I've always liked single tube fluorescents behind a valance. I painted my valance black so on the multi deck layout it gives a shadow box effect.
The lighting works great for ops sessions and photos.
Larry
http://www.youtube.com/user/ClinchValleySD40
http://www.flickr.com/photos/52481330@N05/
http://www.trainboard.com/railimages/showgallery.php/cat/500/page/1/ppuser/8745/sl/c
Put up track lighting and use screw in fluorescents, cheap and changeable I spent less than $100.00 for the entire garage with the track being the most expensive thing (heads were around $1.50 a piece om e-bay).!
Just to add “my two-cents” again from my first page opinion on lighting I painted my ceiling sky blue. By painting it blue it reflects in the water on my layout just like the real sky does outside.
Doc
Fred W,
Thanks from me, also!
Dante
Just picked up the December 2010 MRR, and found a 4-page gem called: "Achieve Realistic Colors under artificial lighting." This is an all "meat & potatoes" article with instructions of how scenery, light bulb-types, time of day to be modeled, scenery colors, weathering rolling stock, valances -- All have a relationship with each other for the final effect of layout lighting.
December MRRs are always jam-packed issues. Check it out at your favorite magazine store.
Conemaugh Road & Traction circa 1956
Always finish the lighting situation before building a layout. I use fluorescent lights and a drop ceiling. This gives nice even light throughout.
Craig North Carolina
wow, if you want more information try this.www.theledlight.com/lumens.html . My head is starting to hurt.I think I will turn on another light.
Philip
Fred W
Thanks for the info !
I am retired and I can sometimes be in the train room most of the day! ;-)
As I stated before - I tried to set my light levels at 100 cp (minimum) on the lowest levels of my layout (which average around 32").
Most of my layout stands at 42" so naturally the light level will be higher the closer to the lights I get.
I am happy with the level of brightness I have on the layout at this time. I can do just about anything I need to do (read car numbers or small detail work) without any additional work lights !
It is too bad that some modelers I know figure that it is OK to try and run the layout with ONE 100 watt bulb (an exaggeration - but not by much) in the center of the room and carry around huge flood lights to work on the layout. If there was enough light to see by you would find a really nice layout under there!
I just wish others would consider raising their room light level as it would help those of us that are getting old (which BTW - I am NOT even considering I am any where that age) ;-)
Thanks
BOB H - Clarion, PA
fwright Candle power measures the actual light intensity at the surface. IIRC, 100 is the old standard minimum for office work - reading and writing. As has been mentioned, this is quite bright - and is expensive to meet. But lighting at or above 100 candle power is quite comfortable to do office work in all day. Less lighting leads to fatigue, eyestrain, errors, and headaches. The bottom line is that the required brightness levels depend on several factors how long a period of time are you going to be at the layout in a given day? Shorter durations allow for dimmer lighting. are you just observing the trains running, or do you need to be able to read the small lettering on your freight cars? More detail needs higher light levels. Performing track work and other relatively fine tasks requires much higher light levels than general operations. how old are you, and how good are your eyes? Have you built in the reserve to compensate for the aging of your eyes? I would suggest that closer to 200 ft candles would be ideal for hand laying track, or detailing rolling stock. You would not want less than 100 ft candles for these activities. Operating the layout would be anywhere from 50 ft candles to 100 ft candles, depending on how you operate. If you need to read HO dimensional data, or see clearly to pick the couplers or spot cars, 100 ft candles would be a nice minimum. The same is true for seeing all the fine details on your prize locomotives. Fred W
Candle power measures the actual light intensity at the surface. IIRC, 100 is the old standard minimum for office work - reading and writing. As has been mentioned, this is quite bright - and is expensive to meet. But lighting at or above 100 candle power is quite comfortable to do office work in all day. Less lighting leads to fatigue, eyestrain, errors, and headaches.
