Ok...so i still haven't received emails back from a couple of suppliers so that means im gonna start looking in ebay for these items.

Another very interesting thing I found about the Coralife 03 Actinic lamp:

http://members.misty.com/don/f-spec.html writes

"The phosphor band's spectrum seems basically confined to the 400 to 480 nM range, with most of the output between 410 and 435 nm. The peak seems to be in the 415 to 420 nm range (bluish violet)."

OK my question is...when is the light outputting at 400? Between 410-434? And 480nm?

http://forums.gardenweb.com/forums/load/li...1824112372.html writes "A very common actinic phosphor has a peak at 420nm, the peak quickly decays to ~380nm and ~480nm."

If it cannot consistently output roughly 420nm then it is no good for any of us.

Here's a very good read:

http://www.caci.co.nz/imagelibrary/100060.pdf

The graph showing what light (nm) is absorbed by P. Acne and C. Acne is great! 400-415nm is the most effective!

So now the question we need to solve is: WHEN DOES THE LAMP OUTPUT AT 400-415? When you first turn it on? 5 minutes into it? 20 minutes?

Mikeye, not to worry...
When people talk about "the peak quickly decays" and similar terms, they are NOT talking about it changing over time. They are referring to the intensity of the light at various wavelengths. In other words, the bulb gives off some really bright light at 420nm, and some less bright additional light at other nearby wavelengths. The bulb has substantial light at various wavelengths from 410 to 435, with some at light output at wavelengths a bit further from the ideal, such as 380nm, 480nm, etc. That is simply the nature of light sources; the output includes various wavelengths. If you plot the intensity vs wavelength you will get a series of peaks/humps.

The "True Actinic 03" 420nm aquarium fluorescents and the Sci-Arts/Enlux 415nm bulbs are good examples of bulbs with a close to optimum spectral distribution.

The acne bacteria are particuarly sensitive to light at 415-420nm, but are also sensitive to nearby wavelegths, just less so.

So, ideally, you would like to put all the energy into light in the 410-420nm wavelengths, but that isn't possible. The sun for example, emits light at a zillion different wavelenghts. Hot filaments (incandescent lightbulbs) emit at all wavelengths, with varying energies at different wavelengths (the plot looks like a very broad smooth hump). The phosphors in fluorescent bulbs can have fairly sharp peaks at certain wavelengths depending on the specific phosphors used, and LEDs also have specific strong peaks. We want bulbs that have a strong sharp peak around 410-420, but there will be extra light at other wavelengths too. That's not bad, but it does make it harder to compare different light sources, since any spec for output power is usually for total power at all wavelengths combined, whereas we are interested in the power for a specific narrow band of wavelengths around 410-420nm and different bulbs will have differing distributions of intensity vs wavelength.

That is part of why I cannot answer Poloho's question about how many Enlux LEDs for one side of face. Part of the problem is that I don't know the mw/sq-cm power output of the Enlux bulbs. In fact, I don't know the output power of the Enlux bulbs at all; they spec input power as about 15w, but not output power. The difference is the "efficiency factor". I can guess it to be about 20%, but that's a wild guess. Making that guess, the Enlux would output about 3W (3000mw). The Elnux bulbs sold by SciArts today are their flood beam patterns, which means the light spreads out in a cone that's about 80-degrees wide. That means you need to be just a few inches away to get the bulk of the light focused on your face. (I calc it will illuminate an area about 10" across at 4-5 inches away).

If I were to assume that one is somehow able to get half the bulb's light (the other half missing your face) onto an area that's 6"x6" (15cm x 15cm) by sitting a couple inches away, then you would still have only 6.5mw/sq-cm of power on the skin. (.5 x 3000mw / 225 sq cm). Thus even at that extreme close range you would still need to expose yourself for 2 hrs to get the dose used in the studies. Sooo, if my calcs are right it's hard to get the doses used in the study without an awful lot of light or long dose times. Remember, each doubling of the distance decreases the light intensity by 4x. Sitting any comfortable distance reduces the light to really low levels.

Using a more tightly focused Enlux LED should make it easier to get more of the light where you want it, on your face. At my request SciArts is supposed to be woking to stock the EnLux 40-degree spot light version. Using more bulbs would help too, if focused/aimed properly.

