Mini lume test

Mini lume test

Postby DragonDan » March 10th 2013, 8:20pm

I've wanted to do this for a while. Now that I've done it, well, not terribly exciting. But since I've nothing else to do at the moment, you get to see the little experiment I tried. How long does lume last? In my case not too long.

Test: two watches, a Deep Blue T100 as a control, and a circa 1984 Gallet World Timer, that was relumed with vintage-tone superluminova about a year-and-a-half ago by Everest Watch Works.
Setup: A tripod, a pillow and my Canon 50D with 24-105mm F4L. Placed in a dark spare bedroom.
Camera settings: All except the first shot were f8, 32 seconds exposure, at iso 400 and 102mm. Shots taken about 15 minutes apart. I charged up the Gallet with my 110 lumen surefire for about 10 seconds prior to starting. Please try to ignore the fact that I managed to set the Gallet an hour different than the DB...

Results:
Image
Image
Image
Image
Image
Image
Image
User avatar
DragonDan
Senior Member & WIS
 
Posts: 21
Joined: February 21st 2013, 11:00pm
Location: Phoenix, AZ

Re: Mini lume test

Postby conjurer » March 10th 2013, 9:08pm

Some good fucking lume shots there. Well done!
I checked you out, and I now want you to take the journey to lick my taint. It's small, but vast.


--Temerity, to Mr. Neckbeard.
User avatar
conjurer
ASSHAT & Master of Time
 
Posts: 27517
Joined: July 13th 2010, 10:00pm

Re: Mini lume test

Postby Kahuna74 » March 11th 2013, 2:22am

Very well done. I have no watches with tubes and I keep thinking maybe I need one in my collection? Wonder how the T25 looks next to the T100?
User avatar
Kahuna74
Senior Member & WIS
 
Posts: 4463
Joined: June 11th 2011, 10:00pm

Re: Mini lume test

Postby Hawk » March 11th 2013, 3:24am

Kahuna74 wrote:Very well done. I have no watches with tubes and I keep thinking maybe I need one in my collection? Wonder how the T25 looks next to the T100?

Center right is T<25 the others are T<100

Image
And the fact I'm still living rent free in his head makes me grin and giggle.
...bobbee
User avatar
Hawk
ASSHAT
 
Posts: 8308
Joined: October 8th 2010, 10:00pm
Location: Orlando, FL

Re: Mini lume test

Postby WatchDorks.Net » March 11th 2013, 4:02am

Hawk,

What's the watch on the far right?
Proud "hater" since 2009. Get over it and have fun reassembling yer wartches.

Image

Image
User avatar
WatchDorks.Net
Senior Member & WIS
 
Posts: 4801
Joined: June 10th 2010, 10:00pm
Location: The Peoples Republic of Illinois

Re: Mini lume test

Postby codguy » March 11th 2013, 4:19am

OP-
Would love to see the same test but with say a PlanetOcean or perhaps a Seiko "Monster".

I too need to look for a tubed watch.
.
User avatar
codguy
ASSHAT
 
Posts: 5682
Joined: June 9th 2011, 10:00pm

Re: Mini lume test

Postby eddiea » March 11th 2013, 4:21am

Excellent shots ...that been said , not sure there is a purpose to the comparo?
You are using a T100 watch with the maximum output allowed using tubes (100 millicuries of tritium) that keep a steady output without the need of charge, versus a "vintage" tone (called C3 Dense by LumiNova AG, who are the manufacturers) re-lumed watch, that needs to be charge .
"Vintage or C3 dense" are among the worst performing colors in brightness yield, bar none ...that been said and judging by your pics, the Gallet did very well , considering that all Super Luminova will fade somewhat in a few hours period, a very predictable outcome, no surprises there.
Both systems approaches have their plus and minus , both work well...

Image
eddiea
Founding Member & Master of Time
 
Posts: 10667
Joined: December 25th 2009, 11:00pm

Re: Mini lume test

Postby WatchDorks.Net » March 11th 2013, 5:09am

eddiea wrote:You are using a T100 watch with the maximum output allowed using tubes (100 millicuries of tritium) that keep a steady output without the need of charge


???

I thought the Txxx designation were MINIMUM standards, not maximum. In other words, a T100-designated watch might well have 250 millicuries, but it must have at least 100 in order to meet the designation.

That's why, when I compared an Android T100 with a Deep Blue T100 side by side, there was a HUGE difference in lume output. Presumably the Android just made the bare minimum, whereas the Deep Blue had more headroom above the minimum.

