You are right, it is an interesting site. I knew that there had to be somewhere where they were pushing the limits and doing interesting things with LEDs, and this is a good example of that. Thanks much for the reference!
If you are interested in what's going on in the world of LED Lighting follow Keith and his trusty minions at www.allledlighting.com for some the the most illuminating discussions on the good, bad and ugly in the LED lighting market.
You will be amazed at the brain power that explodes daily from the site... Really!
Excellent point. A big factor in my motivation to transition my home lighting from CFL to LED (still a work in progress) was the color of the white LED light. The lights I bought did not specify CRI, only color temperature, but in any case they were a huge improvement over the horrible greenish hue of the CFLs.
One performance specification that held back CFL's acceptance was their poor ability to correctly illunimate the full spectrum of color in our houses. Our spouses fought CFL's in the living room because they made the living room look like it had jaundice or some liver disease. LED's are capable of overcoming this - after all the most accurate color rendering of computer images is obtained on LED backlite displays, not florescent backlite displays.
Knowing the color temperature of a light source (measured in degrees Kelvin) is not sufficient to select a good light bulb. The measurement of how wide a color spectrum a light source can accurately display or illuminate is the Color Rendering Index, or, CRI. The closer to 100 you get, the better the light source. CRI's in the low 90's are considered the minimum for good color illumination. I'd like to see all manufacturers of interior lighting sources, no matter what kind, required to specify the color temperature and CRI on their packaging. This would allow we the consumers to select the best light source and also up the competition among manufacturers to produce a better product.
Replay available now: A handful of emerging network technologies are competing to be the preferred wide-area connection for the Internet of Things. All claim lower costs and power use than cellular but none have wide deployment yet. Listen in as proponents of leading contenders make their case to be the metro or national IoT network of the future. Rick Merritt, EE Times Silicon Valley Bureau Chief, moderators this discussion. Join in and ask his guests questions.