Ad blocker detected: Our website is made possible by displaying online advertisements to our visitors. Please consider supporting us by disabling your ad blocker on our website.
There are so many different types and classifications of lume now that for me it can be difficult to know how bright or how long a given watch will hold illumintion. Hoping to use this thread for discussion and comparison of different types of luminescence to use as a guide, and linking to any online resources that may be useful. As a starter, I found this graphic for different grades of Super Luminova at Lucius Atelier:
Thanks for the primer! Honestly the freshly charged lume shots seen on watch forums mean little. Any decent camera can make any lume look bright. What's interesting are shots at the same exposure at least 30 minutes later. Preferably with control watches for comparison. The linked video did it right.
Bolster wrote: ↑Wed Dec 26, 2018 1:21 am
Thanks for the primer! Honestly the freshly charged lume shots seen on watch forums mean little. Any decent camera can make any lume look bright. What's interesting are shots at the same exposure at least 30 minutes later. Preferably with control watches for comparison. The linked video did it right.
Couldn’t agree more. I think the two components I care most about are brightness and longevity. I use my lumed watches for readability when I wake up in the night / early morning, so brightness about 4 to 6 hours in is most important. If I get a chance I want to do a test showing initial brightness, +30min, and then 2 hour increments (+2hr > +4hr > +6hr).
Click Icon To Contact Me
’There is a crack in everything. That’s how the light gets in.’ - Leonard Cohen, Anthem ’One man's faith is another man's delusion.’ - Anthony Storr
FTE wrote: ↑Wed Dec 26, 2018 1:32 am I use my lumed watches for readability when I wake up in the night / early morning, so brightness about 4 to 6 hours in is most important. If I get a chance I want to do a test showing initial brightness, +30min, and then 2 hour increments (+2hr > +4hr > +6hr).
I'm settling on a particular camera exposure to help me judge lume. I set my camera to ASA400, set the lens to f/2, and expose for 1 second. Any lume still readily visible 30 minutes after charging, is easily readable far into the night. But that 30 minutes of waiting really separates the men from the boys, lume-wise.
Some of the Seiko full-lume watches are awfully bright. I have an inexpensive full-lume Alba (a Seiko cousin) that's like a flashlight. The most readable watch at 5am for me is the Borealis Portus Cale.
FTE wrote: ↑Wed Dec 26, 2018 1:32 am I use my lumed watches for readability when I wake up in the night / early morning, so brightness about 4 to 6 hours in is most important. If I get a chance I want to do a test showing initial brightness, +30min, and then 2 hour increments (+2hr > +4hr > +6hr).
I'm settling on a particular camera exposure to help me judge lume. I set my camera to ASA400, set the lens to f/2, and expose for 1 second. Any lume still readily visible 30 minutes after charging, is easily readable far into the night. But that 30 minutes of waiting really separates the men from the boys, lume-wise.
Some of the Seiko full-lume watches are awfully bright. I have an inexpensive full-lume Alba (a Seiko cousin) that's like a flashlight. The most readable watch at 5am for me is the Borealis Portus Cale.
What are yours?
Sounds like you have some expeience in photography. I will have to give it a try here. My most readable watch at night is my Zelos Mako II. It is brighter and holds a charge longer than any of my other watches.
Click Icon To Contact Me
’There is a crack in everything. That’s how the light gets in.’ - Leonard Cohen, Anthem ’One man's faith is another man's delusion.’ - Anthony Storr
First image is a collection of watches, freshly charged. Second is the same collection 30 minutes later. Exposure was ASA400, f/2, 1 second for both exposures. Any watches that are reasonably readable in the second photo will be easily readable at 5am in the morning. Those you can't read well (or at all) in the bottom photo will die sometime in the night; some of them don't even make it to midnight. That bright one, the full face lume in the top row, second from the right, is an Alba AQGJ404, probably some of the best lume you can get for $75.
Bolster wrote:First image is a collection of watches, freshly charged. Second is the same collection 30 minutes later. Exposure was ASA400, f/2, 1 second for both exposures. Any watches that are reasonably readable in the second photo will be easily readable at 5am in the morning. Those you can't read well (or at all) in the bottom photo will die sometime in the night; some of them don't even make it to midnight. That bright one, the full face lume in the top row, second from the right, is an Alba AQGJ404, probably some of the best lume you can get for $75.
Wow I've never heard of alba but that lume is incredible. I'm curious to see more pics of it now
FTE wrote:
Same here...that Alba looks amazing! What are the other watches in the photos?
