Natural light spectrum.. Why do we use these so much blue lights?

[VintageReefer]

If you were going to try to replicate your old metal halide tank spectrum, what intensities do you think you would run the channels at? This is what I would want to shoot for if I ever go full LED. Those were Phoenix bulbs right?

Phoenix 14k

But some pics have the t5. I did blue + and coral + alternating

I would probably go with kessils supplemented by quanta bars to replicate

 

[buruskeee]

This was talked about in 2018 and I'm sure even prior to that...

Just for Fun - The Perfect Spectrum

There is no such thing as a *perfect* spectrum for corals, but I arrived at these numbers while working on a project. It includes UV-A as well as the normally considered violet-red wavelengths. Again, just for giggles, but its fairly close. UV (350-399) 13.6% Violet (400-430) 22.3% Blue...

www.reef2reef.com

FYI about this post, visually this would be a rather blue color temp to our eyes.

There is no such thing as a *perfect* spectrum for corals, but I arrived at these numbers while working on a project. It includes UV-A as well as the normally considered violet-red wavelengths. Again, just for giggles, but its fairly close.

UV (350-399) 13.6%
Violet (400-430) 22.3%
Blue (431-480) 29.0%
Green-Blue (481-490) 4.6%
Blue-Green (491-510) 4.4%
Green (511-530) 7.5%
Yellow-Green (531-570) 5.0%
Yellow (571-580) 1.0%
Orange (581-600) 1.7%
Red (601-700) 10.8%

 

[areefer01]

FYI about this post, visually this would be a rather blue color temp to our eyes.

It was only a reference. I have no skin in this thread outside a new nit picks as you know. Too much personal bias which is not intended to sound disrespectful but rather we have our own preferences. Nothing wrong with that.

On the other hand I do believe there is a lot of market speak in our hobby be it additive or hardware. Lighting kits with words like engineered for, or promote growth, or thriving on the box or description but no links to articles or studies.

Hope your day is well.

 

[buruskeee]

Title title is misleading. If you listen to what’s being said, he runs his lights at 100% power. If you cut the white channels, you’re getting less overall PAR. Of course you’d slow growth when running 100% blue/violet vs 100% blue/violet PLUS 100% white/green/red.

No comment on the (one of many) peer reviewed study I posted?

Also the radium bulbs are basically the AB+ spectrum most lights are geared towards these days (using full channels). Many manufacturers, especially older generations, do have a more heavy blue spectrum which give more of that windex look.

 

[buruskeee]

It was only a reference. I have no skin in this thread outside a new nit picks as you know. Too much personal bias which is not intended to sound disrespectful but rather we have our own preferences. Nothing wrong with that.

On the other hand I do believe there is a lot of market speak in our hobby be it additive or hardware. Lighting kits with words like engineered for, or promote growth, or thriving on the box or description but no links to articles or studies.

Hope your day is well.

Of course. There are lots of marketing because the end game is $$$ for companies. But you still need a baseline to build off of. There’s a reason why the Radium bulb spectrum is highly sought after (which would be way too blue and “unnatural” for some folks on here shaming people who don’t want to run 6500K).

My day is well - just had to call out the one person calling everyone “suckers” for using blues. Everyone else I’ve interacted with is productive back and forth and I enjoy the interactions.

 

[Reefering1]

Of course. There are lots of marketing because the end game is $$$ for companies. But you still need a baseline to build off of. There’s a reason why the Radium bulb spectrum is highly sought after (which would be way too blue and “unnatural” for some folks on here shaming people who don’t want to run 6500K).

My day is well - just had to call out the one person calling everyone “suckers” for using blues. Everyone else I’ve interacted with is productive back and forth and I enjoy the interactions.

Lol. Just "had" to.. what a joke. For people that seem to be intelligent, there sure are a few that can't read very well. You sir, graduate from "sucker" to "idiot" ;-)

 

[VintageReefer]

Meet in the middle. Blues only morning ramping up to full spectrum and a ramp down to blues only for night.

