Neptune SKY LED

[GillMeister]

I'm still working on my first cup of coffee.

I'm on cup #4 by 8am or my heart stops. It would be really nice if you could spend some time focusing on the control interface. I'm interested in seeing if they took full advantage of the Fusion platform to develop an intuitive and capable interface or if they dropped the ball.

 

[GillMeister]

I would take anything negative posted by the moderator of a competitors user group, like LUX, with a huge grain of salt. Pretty low class tactics if you ask me

 

[Dana Riddle]

@Dana Riddle sorry if you've already answered this, but do yu have any intention of testing out the ATI Straton? I am already running three of them so I am pretty committed already, but who does not want some confirmation to go along with their bias?

I've heard the Stratons are good lights, although I've never tested one. It boils down to my finances and time available to dedicate to testing. Some manufactures offer lighting for testing at little or no charge. If there is a charge, I have to consider the bank book. If I do get a lamp. it can take weeks or months to investigate and write an objective report. I do seem to recall that a Straton was offered at one point, but the timing didn't work out for me.

 

[Dana Riddle]

I'm on cup #4 by 8am or my heart stops. It would be really nice if you could spend some time focusing on the control interface. I'm interested in seeing if they took full advantage of the Fusion platform to develop an intuitive and capable interface or if they dropped the ball.

LOL. Caffeine. Gotta love it. The programming for the SKY is simple, especially for an old guy like me who was introduced to cloud-based services during my advanced years. I'll include my thoughts on programming in the report. But can say it's easy both on a PC and an Android phone. I heard the same is true for Apple devices.

 

[areefer01]

LOL. Caffeine. Gotta love it. The programming for the SKY is simple, especially for an old guy like me who was introduced to cloud-based services during my advanced years. I'll include my thoughts on programming in the report. But can say it's easy both on a PC and an Android phone. I heard the same is true for Apple devices.

Not just you. The phone app is super simple to use and the light will be up and running within 3 to 5 minutes. Even when connected to the aquabus it is only a matter of minutes.

I do not care to use phone apps but in this case it was super easy and my preferred method of accessing the lights. Also to those in general here the phone app has some great range. I was in my kitchen, my display is in my office, 2 walls, and I could change spectrum via the app and it was reaching the SKY lights.

 

[Hooz]

I would take anything negative posted by the moderator of a competitors user group, like LUX, with a huge grain of salt. Pretty low class tactics if you ask me

I get it, but if that's their "AB+" setting, the spectrometer says "nope". Do you have a $3k spectrometer to use to dial in a custom setting?

 

[Jon's Reef]

I get it, but if that's their "AB+" setting, the spectrometer says "nope". Do you have a $3k spectrometer to use to dial in a custom setting?

The AB+ spectrum is shown in @Dana Riddle recent interview:

It is a pretty close match, with the 450 nm peak accentuated a bit.

 

[Acrofiend]

ATI Straton:
153 5 watt LEDs being ran at 1.5 watts with the ability to reach 500+ par.
Larger panel compared to other panel style lights. (15”x15”)
Sleeker looking fixture compared to Sky, Coral care.
BRS merging with Neptune shows why they haven’t put out a review on the Straton even though its been out for months.

 

[theishkid]

In the last two months they've done videos on lights from AI, Reef Bright, and about 4 different videos dealing with Kessil. Other than a "first look" they haven't done anything regarding their own "Sky" which they would have more compelling reasons to do. Maybe give them a little bit of a break. Maybe they are pushing lights that are selling, or maybe they just can't get any of the Stratons in stock to do a test. They have been out of stock forever.
Give them a couple months to see what actually happens with these buyouts and mergers before you start calling them out.

 

[Hurricane Aquatics]

The AB+ spectrum is shown in @Dana Riddle recent interview:

It is a pretty close match, with the 450 nm peak accentuated a bit.

I watched that yesterday and just not a fan of Terrence. Personal feelings aside, that light has a terrible UV spectrum. UV is extremely important in a light fixture and none seem to really understand that one simple fact. Glad the people that have them are happy with them. From the looks of the spectrum, I am sure some of the long time reefers that were using 10k MH's are very happy with the look of them.

