Question for those with Spideright-type reflectors - Page 2

ron101 · #11 10-23-2002, 06:03 PM

I think you would have to angle the actual bulb as well (halides that are parallel to tank front right?) to get best results. That way direct light is focussed as well, not just the reflected.

However theorectically you will be fighting the inverse square law due to the extra distance travelled. I figure about a 20% loss for a 12" horizontal shift with a 24" bulb height and that doesn't take into account absorption by water.

IMO a more effective solution would be to mount the bulbs closer together and maintain a straight down focus. Though it may not be possible and the presence of a center brace could be an issue.

Delphinus · #12 10-23-2002, 06:47 PM

I'm not sure I've given the right idea as to what I want to try. I don't want to aim the lights forward or backwards, I want them aimed towards the center. I don't need 100% light intensity at the left and right walls, but I do in the center.

So, if a person were to use these reflectors that are mounted perpendicular, any rotation of the reflector to the center, would just be a rotation around the bulb. The bulb itself isn't tilting -- just rotating.

So a person ends up with two reflectors, with the outside edges being lower, and the inside edges being raised.

What I was hoping to accomplish with this (in addition to a "focal point at the centre"), is also a bit of angular light, so that some larger pieces can be side-lit, in addition to top-lit.

I have no idea if this is making any sense. Unfortunately, it seems to me I'll never know the answer until I try this myself ... which means plunking down $150 (2 x $75 for optimal reflectors at J&L) on an idea that I'm not 100% certain that will work in the first place. I seem to spend far too much money on experiments that the end result is unused equipment lying around, a lot of cash spent, and one very irate spouse. It doesn't seem to matter if I promise to "end up eventually using this or that" ...