If you assume that fluorescents have about the same efficiency as LEDs (reasonable for the ones we are looking at), then fluorescents may have an edge in the "light/$" department, ASSUMING YOU CAN GET THE LIGHT FOCUSED ON YOUR FACE. If you can somehow get half the output of a pair of 32w fluorescents onto that same 6"x6" area, you would have 4 times as much intensity as the single enLux LED. BUT, can you arrange the fluorescents with the right reflectors to get the light on your face instead of losing it to the rest of your room?

Of course, it's also important to use a light whose energy is concentrated around the cirtical 400-420nm wavelength region (a deep violet color), where it's properly absorbed and kills the bacteria. A bulb with a nice narrow spectrum centered around 400-420 could have less total power but be more effective than a higher-power bulb with a broad or mis-centered spectrum. When you add in the differences in beam patterns of different shaped bulbs, it's really hard to compare two different bulbs and make accurate calculations.

IMPORTANT - I make no guarantee that my assumptions or calculations are valid !!! I could have misunderstood, mis-assumed, or miscalculated.

For anyone considering using metal-halide lamps, beware that they put out LOTS of invisible damaging UV. They MUST be used with a proper UV filter.

Lastly do not guage brightness of differently colored bulbs by the eye. the eye is vastly less sensitive down around 410-420nm than to the longer wavelengths. Thus a regular blue lamp will look MUCH brighter than the deep-violet color of a 415nm bulb even if the 415nm bulb is more powerful. Besides you should NEVER look directly at any of these bulbs, particularly the deeper violet ones. They may look not so bright, but actually be VERY powerful at wavelengths your eyes don't see well. Overdose of blue or visible violet light can permanently damage your eyes!

OK, enough for now, I have to do some paying work!

To answer the question about buying Metal Halide lamps or a fixture for the supposed ClearLight replacement bulb on eBay:

There are metal halide lamps sold for aquarium use. I don't know much about them, but it looks like the fixtures are pricey (typically ~$200 - $800 after you add in ballasts, UV filters, etc). Also, even the bulbs with the strong peaks at 420nm waste a lot of their energy at other less useful frequencies (fine for aquariums, useless for acne). I suspect that the amount of useful energy at the critical 400-420nm range is not that much better than similarly costing fluorescent units.

As to the supposed ClearLight replacement bulb sold online, going by the photo, I didn't see any fixtures that looked like a fit. You would need one with the matching socket and the proper specialized 400w metal-halide ballast. AND you would need a UV filter glass.

Add to it the fact that the seller is the same one who I feel is misrepresenting their cheap 500w quartz-halogen bulb, I'd steer clear.

Doesn't seem worth it to me.

Hi all,

Wow, that really sucks. So apparently to get the same amount of light as in the studies, I need way more than 2 blue lights, and I must sit within 4-5 inches distance of the bulb, or else most of the power gets lost. I've been doing blue light therapy for around 8 weeks now, but it seems like those 8 weeks have been a waste since I've been doing it all wrong. The instructions said to sit at least 1 foot away from the lights... and thats what I did. However, based on your calculations, I would get a minimal amount of power on my skin at 1 foot away. Guess I need to sit closer from now on, and buy a few more lights.

Hey Techguy,

Maybe I'm not reading your post correctly but the peak wavelength of 420nm will be output when or how?

If it is not the amount of time the light is on, is it the distance between the light and my face? If so, what distance will achieve this wavelength?

The fluor light puts out 420 nm peak as soon as you turn it on (it does not change frequencies, but most fluor lights take maybe 2 min to get to full brightness). The spectrum shows intensity versus frequency, and you want something with a nice hump around 415 or so, but that's hard to achieve perfectly. The frequency does not change depending on how close you are. It's simply a matter of brightness... Closer = brighter, but frequency is unaffected.

http://ledmuseum.candlepower.us/seventh/phitld15.gif


You can see from the chart that as you move away in frequency (not in distance from the light), the intensity goes down, but that's fine since we want only the 415 nm light, and don't need anything outside that range. As a user, you have NO effect on the frequency of light, no matter what distance you are from the light.

