From: into@oblivion.nothing.com   
      
   Phil Hobbs wrote in news:sq-   
   dnQe7BumkjHnMnZ2dnUVZ_hmdnZ2d@supernews.com:   
      
   > Confused yet?   
      
   Yes and no. I knew that the art of light measurement is really   
   that, more art than science. Or at least it seems that way.   
      
   The explanations are indeed helpful, if more "mathy" than I   
   expected. It's nice to see I was on the right track.   
      
   But, I think I may have been asking the wrong question. What   
   I'm really looking for is a way to understand the amount of   
   actual light being emitted. And as you and Boxman have shown,   
   it's not that simple of a matter. There's a lot of variables.   
      
   For my needs, it's likely easier for to just buy some sample   
   parts and 'see' if it works as desired.   
      
   The end goal is the illumination of PMMA optical fibers. I'm   
   researching an idea for an artistic display that I'd like to   
   make. It's actually an idea I've had for going on 15 years.   
   Time do something with it. (and maybe make a little money   
   selling them, since I have yet to see anyone else do it)   
      
   The full question is really "how many fibers can I bundle   
   together at a given distance from an LED with X mcd and Y   
   viewing angle and still illuminate them brightly enough."   
      
   I now realize no amount of formulae and theory and specs can   
   answer that question until I figure out what "brightly enough"   
   means, and that is a purely subjective measure at the moment.   
   Hence, better to buy and try.   
      
   I'm pretty sure the LED's I am interested in will put out a   
   lot of light since they are intended for outdoor sign usage.   
   To be sunlight visible, they gotta be bright, right?   
      
   Brian   
   --   
   http://www.skywise711.com - Lasers, Seismology, Astronomy, Skepticism   
   Sed quis custodiet ipsos Custodes?   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)   
|