By my understanding, a T25-designated watch could very well have above 100 millicuries (although realistically, I don't know why a manufacturer would only designate a watch as T25 if it exceeded the T100 minimum... work with me here), as long as it met the 25 spec.
Proud "hater" since 2009. Get over it and have fun reassembling yer wartches.

Image

Image
User avatar
WatchDorks.Net
Senior Member & WIS
 
Posts: 4801
Joined: June 10th 2010, 10:00pm
Location: The Peoples Republic of Illinois

Re: Mini lume test

Postby eddiea » March 11th 2013, 5:43am

WatchDorks.Net wrote:
eddiea wrote:You are using a T100 watch with the maximum output allowed using tubes (100 millicuries of tritium) that keep a steady output without the need of charge


???

I thought the Txxx designation were MINIMUM standards, not maximum. In other words, a T100-designated watch might well have 250 millicuries, but it must have at least 100 in order to meet the designation.

That's why, when I compared an Android T100 with a Deep Blue T100 side by side, there was a HUGE difference in lume output. Presumably the Android just made the bare minimum, whereas the Deep Blue had more headroom above the minimum.

By my understanding, a T25-designated watch could very well have above 100 millicuries (although realistically, I don't know why a manufacturer would only designate a watch as T25 if it exceeded the T100 minimum... work with me here), as long as it met the 25 spec.

T-100 is the maximun Tritium output allowed in the whole watch (in the USA)
The differences you may see, is because a T-100 watch , doesn't necessarily need to have 100 millicuries output, a watch rated T-100 can very well have only 75millicuries...in other words, you can use less tritium (usually to cut cost)but you can not excede the rating output given to a particular watch...
In reputable brands (like Ball) the rating is usually spot on ...others like Android and Deep Blue may not.
Last edited by Anonymous on March 11th 2013, 5:54am, edited 1 time in total.
eddiea
Founding Member & Master of Time
 
Posts: 10667
Joined: December 25th 2009, 11:00pm

Re: Mini lume test

Postby Hawk » March 11th 2013, 5:50am

WatchDorks.Net wrote:Hawk,

What's the watch on the far right?

Ball Spacemaster.

And Eddie speaks truth - the designations are intended as maximums for regulatory agencies rather than minimums for consumer use and the designations are limitations on the total output of the entire watch.

The Ball on the far right reportedly is the max output produced by the company and they're mum on exactly where it lands - best guess is around 85 or 90.

Anything with a total output of 1 to 25 is T-25, anything 26 through 99 is correctly marked simply "T". Ball had one model that I know of marked "T-100" but they claim it was an error and now mark anything over 26 but under 100 as "T".

There's really no such thing as "T-25 tubes" or "T-100" tubes. A watch actually using a T-100 tube would be limited to one rather useless tube.

Deep Blue's early marketing was a mess and quite deceptive though I tend to give them the benefit of the doubt by assuming it was unintentionally misleading. Invicta advertises "T-25 tubes" but one would expect little else from that crowd. I'm not familiar with how Android markets the stuff.
And the fact I'm still living rent free in his head makes me grin and giggle.
...bobbee
User avatar
Hawk
ASSHAT
 
Posts: 8308
Joined: October 8th 2010, 10:00pm
Location: Orlando, FL

Re: Mini lume test

Postby DragonDan » March 11th 2013, 5:56am

The questions was why I did it? Not sure, just curious I suppose. I've seen other lume tests where the photographer bumped up the exposure towards the end of the test, which in my eyes defeats the procedure.
I did it merely because I could. And to see my wife roll her eyes at me when I told her what I was doing in that spare bedroom
User avatar
DragonDan
Senior Member & WIS
 
Posts: 21
Joined: February 21st 2013, 11:00pm
Location: Phoenix, AZ

Re: Mini lume test

Postby Hawk » March 11th 2013, 7:05am

WatchDorks.Net wrote:
That's why, when I compared an Android T100 with a Deep Blue T100 side by side, there was a HUGE difference in lume output.

Since I've been known to enjoy offering up unwarranted speculation and the general consensus is that Wing doesn't intentionally misrepresent his product...

The Ball Spacemaster has 80 tubes of differing output but averaging, say, 1.1 mCi each.

Wing calls his sagacious panda supplier and says "I want some of those tubes that Ball uses in their T100". But, and here's the rub, he only uses 14 of them instead of 80 in his "T100" for a total output of around 15 mCi. Next to Stan's more like 80 mCi it looks pretty feeble. Since he's only assuring the NRC that he hasn't gone over 100, and he surely hasn't, he's golden.