Enjoy the pop in the morning and nights, and crisp white brightness in the afternoon and early evening

 

[djf91]

Title title is misleading. If you listen to what’s being said, he runs his lights at 100% power. If you cut the white channels, you’re getting less overall PAR. Of course you’d slow growth when running 100% blue/violet vs 100% blue/violet PLUS 100% white/green/red.

No comment on the (one of many) peer reviewed study I posted?

Also the radium bulbs are basically the AB+ spectrum most lights are geared towards these days (using full channels). Many manufacturers, especially older generations, do have a more heavy blue spectrum which give more of that windex look.

“I tell people if you’re going to grow them only under blue light, they’re going to grow slower”.

He then goes onto say that corals absorb light across the full spectrum.

And then: “coral growers are using a lot of white light through most of the day for coral growth.”

And then lastly: “if I turned down all of the channels except for blue, then I would be giving them less light, and I would see slower growth”

I don’t know what more you need. Just admit that you only agree with Sanjay when it fits your naive narrative.

 

[djf91]

Nobody has even mentioned yet in this thread the old Iwasaki MH bulb. Supposedly the GOAT for growth. Sadly I never got to use it.

Surely, somebody could match the exact blue wavelengths of this bulb with their LEDs, and only these wavelengths, and they would then have the best growth too.

@buruskeee why would Adam at Battlecorals still continue to use the 6500k Iwasaki bulbs if he could just dial in some Radions to match (only) the blue spectrum of this bulb?

 

[Doctorgori]

Please - get started on all 8 cylinders

Sincerely Lasse

I’ve seen your post; you have knowledge and experience with lighting but the whole LED “white channel” /“blue channel” thing along with “color temperature” has driven a LOT of lighting misunderstandings amongst the post T5/LED generation

For instance you can make white by adding colors… it’s a composite so to speak and “color temperature” is more of a look not a energy level/spectrum thing ( that’s obviously aside from the black body definition). anyway …..

Algea will grow with blue light no problem. Red light helps algea reproduce. It's just a myth that algea won't grow in full blues. You just don't see it as easily in full blue

I’ve said this more than once and IMHO lowering “white” is akin to painting your walls brown to solve a roach infestation…
… basically your ROOT problem is a water issue and for someone from the Halide epoch this is a whitewash thing and a unnecessary shortcut …

I love your tank - one thing I noticed is you run full T5. For whatever reason, I find my coral love my T5 whiter bulbs but get absolutely nuked if I raise the white on my LEDs. There seems to be some kind of difference.

I noticed this also .. it is weird … similar to alkalinity swings: sorta Ok if it’s from a H2O change, not OK when dosing

BTW corals grow under 4800K Halides, and 5500k halides just fine as long as you don’t mind brown ( no telling how much blue energy is embedded in the spectrum
anyway)

BTW blue has more energy and penetrates water

 

[Anxur]

4 Special
2 blu

T5 Coral plus really the worst for me, an hybrid no sense for me...

 

[Lasse]

“color temperature” is more of a look not a energy level/spectrum thing

Exactly and you can reach - as an example - a look that imitating the look of a black body heaten upp to 15000 degree K with many different combinations of wave length. All this below is around 15 000 K . simulation is done with the following set up. 33 pcs of 425 nm , 44 pcs royal blue at 453 nm, 22 pcs of 450 nm, 44 pcs white 7750 K, 22 pcs 6500 K and 11 pcs at 4400 K - all of this run on 1 W at 100 % intensity. 176 pcs RGB blue 465 nm. 176 RGB red 622 nm and 176 RGB green at 527 nm. All of the RGB leds run at 0.33 w each at 100 % intensity

Below I try to show how i looks if I use different ways of achieving around 15 000. I use around 23 % of my total possible output