The bottom line is that the required brightness levels depend on several factors
I would suggest that closer to 200 ft candles would be ideal for hand laying track, or detailing rolling stock. You would not want less than 100 ft candles for these activities.
Operating the layout would be anywhere from 50 ft candles to 100 ft candles, depending on how you operate. If you need to read HO dimensional data, or see clearly to pick the couplers or spot cars, 100 ft candles would be a nice minimum. The same is true for seeing all the fine details on your prize locomotives.
cmrproducts I too checked my layout using a LUX meter (same as Candlepower but in Metric - it could read both ways) and all I could find on the net was the value or 100 to 200. So I began checking my layout at the track height. I also was able to check out the difference between using white or silver reflectors above my lights. I used aluminum roof flashing to add a reflector to put all of the light down on the layout instead of lighting up above the ceiling grid. Adding white or silver side really made no difference (or so little that the meter would only show a value of 2 to 3 change between the two colors). But adding the reflector helped a lot in bringing up the candlepower level according to the meter - YET - my eyes could not see any real difference It would be nice to find out what is expected on lighting levels - one side states it in candle power and others recommend it in Watts/Sq Ft ! Which way is it ? BOB H - Clarion, PA
I too checked my layout using a LUX meter (same as Candlepower but in Metric - it could read both ways) and all I could find on the net was the value or 100 to 200.
So I began checking my layout at the track height.
I also was able to check out the difference between using white or silver reflectors above my lights.
I used aluminum roof flashing to add a reflector to put all of the light down on the layout instead of lighting up above the ceiling grid.
Adding white or silver side really made no difference (or so little that the meter would only show a value of 2 to 3 change between the two colors).
But adding the reflector helped a lot in bringing up the candlepower level according to the meter - YET - my eyes could not see any real difference
It would be nice to find out what is expected on lighting levels - one side states it in candle power and others recommend it in Watts/Sq Ft !
Which way is it ?
Watts/sq ft only works when using a consistent light source - usually flourescent tubes. Watts/sq ft really measures energy input, not light output, hence the need for consistency in energy conversion for the measurement to make sense.
The human eye and optic nerve is an incredible system. The dynamic range (ability to handle different light levels) is far greater (several orders of magnitude greater) than any camera or other sensor man has developed. Because of this incredible dynamic range of our optic system, detecting small changes in light levels is very difficult. Just like hearing, our response to changing light levels is decidedly non-linear. In hearing, it takes nearly the twice the sound intensity to detect the difference between the "loudness" of two sounds. So we use a logarithmic scale (db) to measure sound levels.
However, dynamic range (and focusing ability) declines as our eye muscles age, and don't work quite as well as they used to. The loss is always at the low light levels, the same as with hearing loss. Extra brightness allows us to compensate for some of the vision loss - I have noticed that I can manage without my reading glasses if I have very bright lights. Conversely, my reading glasses allow me to function in much lower light levels than I would otherwise need for the task.
my thoughts, your choices
This was on the lowest level of the layout (I have several levels)!
I have the lights mounted above the drop ceiling grid and they had no built in reflectors as these were industrial 8 ft 4 tube lighting units.
dante The critical factor is not watts per sf but footcandles on the surface. I have recently read a guideline that recommends as high as 100-200 footcandles for fine detail work (the higher number for us older folks). 200 is a lot of light! I am going to strive for about 100 unless someone out there has actual experience with measured light levels that indicates that more than 100 is really required. Dante
The critical factor is not watts per sf but footcandles on the surface.
I have recently read a guideline that recommends as high as 100-200 footcandles for fine detail work (the higher number for us older folks). 200 is a lot of light! I am going to strive for about 100 unless someone out there has actual experience with measured light levels that indicates that more than 100 is really required.
The critical factor is not watts per sf but footcandles on the surface. That is the light source strength measured in candelas (candlepower) divided by the square of the distance between the surface and the light source. You obtain the candela ratings from the photometry test of the fixture or bare lamp.