My two cents is that since it is fluorescent, and does not put out much heat, I suggested my daughter have the lights about 6 or 8 inches from her face. To get the bang for the buck, you want to have a desk light or fixture with either white or mirror backing, which sends the light in one direction (at you). In my daughter's case, I bought two desk lamp fixtures, so she can have one aimed at the top and right side, and one aimed at top and left (in other words, angled slightly toward her cheeks, and roughly above her face on the left and right side). We are using FML 27 type fixtures which are basically 27 watts, and a specially manufactured bulb bought on ebay (I reference this item in an earlier post). She has been using it for two weeks and it 'seems' to be working, but anectodal evidence can be unreliable. I won't know for sure for a month or two, and I will report back as we know more.

Are you using a fluorescent light or an LED?

It is a question of intensity and how often and how long. A dimmer light, left on for longer, may have the same overall effectiveness as a brighter light for a shorter time, assuming both can penetrate a bit into the skin. With the clearlight treatment, you usually go once or twice a week, for 20 min or so. With these cooler lights, and having it at home, you can stay under longer and every day, so maybe that makes up for it. The real acid test is whether you see any results after a few months, even if not amazing results. In my daughter's case, she went through the clearlight treatments 4 years ago, and I would say after 8 weeks she was 75 percent cleared up, but we did not see results for 5 weeks, and there was more breakouts during the "cleanup" weeks in the beginning. We really need more folks to test and report back, but I would recommend getting not less than 60 watts of fluorescent light power (equivallent to 250 watts of regular bulbs) and stay pretty close to the light. Watch for any sign of "tanning" as that would indicate your light has too much UV in it!

This is what i bought on the internet (ebay) and he included a second lamp, and then I bought a second fixture from Home Depot (HD sells the same desk lamp for $19.95, but you need the 420 nm lights the ebay guy has an exclusive on, and he only sells the lights with the desk lamp, but will sell you (or include) a spare bulb unless one comes with his shipment as mine did.)

http://cgi.ebay.com/Acne-Treatment-FDA-APP...1QQcmdZViewItem (NOTE: This link will only work while the "auction" is pending).

FYI (this is NOT a plug for this guy), Here's some feedback from purchasers of the ebay product (note, this feedback is for many items he sells, but look for the products that refer to the acne light). A recent person who bought a light in sept reported that it was working for them. You will see my feedback under "blacksheiladog", but I don't make any comment other than the seller shipped as promised... As mentioned above, will take some time to deteremine effectiveness!

http://feedback.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?...id=140164455693

The answer is that it is putting out ALL those frequencies, all the time. But it puts out MOSTLY 420nm, and less and less of frequencies that are above or below 420nm.

Very interesting. As mentioned above, it puts out 420 the moment you turn it on, and never changes, but all flourescent bulbs tend to lose some of their brightness over a long period of time. They do NOT change frequencies, however, no matter how old or dim they become, or how far away you are from the light source.

Maybe this helps: Wavelength and Frequency are just two technical ways of defining what most people call the color of the light. (Actually it's called "hue", but that's splitting hairs. Color is a result of mixing different hues together).

If it's easier, just think of wavelength, frequency, hue and color as all the same thing. It's not exactly true, but it's good enough.

These lights have a color that consist of a hue that's technically called 415nm as well as some hues that are extremely close to that. To the human eye it looks like a deep violet. Other hues, such as 460 or 480nm look more like blue. The color we want is the violet that consists of as much hue in the 410-420nm range as possible.

In the bulbs we are discussing, other nearby hues are present but at lower brightnesses. The graphs try to describe the mix of colors and their brightness relative to each other. What's shown is simply the mix of colors present in the light. The distance doesn't effect that, nor does it change signficantly over time (after about a 1 minute warmup)

Very nice guys!

Totally cleared up my confusion.

So I still haven't ordered the large aqualight because it "seems" the small 2 x 9w aqualight is working. On the Beautyskin lamp's manual it says to expect to see a worsening before getting better and some people on this board can also confirm that. I've gotten a few on my forehead and cheek area out of nowhere...so I'm assuming it could be the "worsening" factor so I will continue to monitor everything and keep you guys posted.