1 All blue 453 nm -at 45%, 465 nm at 45 %, 425 nm at 42.4 and 450 nm at 25 % All others at 0% => 23730 K
2 all channels on 23 % -> 14890 K
3 453 nm at 21%, 465 nm at 100%, 527 nm at 100 %, 622 nm at 100 % 425 nm at 22.6 % and 450 nm at 23,6 % RGB trick leaving all white at 0 => 14860 K
4 453 nm at 25%, 7750 K at 25&, 6500 K at 25%, 4400 K at 43,5%, 425 nm 21.9 % and 450 nm at 25 %. All others (RGB) at 0 %

4 Special
2 blu

I love your tank - one thing I noticed is you run full T5. For whatever reason, I find my coral love my T5 whiter bulbs but get absolutely nuked if I raise the white on my LEDs. There seems to be some kind of difference.

This is because that ATI Special use the RGB trick I use in picture 3 above. ATI special have a spectrum like this. The spikes att 550 and 620 trick our eyes and brain to see a white tint. White light is a combination of all wavelengths but our eyes only see blue, green and red and our brain does the rest of the trick.

If you ad a 8000 K white LED to this you also give the other PAR rich wavelengths - like this

Photo without filter and with the same white balance. It looks like this in real life.

Sincerely Lasse

 

[Anxur]

Exactly and you can reach - as an example - a look that imitating the look of a black body heaten upp to 15000 degree K with many different combinations of wave length. All this below is around 15 000 K . simulation is done with the following set up. 33 pcs of 425 nm , 44 pcs royal blue at 453 nm, 22 pcs of 450 nm, 44 pcs white 7750 K, 22 pcs 6500 K and 11 pcs at 4400 K - all of this run on 1 W at 100 % intensity. 176 pcs RGB blue 465 nm. 176 RGB red 622 nm and 176 RGB green at 527 nm. All of the RGB leds run at 0.33 w each at 100 % intensity

Below I try to show how i looks if I use different ways of achieving around 15 000. I use around 23 % of my total possible output

1 All blue 453 nm -at 45%, 465 nm at 45 %, 425 nm at 42.4 and 450 nm at 25 % All others at 0% => 23730 K
2 all channels on 23 % -> 14890 K
3 453 nm at 21%, 465 nm at 100%, 527 nm at 100 %, 622 nm at 100 % 425 nm at 22.6 % and 450 nm at 23,6 % RGB trick leaving all white at 0 => 14860 K
4 453 nm at 25%, 7750 K at 25&, 6500 K at 25%, 4400 K at 43,5%, 425 nm 21.9 % and 450 nm at 25 %. All others (RGB) at 0 %

This is because that ATI Special use the RGB trick I use in picture 3 above. ATI special have a spectrum like this. The spikes att 550 and 620 trick our eyes and brain to see a white tint. White light is a combination of all wavelengths but our eyes only see blue, green and red and our brain does the rest of the trick.

If you ad a 8000 K white LED to this you also give the other PAR rich wavelengths - like this

Photo without filter and with the same white balance. It looks like this in real life.

Sincerely Lasse

This is the sun spectrum over the reef...

Blu light is like a woman's mask.. Cover disaster, cover algae, cover all..
Blu light is magic...to cover disaster..

 

[Anxur]

 

[GARRIGA]

More PAR in higher spectrum means more uglies to come with it, along with wasted power/heat. It’s mostly just about efficiency (and more so visual preference).

The majority of reefers keep between 10k-15k, while the “I’m right and you’re wrong crowd” of the 6500K along with the full windex folks are more in the minority. Visually it’s just a great balance of not being washed out while still providing some pop and color variety.

Coral farms run at huge scale so minimizing wattage is huge for the bottom line, along with less maintenance with uglies and hiding uglies easier for showing.

Not convinced higher PAR brings more uglies plus PAR isn't based on light intensity of all colors but intensity of specific colors. See below. Therefore one can get identical PAR readings regardless if all blues or full spectrum.

PAR stands for photosynthetic active radiation and describes the wavelengths of light that sit within the visible range of 400-700nm

Becoming more partial to the theory it's all about competition and predation. On the reef algae would grow rampant were it not for predators. Same PAR keeping corals thriving.