I've heard the Stratons are good lights, although I've never tested one. It boils down to my finances and time available to dedicate to testing. Some manufactures offer lighting for testing at little or no charge. If there is a charge, I have to consider the bank book. If I do get a lamp. it can take weeks or months to investigate and write an objective report. I do seem to recall that a Straton was offered at one point, but the timing didn't work out for me.

I received an ATI Straton about a week ago and I am a light junkie who has used and tested just about every light that has been released since 2011. The ATI Straton has impressed me beyond words in just a week. I have never, ever seen my entire tank of corals respond as quickly and as dramatically as they have under the Straton.

As I am sure you have gathered, it is an amazingly well built fixture, which I really appreciate. I also like that they included 18 UV leds (405nm) and 18 Violet leds (420nm) as well. I would recommend these to anyone over any fixture that is currently out there.

I will be interested to see the Neptune Sky in person when they come around. I hope everyone likes them and has great luck out of them.

 

[Downfall]

I watched that yesterday and just not a fan of Terrence. Personal feelings aside, that light has a terrible UV spectrum. UV is extremely important in a light fixture and none seem to really understand that one simple fact. Glad the people that have them are happy with them. From the looks of the spectrum, I am sure some of the long time reefers that were using 10k MH's are very happy with the look of them.



I received an ATI Straton about a week ago and I am a light junkie who has used and tested just about every light that has been released since 2011. The ATI Straton has impressed me beyond words in just a week. I have never, ever seen my entire tank of corals respond as quickly and as dramatically as they have under the Straton.

As I am sure you have gathered, it is an amazingly well built fixture, which I really appreciate. I also like that they included 18 UV leds (405nm) and 18 Violet leds (420nm) as well. I would recommend these to anyone over any fixture that is currently out there.

I will be interested to see the Neptune Sky in person when they come around. I hope everyone likes them and has great luck out of them.

I'm genuinely curious why UV is "extremely important" could you please explain or point me in the right direction to read more?

 

[GillMeister]

I'm genuinely curious why UV is "extremely important" could you please explain or point me in the right direction to read more?

The blue end of the spectrum is what feeds the symbiotic algaes photosynthesis process. 420nm and 460nm are the light frequencies commonly looked for in a light.

The poster is saying the SKY light didnt peak strongly in this spectrum for these settings. The implication appears to be that SKY can't match what others consider an ideal lighting profile found on other lights.

It also appears this is based on observations of a preset program. We don't yet know if a cistom program would match results more in line with the posters preferences.

 

[hart24601]

I watched that yesterday and just not a fan of Terrence. Personal feelings aside, that light has a terrible UV spectrum. UV is extremely important in a light fixture and none seem to really understand that one simple fact. Glad the people that have them are happy with them. From the looks of the spectrum, I am sure some of the long time reefers that were using 10k MH's are very happy with the look of them.



I received an ATI Straton about a week ago and I am a light junkie who has used and tested just about every light that has been released since 2011. The ATI Straton has impressed me beyond words in just a week. I have never, ever seen my entire tank of corals respond as quickly and as dramatically as they have under the Straton.

As I am sure you have gathered, it is an amazingly well built fixture, which I really appreciate. I also like that they included 18 UV leds (405nm) and 18 Violet leds (420nm) as well. I would recommend these to anyone over any fixture that is currently out there.

I will be interested to see the Neptune Sky in person when they come around. I hope everyone likes them and has great luck out of them.

Looking at the video it appears the sky has ~400 and some around 420-425 as well based on the bumps in the graph. I don't how how many of those it has though, maybe I missed it. I have orphek which has 380nm UV but it looks like orpheks new boards they dropped those for 400nm. Kessil also has a diode in the 380 range in their lights.

 

[GillMeister]

Looking at the video it appears the sky has ~400 and some around 420-425 as well based on the bumps in the graph. I don't how how many of those it has though, maybe I missed it. I have orphek which has 380nm UV but it looks like orpheks new boards they dropped those for 400nm. Kessil also has a diode in the 380 range in their lights.

Ryan and Randy just noted on a live BRSTV video that the spectrum on the SKY light isn't as wide as some of the competition. The observation stated about the video with Terrence and Dana and the lack of lower spectrum could be correct.