What I don't understand with most layouts that I have operated on is that the light levels seem WAY TO DARK!
Either I am going blind or the owners do not want anyone to really see their layout.
Some have spots lighting up certain points on the layout but 90% of the rest of the layout can't be seen. I miss a lot of detail as it is way too dark.
When I began my laterst layout I was going to make the same mistake as my layout would be easy to see as it is an operations orientated layout and taking pictures of it would be the last thing I would worry about!
But I felt that putting a lot of light sould make it a lot easier to photograph - and NO I am not using the special florescent lights - just regual 8 ft tubes available at Home Depot. I figure that the digital cameras can compensate for the light.
With the area I have (2100 sq ft) I have a little over 5500 watts of light on the layout which works out to 2.6 watts per sq ft. I never could find any recommendation on the number of watts/sq ft on the net.
So I just kept adding lights until I eliminated any dark areas on the layout - although I occasionally move a light every once in a while to brighten up an area as I continue to do scenery.
chugg How close together do you think the fixtures should be? For example if I have an eight foot straight section should I put in two four foot tube fixtures or would one be good?
How close together do you think the fixtures should be? For example if I have an eight foot straight section should I put in two four foot tube fixtures or would one be good?
Philip, for a simple 8' section with the fixture not covered by a plastic panel like mine, one fixture should be adequate. Most of mine are 3' or 4' apart, a little further than I would have liked, but following an irregular-shaped layout within the confines of a grid-type ceiling does present some limitations. I had thought about surface-mounting mine beneath the ceiling grid, but that would have required a valance to direct the light only onto the layout.
Wayne
the lighting will be tucked behind the valence that follows the layout bellow it. From the input I have recieved I will now be useing mostly fluorescents; tube types in the strait sections and cfl's in the rounded. They are cheaper to operate, cooler, and more light output per watt . If I can control one circiut with a dimmer then I can simulate late afternoon sun as well as control the the lighting if it is to bright.
Thanks, Philip
That's something I hadn't thought of . My spray booth as well as the room I have set up for painting have incadecent floods. I will check the paint colors against the the layout lighting from now on as I can see what a difference the color temp. makes.
Another thing to keep in mind is that, no matter the type of light, your perception of it will quickly adjust to a point where it will "look right".
I used coloured-balanced fluorescents on a previous layout, and while the appearance was good, the cost (at that time $15.00/ tube) was prohibitive. I agonised over light selection for the current layout, but after testing several types and combinations, settled on Cool White fluorescent tubes. The main reason for this choice was quantity of light, rather than quality, as the CW put out more lumens than other types. (I've since discovered a Soft White tube that puts out more lumens than a comparable CW - while the light quality is "warmer", it also seems to confuse my camera's ability to make it look like daylight, a problem not encountered with the CW.) Most digital cameras can be set to correct for the ambient lighting and, in person, your eyes will, too.
One of the arguements against fluorescents is the lack of distinct shadows - I don't find it noticeable while operating, and usually don't worry about it in photos either.
I've found that a hand-held "trouble light" works well enough to generate some shadow effect.
There are currently 16 4' double tube fixtures in place, with another 8 or 9 to be added when part of the layout is doubledecked - the additional fixtures will be attached to the underside of the upper deck to provide lighting for the layout already in place:
If you're interested in nighttime operations (I'm not and have absolutely no intention of hiding my detailing efforts in the dark), there are dimmable fluorescents, or you could install an auxiliary incandescent system for nighttime effects.
Placement of the lighting is important, regardless of the type you choose. Since most of my layout is fairly narrow (30" or less), I situated the lights totally over the layout but very close to the edge of the aisle - this ensures that things close to the viewer are not in shadow. Because shadows cast by the fluorescents are indistinct, this usually doesn't cause problems with shadows on the backdrop, although the same set-up with incandescents may.