 

[SeaDweller]

what the heck are you all arguing about? I get great colors and fluorescence under all blue/UV BECAUSE of the heavy dose of a full, well rounded daylight spectrum I give my tank.

You can have the best of both worlds, dud(ette)s.

 

[Lasse]

From an earlier experiments where I try to explain the differences between reflecting colours and and colours created by florescence

Colours of corals

In the thread https://www.reef2reef.com/threads/have-we-been-wrong-in-our-understanding-of-par-this-whole-time.1035018/ all from PAR to coral colourations is discussed. Among other things - coral colouration during different wavelengths was discussed. I decide to start an own thread according...

www.reef2reef.com

Colours of corals

I am always impressed with your responses... thank you. Now about the space stuff, what's your take- why do the pics look so impressive? Something about ir, as far as I know; if so, how could ir possibly not be meaningful to life on earth? Haha, thank you, and I'm not sure on the space/IR stuff...

www.reef2reef.com

Colours of corals

I am always impressed with your responses... thank you. Now about the space stuff, what's your take- why do the pics look so impressive? Something about ir, as far as I know; if so, how could ir possibly not be meaningful to life on earth? Haha, thank you, and I'm not sure on the space/IR stuff...

www.reef2reef.com

Sincerely Lasse

 

[deome]

I switched to the WWC lighting template (below) this summer while battling a huge algae outbreak. To answer poll question, yes I love full spectrum lighting, but so does algae (not as much as red or green, but jussayin). The template recommends 4-6 hours of full spectrum + blue + UV, 6-8 hours blue + UV, 12 hour schedule; I use 6 and 6, and now I never see algae establish itself in any tank running this lighting schedule (I'm sure other things I do for algae control contribute, but it grows freely in my refugium where I want it to stay, and nowhere else).


Short answer: blue light good for corals, but really bad for algae. Both reasons are why I use blue lighting, but it's especially for algae control. Since I changed to the WWC template, everything in my tank looks happier (LPS dominant/mixed reef tank), and I'm a huge fan of set and forget.

If I had a compelling reason to not use blue lighting, I would switch back to 12 hours of blue + UV + full spectrum because I actually *don't* like my tank looking like a rave; a little florescence under white light is enough for me.

 

[Solo McReefer]

He writes "true color" as if it's a real thing

Half the color in our tanks is reflected color

The other half is fluorescent color

 

[buruskeee]

“I tell people if you’re going to grow them only under blue light, they’re going to grow slower”.

He then goes onto say that corals absorb light across the full spectrum.

And then: “coral growers are using a lot of white light through most of the day for coral growth.”

And then lastly: “if I turned down all of the channels except for blue, then I would be giving them less light, and I would see slower growth”

I don’t know what more you need. Just admit that you only agree with Sanjay when it fits your naive narrative.

He clearly states he runs his lights all channels 100% then said when he runs just blue growth is slowed. That’s pretty obvious if you’re using half the power of the fixtures.

Nice that you’ve still ignored the peer reviewed study I shared that proves blue is what corals are most sensitive to.

No I don’t care for narratives. I’m just sharing facts. As I said, I don’t care if people run their tanks in full 100CRI or straight windex blue - everyone has their preferences and trying to tell someone e they’re doing it wrong because it’s not their taste is just silly. To put out false statements that blue is worse for corals because of how you comprehend someone’s context, when there are literal scientific studies that prove otherwise, is what pushing a narrative means.

Again, here’s the scientific study. Please share your thoughts on why it’s wrong.

Checking your browser - reCAPTCHA

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

And here’s another one.

Effects of LED Light Illumination on the Growth, Digestive Enzymes, and Photoacclimation of Goniopora columna in Captivity - PMC

Coral aquaculture is a new industry, which is of great importance to the sustainable development of coral reefs and meeting commercial needs. Light sources are crucial for the growth of corals because zooxanthellae provide them with essential ...

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

And there’s tons more I can keep sharing that prove it repeatedly.