 

[flourishofmediocrity]

The spectrum for the SKY seems to peak about 445-450 according to the BRS investigates:

Then a little later, they explain again why that range is so important: that is the range that is used for photosynthesis.

My question for those saying that UV is so important, why? Why is UV needed? What biological function in corals requires UV? When I do a search for "why is UV important to reefs?" the only thing that comes up is a bunch of articles on impact of chemical vs mineral sunscreen impact on coral reefs, and nothing about the science of why UV light is needed by corals.

 

[GillMeister]

The spectrum for the SKY seems to peak about 445-450 according to the BRS investigates:

Then a little later, they explain again why that range is so important: that is the range that is used for photosynthesis.

My question for those saying that UV is so important, why? Why is UV needed? What biological function in corals requires UV? When I do a search for "why is UV important to reefs?" the only thing that comes up is a bunch of articles on impact of chemical vs mineral sunscreen impact on coral reefs, and nothing about the science of why UV light is needed by corals.

Try googling "UV light and photosynthesis". You'll come away with an entirely different opinion.

 

[flourishofmediocrity]

Try googling "UV light and photosynthesis". You'll come away with an entirely different opinion.

Ok, I use duckduckgo and the second link that comes up:

https://journals.asm.org/doi/10.1128/aem.64.10.3893-3899.1998?permanently=true&

which is a scientific journal titled "

Effects of Visible Light and UV Radiation on Photosynthesis in a Population of a Hot Spring Cyanobacterium, aSynechococcus sp., Subjected to High-Temperature Stress"​

and it basically says that UV inhibits photosynthesis. I don't want to muddy the waters too much here, the article is about the way temperature affects how much UV inhibits photosynthesis, but the point is some people seem to think that UV is NEEDED for photosynthesis, and the first thing I find says that it inhibits it.

Instead of telling me to "google" it, do you have any actual data or articles highlighting the importance of UV for reefs, and why it helps our reef tanks?

Below is the part of the article that talks about UV inhibiting photosynthesis. I don't want to copy / paste the whole thing:

UV inhibition of photosynthesis.​

Estimates of mean UVA and UVB fluxes and their associated standard errors were 30.3 ± 4.81 and 2.3 ± 0.38 W m−2, respectively, for the first experiment of 8 July 1995. These values were 34.7 ± 1.16 and 2.7 ± 0.12 W m−2 for the second experiment of 8 July 1995, and they were 38.8 ± 0.38 and 3.1 ± 0.13 W m−2 for the experiment of 25 June 1996.
UV inhibition data for the three temperatures are presented in Fig. 2and Table 3. Since an interaction between irradiance and UV treatments was never observed (P > 0.20 in all cases), irradiance and UV treatments were pooled for a single estimate of UV inhibition at each temperature (see Materials and Methods). The three temperature treatments exhibited different susceptibilities to UV inhibition (Table 3). Octopus Spring cells were consistently inhibited by UV radiation at a suboptimal temperature (55°C). UV inhibition was observed at 70°C for the second experiment of 8 July 1995 and 25 June 1996 and at 65°C only for the second experiment of 8 July 1995. The UV effect at 65°C occurred only when UV inhibition was detected at the other two temperatures as well. No significant differences in magnitude of UV inhibition were observed at temperatures exhibiting UV-induced depression of carbon assimilation, with estimated means ranging from 13.5 to 35.4%

EDIT: I'm not trying to be confrontational or anything, I just want to know what YOU know.

 

[flourishofmediocrity]

Here's another one:

https://www.journals.uchicago.edu/doi/10.2307/25066620

Effects of Temperature and UV Radiation Increases on the Photosynthetic Efficiency in Four Scleractinian Coral Species​