While I originally wanted to have the fixtures attached to the ceiling with a valance following the contours of the layout fascia, the suspended ceiling (to hide ductwork and support beams) would have made it difficult and possibly limited vertical space for the upper level. The plastic lighting panels don't decrease the quantity of light too severely, although I have a couple of areas where the fixtures should have been a little closer together.
The fluorescents are much cooler than would be a similar installation using incandescents, and cheaper to run, too.
WHile my small layout does not have dedicated lighting for it, I use only CFL "daylight Full Spectrum" bulbs throughout the the whole house for my seasonal depression.
They give a nice whiter "daylight" brightness to everything they illuminate.
Just a thought.
If you go to the right side margin and do a "search our community" for "layout lighting" or "photgraphy lighting" you should find a thread not too long ago that compared photgraphs with the various forms of light bulbs available, Very informative. You can decide for yourself what bulbs to use to give what light you want.
-G .
Just my thoughts, ideas, opinions and experiences. Others may vary.
HO and N Scale.
After long and careful thought, they have convinced me. I have come to the conclusion that they are right. The aliens did it.
It's a good idea to pay attention to the color temperature of the bulbs you use. I'm using the "Bright Effects" cfl's from Lowes. The daylight temperature, 6500 degrees, is far too harsh for my windowless basement room. I'm having good luck with the 3500 degree lights, which aren't too far off daylight.
Also, be sure to test paints under the lighting you use in your layout room. Differing color temperatures can cause some unexpected color shifts in paint, particularly in the blues ( which can look positively purple under some fluorescent lighting.
I have two sets of light sources in the ceiling, which shine on the layout. I use bright white 100watt CFL bulbs for regular lighting all the time.
When I want to dim the lighting down to nighttime conditions I switch on my Tungsten floodlights in addition to the CFL's. (Increase in light is not noticeable) Then I switch off the CFLl's and use the dimmer to bring the lighting level down to nighttime conditions.
Look at these two photos to see the difference in lighting.
1) CFL 100watt Daylight
2) 150watt Tungsten floodlight
I also have an orange string of large Christmas bulbs for a sundown effect and blue ones for the nighttime. They will have dimmers. I have not installed them yet.
That's a good point. The bases I was looking at don't have a shroud on them so I could use any kind of bulb I wanted. It wouldn't have to be a floodlight. maybe I could just use a couple small flood or spots to highlight a particular scene like a roundhouse and use a bare bulb or something more even in the others. There are several types of cfl's that are dimmable, as you said.
Thanks Philip
Couple of thoughts.
Flood light bulbs have a lot of heat, though there are now CF floodlight bulbs available, I'm not shure of your choices in type of bulb.
Floodlights set up as you suggest would cast shadows from two directions, not realistic.
I think, but you'd have to check, that there are some flourescent bulbs that can be dimmed. You might want to run several smaller flouresent fixtures, having every other (every third) on a dimmer. Or you could use your different types of lights, daylight, blacklight and dimmable lights in succesive fixtures to give the most even light in all cases. Each type of light on its own circuit.
Just what came to my mind.
Good luck,
I am starting a new layout. The area available is about 16x24. The cieling hight is 7'9". The plan is to follow around the walls with some penninsulas coming out from the walls. My retired pike didn't have any dedicated light ;just what was available from the lights in the room. This is what my plan is now. I will cut 3/4 x 4" plywood to follow the curves and corners of the layout . The upper will be a mirror of the lower. I will have an upper valance of 1/8 evansboard 9 1/4" deep glued and nailed to the plywood. I choose that depth because there is a sheetrocked heat duct going thru the middle of the room that comes down that far. Screw a 4" electrical box to the plywood every ten feet or so. The boxs would be connected with flex conduit, and each box would have two adjustable lamp bases on it . Home Depot has a two light flood base that will work great. I can mix and match whatever bulb types and wattages I want. I think I will run two circuits. One with a dimmer and another that controlled different bulbtypes and colors such as blue and black bulbs or blacklight bulbs for a night time effect. I could experiment with that. What do you think?