Hi guys. I didn't list the watches because they are likely of no interest to you...you guys are primarily $500 and up mechanical gourmets, and I am a $50 quartz gourmand. But since you asked, top row L to R: Wenger Quartz Alarm; 1990s Seiko Quartz Ultrasonic Alarm (great lume!); Momentum Quartz Pathfinder III (modified with one white, one black hand); Borealis Portus Cale; Alba Quartz AQGJ404 (insane lume!!); Momentum Quartz Torpedo (poor lume). Bottom row L to R: Timex Quartz Countdown (worst lume of all, but indiglo); Seiko 5 Countdown; Wenger Quartz Off Road (incredibly good lume, better than the Seiko 5, but on hands only); Glycine Combat Sub (lume fades quickly but still readable at 5am--an example of quick-fade-long-last lume); Nixon Quartz Ranger GMT; Nixon Quartz Ranger, the latter two having modest lume, but still readable in the wee hours.
The AQGH404 has personality issues; jangly cheap bracelet and an obnoxiously large bifocal. Japanese components in a China assembled watch. Alba is a "not for gweilo" Seiko-affiliated brand sold in the orient. Can get them easily enough on eBay. I researched and bought it because I wanted to experience a full-face Seiko lume. Did not disappoint in that respect.
Regards charging. The article that FTE links above says: "Ref. Note 4 above, this is saying that if we charge up our lume with lotsa UV for 1000 hrs or more, the lume will be permanently degraded with a 20% loss of brightness." So UV both excites and kills lume. UV-emitting lights include: UV-specific lights of any type (I've seen them recommended many times for charging watch lume = bad idea!), daylight, fluorescent lights including CFLs, and mercury vapor lights.
To charge my watches, I use a white LED worklight (Snap-on branded). Will that degrade the lume? Probably not, since white "LED lights do not emit any UV (Ultra Violet) rays. Unlike other light bulbs that do give off small amounts of UV radiation due to the particular technology inherent in them, LED light technology does not produce UV radiation...LEDs do not generate UV radiation because they are lit through a process which involves electrical current flowing to semiconductors" (LEDlights.org)
This probably also means that my LED light is not an efficient charger, so I have probably UNDER-represented lume capacity in my photos above.
Bolster wrote:
Regards charging. The article that FTE links above says: "Ref. Note 4 above, this is saying that if we charge up our lume with lotsa UV for 1000 hrs or more, the lume will be permanently degraded with a 20% loss of brightness." So UV both excites and kills lume. UV-emitting lights include: UV-specific lights of any type (I've seen them recommended many times for charging watch lume = bad idea!), daylight, fluorescent lights including CFLs, and mercury vapor lights.
To charge my watches, I use a white LED worklight (Snap-on branded). Will that degrade the lume? Probably not, since white "LED lights do not emit any UV (Ultra Violet) rays. Unlike other light bulbs that do give off small amounts of UV radiation due to the particular technology inherent in them, LED light technology does not produce UV radiation...LEDs do not generate UV radiation because they are lit through a process which involves electrical current flowing to semiconductors" (LEDlights.org)
This probably also means that my LED light is not an efficient charger, so I have probably UNDER-represented lume capacity in my photos above.
True that UV light over time does degrade lume. The thing is, even a UV light held up close to charge a watch produces far less UV than being out in the sun. So if you are going to wear your watch outside for a couple hours, you run far greater risk of degrading the lume than sitting all day with a tiny UV flashlight on it. You are correct that cool white LED’s emit almost no UV, and therefore are not great for charging UV-reactive lume. There is a great thread on this topic back on the WuS site.
Click Icon To Contact Me
’There is a crack in everything. That’s how the light gets in.’ - Leonard Cohen, Anthem ’One man's faith is another man's delusion.’ - Anthony Storr
Bolster wrote:
Regards charging. The article that FTE links above says: "Ref. Note 4 above, this is saying that if we charge up our lume with lotsa UV for 1000 hrs or more, the lume will be permanently degraded with a 20% loss of brightness." So UV both excites and kills lume. UV-emitting lights include: UV-specific lights of any type (I've seen them recommended many times for charging watch lume = bad idea!), daylight, fluorescent lights including CFLs, and mercury vapor lights.