Experiments were performed on coral species containing clade A (Stylophora pistillata, Montipora aequituberculata) or clade C (Acropora sp., Pavona cactus) zooxanthellae. The photosynthetic efficiency (Fv/Fm) of the corals was first assessed during a short-term increase in temperature (from 27 °C to 29 °C, 32 °C, and 34 °C) and acute exposure to UV radiation (20.5 W m−2 UVA and 1.2 W m−2 UVB) alone or in combination. Increasing temperature to 34 °C significantly decreased the Fv/Fm in S. pistillata and M. aequituberculata. Increased UV radiation alone significantly decreased the Fv/Fm of all coral species, even at 27 °C. There was a combined effect of temperature and UV radiation, which reduced Fv/Fm in all corals by 25% to 40%. During a long-term exposure to UV radiation (17 days) the Fv/Fm was significantly reduced after 3 days’ exposure in all species, which did not recover their initial values, even after 17 days. By this time, all corals had synthesized mycosporine-like amino acids (MAAs). The concentration and diversity of MAAs differed among species, being higher for corals containing clade A zooxanthellae. Prolonged exposure to UV radiation at the nonstressful temperature of 27 °C conferred protection against independent, thermally induced photoinhibition in all four species.


**********************************************************************************************

I also saw on Orphek's site that corals have to protect themselves from UV-A and UV-B or they'll bleach, and they say that some UV is needed by the corals, but they don't say why.

 

[oreo54]

The blue end of the spectrum is what feeds the symbiotic algaes photosynthesis process. 420nm and 460nm are the light frequencies commonly looked for in a light.

The poster is saying the SKY light didnt peak strongly in this spectrum for these settings. The implication appears to be that SKY can't match what others consider an ideal lighting profile found on other lights.

Not sure why..
"A"

"C2"

Chlorophyll c2 is the most common form of chlorophyll c.[7] Its absorption maxima are around 447, 580, 627 nm and 450, 581, 629 nm in diethyl ether and acetone respectively.[

Keep in mind nm does shift in "real life" a bit.
A list of all the pigments:
ATI peaks at 450.. approx. Not sure why BRS shows 460 BUT does demonstrate a lot of err "slop" in the system
inc. ATI changing phosphors

 

[oreo54]

Here's another one:

https://www.journals.uchicago.edu/doi/10.2307/25066620

Effects of Temperature and UV Radiation Increases on the Photosynthetic Efficiency in Four Scleractinian Coral Species​

Experiments were performed on coral species containing clade A (Stylophora pistillata, Montipora aequituberculata) or clade C (Acropora sp., Pavona cactus) zooxanthellae. The photosynthetic efficiency (Fv/Fm) of the corals was first assessed during a short-term increase in temperature (from 27 °C to 29 °C, 32 °C, and 34 °C) and acute exposure to UV radiation (20.5 W m−2 UVA and 1.2 W m−2 UVB) alone or in combination. Increasing temperature to 34 °C significantly decreased the Fv/Fm in S. pistillata and M. aequituberculata. Increased UV radiation alone significantly decreased the Fv/Fm of all coral species, even at 27 °C. There was a combined effect of temperature and UV radiation, which reduced Fv/Fm in all corals by 25% to 40%. During a long-term exposure to UV radiation (17 days) the Fv/Fm was significantly reduced after 3 days’ exposure in all species, which did not recover their initial values, even after 17 days. By this time, all corals had synthesized mycosporine-like amino acids (MAAs). The concentration and diversity of MAAs differed among species, being higher for corals containing clade A zooxanthellae. Prolonged exposure to UV radiation at the nonstressful temperature of 27 °C conferred protection against independent, thermally induced photoinhibition in all four species.


**********************************************************************************************

I also saw on Orphek's site that corals have to protect themselves from UV-A and UV-B or they'll bleach, and they say that some UV is needed by the corals, but they don't say why.

Well part of this is the loose term of "UV".
another part is the different divisions in UV

Some UV-a is used or useable in photosynthesis directly.
Some UV "irritates" the corals enough to produce nice colorful pigments
Some UV "may" help health by irritating bacteria and other pests.

I've yet to find any real documented proof that UV does anything more than the above.
Blue on a par to par basis can substitute for many of the "UV" effects.

From a terrestrial plant perspective, not that it means much..

Light signaling and plant responses to blue and UV radiations—Perspectives for applications in horticulture

Ultra-violet (UV) and blue radiations are perceived by plants through several photoreceptors. They regulate a large range of processes throughout plan…

www.sciencedirect.com