substantial intensity difference that arises merely from the inverse light law.
If someone could build up an LED source that preferentially supplies more light to the bottom of the target then it may be possible to illuminate such lighting systems more evenly.
The further away from the light source the target is, the less the difference in intensity. (The ratio of top to bottom distance is close to 1) But as the light is brought closer to the target then the difference is increased (The ratio of top to bottom is (much) greater than 1.
Any takers who want to experiment??? It would be nice to have a light fitting that plugged / screwed in to the original fitting.
for me, I would redesign the reflector the LED is mounted in - cheaper, simpler?RossM wrote:Spencer noted: "-the fall off of light level between the top and bottom of the target face seems more noticeable with the new lights in the same gooseneck fittings."
That comment elicited (in my feeble brain) an interesting idea that LED lighting effects may be usefully applied to these types of gooseneck light holders. That is, the opportunity to fit multiple LEDs within such a light fitting.
The light falls off in intensity as "1 over distance squared". This means to drop the intensity of light by 4 times on an object, you only have to move the object twice as far from the light source. There is quite a measurable difference in the distance from the light source to the top of the target and the distance from the light to the bottom of the target. This means there is quite a substantial intensity difference that arises merely from the inverse light law.
If someone could build up an LED source that preferentially supplies more light to the bottom of the target then it may be possible to illuminate such lighting systems more evenly.
The further away from the light source the target is, the less the difference in intensity. (The ratio of top to bottom distance is close to 1) But as the light is brought closer to the target then the difference is increased (The ratio of top to bottom is (much) greater than 1.
Any takers who want to experiment??? It would be nice to have a light fitting that plugged / screwed in to the original fitting.