But the lume still sucks.
And the fact I'm still living rent free in his head makes me grin and giggle.
...bobbee
User avatar
Hawk
ASSHAT
 
Posts: 8308
Joined: October 8th 2010, 10:00pm
Location: Orlando, FL

Re: Mini lume test

Postby boscoe » March 11th 2013, 7:28am

those tubes are cool
User avatar
boscoe
ASSHAT
 
Posts: 9669
Joined: March 31st 2010, 10:00pm

Re: Mini lume test

Postby koimaster » March 11th 2013, 7:57am

DragonDan wrote:The questions was why I did it? Not sure, just curious I suppose. I've seen other lume tests where the photographer bumped up the exposure towards the end of the test, which in my eyes defeats the procedure.
I did it merely because I could. And to see my wife roll her eyes at me when I told her what I was doing in that spare bedroom



Nice shots and a good comparison. Time well spent and better yet, it gets people to discuss the topic. Well done. My wife never rolled her eyes when I went into one of the spare bedrooms though. She always assumed I wanted to watch her lume Image
Image

1946-2006

“Your heart was warm and happy

With the lilt of Irish laughter

Every day and in every way

Now forever and ever after."
User avatar
koimaster
Administrator/Founder
 
Posts: 35407
Joined: December 16th 2009, 11:00pm
Location: Oregon

Re: Mini lume test

Postby 3Flushes » March 11th 2013, 8:34am

eddiea wrote:
T-100 is the maximun Tritium output allowed in the whole watch (in the USA)
The differences you may see, is because a T-100 watch , doesn't necessarily need to have 100 millicuries output, a watch rated T-100 can very well have only 75millicuries...in other words, you can use less tritium (usually to cut cost)but you can not excede the rating output given to a particular watch...
In reputable brands (like Ball) the rating is usually spot on ...others like Android and Deep Blue may not.


Hawk wrote:Anything with a total output of 1 to 25 is T-25, anything 26 through 99 is correctly marked simply "T". Ball had one model that I know of marked "T-100" but they claim it was an error and now mark anything over 26 but under 100 as "T".

There's really no such thing as "T-25 tubes" or "T-100" tubes. A watch actually using a T-100 tube would be limited to one rather useless tube.

Deep Blue's early marketing was a mess and quite deceptive though I tend to give them the benefit of the doubt by assuming it was unintentionally misleading. Invicta advertises "T-25 tubes" but one would expect little else from that crowd. I'm not familiar with how Android markets the stuff.


Nice pics - This is great to know. I've always wondered why there was frequently a discernible difference in lume shots between brands where the watches were rated the same. I've always just attributed it to the photography before. Another way misleading labeling can make a watch look like something it's not debunked at WL. Image
Copyright ©️ 2018 3flushes Media.

"When a watchmaker puts an eyeglass into his eye to examine something that another watchmaker has made, he's not looking for an opportunity to praise that man, he's looking for imperfections." George Daniels
User avatar
3Flushes
ASSHAT & Master of Time
 
Posts: 6158
Joined: November 25th 2012, 11:00pm

Re: Mini lume test

Postby eddiea » March 11th 2013, 9:30am

Hawk wrote:
WatchDorks.Net wrote:
That's why, when I compared an Android T100 with a Deep Blue T100 side by side, there was a HUGE difference in lume output.

Since I've been known to enjoy offering up unwarranted speculation and the general consensus is that Wing doesn't intentionally misrepresent his product...

The Ball Spacemaster has 80 tubes of differing output but averaging, say, 1.1 mCi each.
Wing calls his sagacious panda supplier and says "I want some of those tubes that Ball uses in their T100". But, and here's the rub, he only uses 14 of them instead of 80 in his "T100" for a total output of around 15 mCi. Next to Stan's more like 80 mCi it looks pretty feeble. Since he's only assuring the NRC that he hasn't gone over 100, and he surely hasn't, he's golden.
But the lume still sucks.

Agreed, I think Deep Blue do a much better job on the tubes (and in general) that say, the fashion accesories outlets like Android/Invicta etc...As a rule off thumb, I'll never compare real watches with them.
eddiea
Founding Member & Master of Time
 
Posts: 10667
Joined: December 25th 2009, 11:00pm

Re: Mini lume test

Postby codguy » March 11th 2013, 9:49am

eddiea wrote:
I'll never compare real watches with them.


Yup
.
User avatar
codguy
ASSHAT
 
Posts: 5682
Joined: June 9th 2011, 10:00pm

Re: Mini lume test

Postby Kahuna74 » March 11th 2013, 5:05pm

Okay guy's, good information for sure. So now say I want one for my collection. Not a TV brand and not over say 600.00? Are they out there? I know ball is not cheap and I agree that one looks the brightest by far.
User avatar
Kahuna74
Senior Member & WIS
 
Posts: 4463
Joined: June 11th 2011, 10:00pm

Re: Mini lume test

Postby WatchDorks.Net » March 11th 2013, 5:16pm

If memory serves, there's only a handful of brands out there doing T100... Ball, Deep Blue, Android, and...?
Proud "hater" since 2009. Get over it and have fun reassembling yer wartches.