To charge my watches, I use a white LED worklight (Snap-on branded). Will that degrade the lume? Probably not, since white "LED lights do not emit any UV (Ultra Violet) rays. Unlike other light bulbs that do give off small amounts of UV radiation due to the particular technology inherent in them, LED light technology does not produce UV radiation...LEDs do not generate UV radiation because they are lit through a process which involves electrical current flowing to semiconductors" (LEDlights.org)
This probably also means that my LED light is not an efficient charger, so I have probably UNDER-represented lume capacity in my photos above.
True that UV light over time does degrade lume. The thing is, even a UV light held up close to charge a watch produces far less UV than being out in the sun. So if you are going to wear your watch outside for a couple hours, you run far greater risk of degrading the lume than sitting all day with a tiny UV flashlight on it. You are correct that cool white LED’s emit almost no UV, and therefore are not great for charging UV-reactive lume. There is a great thread on this topic back on the WuS site.
Yes that's all true, but I don't worry about degrading the lume on my watches. Depending on the watch of course, any skilled watchmaker can do a reapplication of the lume relatively inexpensive.
Bolster wrote:
Regards charging. The article that FTE links above says: "Ref. Note 4 above, this is saying that if we charge up our lume with lotsa UV for 1000 hrs or more, the lume will be permanently degraded with a 20% loss of brightness." So UV both excites and kills lume. UV-emitting lights include: UV-specific lights of any type (I've seen them recommended many times for charging watch lume = bad idea!), daylight, fluorescent lights including CFLs, and mercury vapor lights.
To charge my watches, I use a white LED worklight (Snap-on branded). Will that degrade the lume? Probably not, since white "LED lights do not emit any UV (Ultra Violet) rays. Unlike other light bulbs that do give off small amounts of UV radiation due to the particular technology inherent in them, LED light technology does not produce UV radiation...LEDs do not generate UV radiation because they are lit through a process which involves electrical current flowing to semiconductors" (LEDlights.org)
This probably also means that my LED light is not an efficient charger, so I have probably UNDER-represented lume capacity in my photos above.
True that UV light over time does degrade lume. The thing is, even a UV light held up close to charge a watch produces far less UV than being out in the sun. So if you are going to wear your watch outside for a couple hours, you run far greater risk of degrading the lume than sitting all day with a tiny UV flashlight on it. You are correct that cool white LED’s emit almost no UV, and therefore are not great for charging UV-reactive lume. There is a great thread on this topic back on the WuS site.
Yes that's all true, but I don't worry about degrading the lume on my watches. Depending on the watch of course, any skilled watchmaker can do a reapplication of the lume relatively inexpensive.
Agreed, and there is no reason not to use a UV torch to charge the lume....it does less damge than normal wear.
Click Icon To Contact Me
’There is a crack in everything. That’s how the light gets in.’ - Leonard Cohen, Anthem ’One man's faith is another man's delusion.’ - Anthony Storr
FTE wrote:
True that UV light over time does degrade lume. The thing is, even a UV light held up close to charge a watch produces far less UV than being out in the sun. So if you are going to wear your watch outside for a couple hours, you run far greater risk of degrading the lume than sitting all day with a tiny UV flashlight on it. You are correct that cool white LED’s emit almost no UV, and therefore are not great for charging UV-reactive lume. There is a great thread on this topic back on the WuS site.
Yes that's all true, but I don't worry about degrading the lume on my watches. Depending on the watch of course, any skilled watchmaker can do a reapplication of the lume relatively inexpensive.
Agreed, and there is no reason not to use a UV torch to charge the lume....it does less damge than normal wear.
The UV flashlight does seem pretty insignificant. I think I take 30 seconds to charge mine with the flashlight. That means I would have to do it 120,000 times to reach that 1000 hours degradation level. Seems unlikely that I would ever do it even 1000 times.
FTE wrote: ↑Fri Dec 28, 2018 6:11 pm True that UV light over time does degrade lume. The thing is, even a UV light held up close to charge a watch produces far less UV than being out in the sun. So if you are going to wear your watch outside for a couple hours, you run far greater risk of degrading the lume than sitting all day with a tiny UV flashlight on it...
Interesting. I had gotten the idea from my time at CPF that some UV lights were dangerous to the eyes, much more so than sunlight, so I imagined they might also degrade lume as well. But you never know how much of the info you read online is empirical, and how much of it is just hyperventilation and gossipy fearmongering. You read a thread like the following, and you get real cautious around UV flashlights, even if your logical mind knows better... Of course we're talking watches, not eyes, so watch lume damage doesn't matter much.
