M.V. & Flourescent Blacklights vs. Elation LED UV Fixtures

After reading deeply into the Black Light thread and slightly frying my brain, I come back with this question.

Has anyone used the Elation Design 36UV? I am wondering how these stack up to traditional black lights suchs as the Wildfires, Altmans, UV Cannon, UV wash, etc.... basically any black light that is not L.E.D

AM I to understand that based on what I became overwhelemed with in the UV thread that the L.E.D black light is probably a Black Light-Blue effect as opposed to a clean true UV ouput?

Maybe thats even gettin gtoo deep for what I really need to know. Answer if you will, but also let's just get more direct.....has anyone seen the L.E.D Blacklight in action? It has photometric data on elations site but it appears very low to me. Problem is, I am uncertain as to how the reflected light, in this case, people at a club wearing white clothing....is measured when we are talking about this spectrum of light. Does the lumens spec follow the same outlines as visible light?

We are debating getting a bunch of UV washes or some of these Design LED 36UV's but I can't even start to consider the purchase until I know more about it and get to see it somewhere.

The onhly UV LED's if seen have been in a small flashlight about a year ago and it didn't do squat!

thanks in advance,
jeff
 
We just put Chauvets LED Shadow UV fixture to Elations UV Wash. No comparison... UV Wash was more than twice as bright with broader coverage.
Considering the relative cost per fixture, the UV Wash is by far the better value.


That helps in the comparison between those two for sure but still, the problem still within is the fact that the Chavet fixture is using 1/8 or 1/4 watt led's? Doesnt say on the spec but from the looks of it, i'd guess 1/8 watt? The Elation uses 1 watt LED's. Massive difference. 3 watt (not UV though) is coming out 1st quarter this year too so I have a bit of waiting to do as I think there may be another incredible boost in output, possibly in UV versions too. Even if they do put that out though, I still want some user feedback on if 1 watt or 3 watt UV LED's are a viable replacement or competition for the FL and MV lamp standards. Since the 3 watt version is not out yet, my question still remains between the Elation UV36 and the UV Wash, as well as against the UV Cannon, and other competetive same price range models.

However, since you have the comparison from each type of output....aside from the overall intensity, does the LED ones you have truly output UV or does it look more simply like dark blue light which isn't making anything glow but rather just blue....like a regular lamp with a blue gel on it. Are these LED's really putting off UV or just simulated?

It is nice to hear though that you like the UV Wash overall. THey are at a good price point so it won't hurt the pocket to by a bunch. I think 6 could cover a dance floor of say 300 people wearing white, yes? I want intense coverage, not just a bit of a glow, but rather a "****!!! everybody is bright blue!" coverage. lol Or does that sound like the job for a pair of wildfires.
I'd guesstimate the room is about 20 x 65. Lights will be hung about 10 - 15 ft high. The theme is Flourescent night so the main focus of this dance club event is UV Light.
 
Last edited:
I have a side question on this one concerning blacklight blue. I was under the impression that blacklight blue acted as a filter removing the "visible" light on a source, say incandescent-halogen or fluorescent. The UV these lamps produce is a natural result, not a "simulation". It is inefficient based on the grounds that these lamps were designed to produce visible light but have been given an extremely low visible light trasmissive coating in order to let their UV through? Am I correct in this thinking?

I'm just starting to really understand the differences, can someone elaborate?

One cool thing about LED UV, and one thing to consider, is the on-board ability to STROBE.
 
I have a side question on this one concerning blacklight blue. I was under the impression that blacklight blue acted as a filter removing the "visible" light on a source, say incandescent-halogen or fluorescent. The UV these lamps produce is a natural result, not a "simulation". It is inefficient based on the grounds that these lamps were designed to produce visible light but have been given an extremely low visible light trasmissive coating in order to let their UV through? Am I correct in this thinking?
I'm just starting to really understand the differences, can someone elaborate?
One cool thing about LED UV, and one thing to consider, is the on-board ability to STROBE.
Using an incandescent lamp as a blacklight is inefficient as the majority of the light emitted is in the visible spectrum. On the other hand with fluorescent lamps all you have to do is not put the phosphor coating on the inside of the tube. Fluorescent emit UV, but the phosphor coating on the tube converts that to visible light, leave out the coating you get basically pure UV radiation.

Arc discharge lamps emit a large amount of both visible and UV light. The blacklight fixtures that use arc lamps, like many Wildfire (TM) fixtures just use a dichroic filter, often called "woods glass", that allows UV to pass, but reflects back the visible light.
 
Almost nailed it. The UV that uncoated fluorescents put out is the deadly kind! That is why they are used in germicidal units. You would never want to look at it! To produce a fluorescent backlight, the bulb is coated on the inside with a phosphor that converts that UV to a safer bandwidth UV. The bulb is then made out of Wood's glass, or has a coating filter on the outside that does the same thing. (remove most visible light.) That is why they are a bit purple. The MV blacklights usually use only the Wood's glass or outside coating. In both cases, (Flu & MV) bulbs that are made of Wood's glass are more fragile, and lamps that are outside coated are not as pure, that is why high end blacklights use an external Wood's glass filter that is separate from the lamp.
 
Almost nailed it. The UV that uncoated fluorescents put out is the deadly kind! That is why they are used in germicidal units. You would never want to look at it! To produce a fluorescent backlight, the bulb is coated on the inside with a phosphor that converts that UV to a safer bandwidth UV. The bulb is then made out of Wood's glass, or has a coating filter on the outside that does the same thing. (remove most visible light.) That is why they are a bit purple. The MV blacklights usually use only the Wood's glass or outside coating. In both cases, (Flu & MV) bulbs that are made of Wood's glass are more fragile, and lamps that are outside coated are not as pure, that is why high end blacklights use an external Wood's glass filter that is separate from the lamp.

I was once told that part of the reason for the purplish look to fluorescent UV lights is safety. Since true UV is invisible you can't tell if the thing is on or off. If you've ever used one of the big discharge style UV lights you see almost no difference between the light when it is on or off. So for consumer products they put a little purple in so that you know you've got the thing turned on. Probably also has to do with the quality of glass but it sounds good to say it's for safety.

(Sort of like why they put that onion smell into natural gas.)
 
I was once told that part of the reason for the purplish look to fluorescent UV lights is safety.

Could be. Or maybe an accidental benefit! Being the nut that I am, I scraped the coating off of "outside-coated" UV bulbs in the past, and they generally have a violet/blue color to them.

Back to the original question, here are some pros & cons:

MV Blacklights:
+Highest output, (with external filter-) best true UV output.
- Long start up time, heavy.

Fluorescent Blacklights:
+Least expensive, fast start.
-Long tube versions awkward, Hard to project, has purple color

LED Blacklights
+Light weight, long life, fast start, very efficient, the way of the future.
-Very expensive, low output, purple/blue color, its not the future yet.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back