Image

Image
User avatar
WatchDorks.Net
Senior Member & WIS
 
Posts: 4801
Joined: June 10th 2010, 10:00pm
Location: The Peoples Republic of Illinois

Re: Mini lume test

Postby supernovae » March 11th 2013, 5:24pm

Hawk wrote:
Kahuna74 wrote:Very well done. I have no watches with tubes and I keep thinking maybe I need one in my collection? Wonder how the T25 looks next to the T100?

Center right is T<25 the others are T<100

Image


love that line-up...awesome image :)
User avatar
supernovae
Senior Member & WIS
 
Posts: 408
Joined: January 28th 2013, 11:00pm

Re: Mini lume test

Postby eddiea » March 11th 2013, 6:23pm

Kahuna74 wrote:Okay guy's, good information for sure. So now say I want one for my collection. Not a TV brand and not over say 600.00? Are they out there? I know ball is not cheap and I agree that one looks the brightest by far.

Personally, a pre-loved Ball would be the only choice.
Last edited by Anonymous on March 12th 2013, 3:32am, edited 1 time in total.
eddiea
Founding Member & Master of Time
 
Posts: 10667
Joined: December 25th 2009, 11:00pm

Re: Mini lume test

Postby Kahuna74 » March 12th 2013, 1:51am

Well it looks like I need to do some research and see what I can find. seems like I remember one for sale here at Lords this past summer that was a different Brand.
Found one, Traser?
User avatar
Kahuna74
Senior Member & WIS
 
Posts: 4463
Joined: June 11th 2011, 10:00pm

Re: Mini lume test

Postby Hawk » March 12th 2013, 5:04am

Kahuna74 wrote:Well it looks like I need to do some research and see what I can find. seems like I remember one for sale here at Lords this past summer that was a different Brand.
Found one, Traser?

I believe Traser is MBMicrotec's "house brand" so I'd expect them to put together a readable T<25.

I wouldn't get hung up on ratings. Since the fashion brands decided to get on the T-100 bandwagon with degrees of success ranging from the "comical" to the "pretty nice" it's not unheard of for a well executed T-25 to outperform a botched T-100. Add to the usual claims that a watch with an output of 26 mCi is required by law to be marked "T" or "T100" and you have a recipe for chaos.

Until and unless the fashion brand tritium fad wears off I'm afraid that the T25, T, T100 ratings have been rendered pretty much meaningless as cross-brand comparisons.

And the fact I'm still living rent free in his head makes me grin and giggle.
...bobbee
User avatar
Hawk
ASSHAT
 
Posts: 8308
Joined: October 8th 2010, 10:00pm
Location: Orlando, FL

Re: Mini lume test

Postby Kahuna74 » March 12th 2013, 9:19am

Hawk wrote:
Kahuna74 wrote:Well it looks like I need to do some research and see what I can find. seems like I remember one for sale here at Lords this past summer that was a different Brand.
Found one, Traser?

I believe Traser is MBMicrotec's "house brand" so I'd expect them to put together a readable T<25.

I wouldn't get hung up on ratings. Since the fashion brands decided to get on the T-100 bandwagon with degrees of success ranging from the "comical" to the "pretty nice" it's not unheard of for a well executed T-25 to outperform a botched T-100. Add to the usual claims that a watch with an output of 26 mCi is required by law to be marked "T" or "T100" and you have a recipe for chaos.

Until and unless the fashion brand tritium fad wears off I'm afraid that the T25, T, T100 ratings have been rendered pretty much meaningless as cross-brand comparisons.


Thanks Hawk, I have been checking out the Traser H3 with blue lume, looks good. What about the Ronda movement, good , bad, Okay?
User avatar
Kahuna74
Senior Member & WIS
 
Posts: 4463
Joined: June 11th 2011, 10:00pm

Re: Mini lume test

Postby Hawk » March 12th 2013, 10:48am

I have a weakness for the blue myself.

As far as Ronda goes I don't have any experience.
And the fact I'm still living rent free in his head makes me grin and giggle.
...bobbee
User avatar
Hawk
ASSHAT
 
Posts: 8308
Joined: October 8th 2010, 10:00pm
Location: Orlando, FL


Return to General Watch talk

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 7 guests