Also, 2 x 9w seems to be weak but I keep it 2" away from the affected areas and 10 minutes per affected area per day. So far I'm into my 2nd week and will continue to give it 2-4 more weeks until I decide to stay or get higher wattage light. Interestingly, the Beautyskin lamp selling for $300 and only uses 3 x 15w blue lamps! That's robbery! And pretty weak too.

I also emailed the ebay seller who Dan referred to about just buying his replacement bulbs and not the light fixture. He replied and said it is only for customers who previously purchased the entire package. That really sucks for us non-customers who just want the bulbs. Also, I noticed in his pictures that the light was just blue and no violet but that's from the pictures and not first hand. If you look at the pictures I posted for my aqualight with the 9w actinic lamps, you clearly see the violet and blue.

Just a side note...I dunno why my display for this board has changed to something like this:

mikeye Hey Techguy, Maybe I'm not reading your post ... Yesterday, 01:39 AM
blacksheiladog Hey Techguy, Maybe I'm not reading your post ... Yesterday, 05:43 PM
Techguy Maybe this helps: Wavelength and Frequency are jus... Today, 12:52 AM
mikeye Very nice guys! Totally cleared up my confusi... Today, 03:53 AM

And I have to click into it to see the individual post. That's why I missed Dan's response to my questions regarding freq and I ended up asking my question twice.

Quick note on photos of lights:

Digital cameras see colors differently than humans and often different cameras will see colors differently from each other. It has to do with the characteristics of the sensing chips. Soooo, don't put ANY faith at all in the apparent color of a photo of a blue vs violet digital photo. You have to get a spectrum spec or chart for the bulb in question from an authoritive source.

Just one more thing that makes it hard to sleuth out what might work.

I asked the Ebay guy to send me a spectrum for the bulb he has manufactured for his lamp fixture, and he indicated he would do so, but he said it was identical to the one I posted earlier in my first post which I will copy here:

http://ledmuseum.candlepower.us/seventh/phitld15.gif

But to date, he has not sent the spectrum readout to me, although he indicated his wife just had a baby and he is kind of busy with that I am sure. -Dan

See my post immediately above, and you are on the right track, in that the weaker the light, the closer you need it to be to your face, and with fluors, since they are not putting out heat very much, they can be very close, and closer means significantly more lumens. Each time you double the distance, you cut the light by a factor of 4, but the reverse is that each time you cut the distance by half, you increase the intenstity by 4X. The staff person at the doctor who did the clearlight treatment was trying to tell me that the fan that comes on and off during treatment is for the purpose of "opening pores". I thought this was hogwash. The fan is undoubtedly coming on because the area under the light fixture has a thermostat to try to keep the temp down from the intense heat generated by the metal halide lamps they use! As a result, you have to be at least 18 inches below the lights just so you don't get too hot.

Hey Dan,

Do you notice any violet from the light or just blue?

EDIT: I looked at the light again today, and it looks blue/violet, definite violet component I did not notice the first time I checked it.

My daughter is in her 3rd week. I just saw her today, and she is much clearer, but of course, this type of thing changes from week to week. But I am encouraged and so is she. Also remember she just got the levulan treatment, and that usually results in clearing for many months, but she was breaking out until we started the daily light treatment, so who knows for sure.

You can see from the ebay guy's "feedback" that at least a few have said it worked for them. I read on the internet conflicting sources, some of which say that violet colors are down in the 380nm range, with deep blue around 420nm, and others say violet begins at 420nm and down. If the light peaks at 420nm, it is a valid question whether it should have any significant violet component you can see with your eyes. Also, some eyes are better at colors than others. But I think we are talking about the same type of bulb, namely, an actinic 03 type in a small fluorescent bulb. -Dan

PS: Here's a website I found that urges protection of eyes for blue light. I emphasize that the internet is full of good info and nonsense, so read for info only, but I do believe it is appropriate with all these blue lights to protect the eyes completely from exposure!

http://www.mdsupport.org/library/hazard.html#blue

Here's what the spectrum chart guy wrote about the true actinic bulbs which were the subject of this spectrum: "Spectrometer plot of a Philips TLD 15W / 03 actinic fluoro lamp.
This lamp is *VERY* blue like the Philips lamp directly below."

http://ledmuseum.candlepower.us/seventh/phitld15.gif

He refers to it as "very blue" without mentioning violet components.

Agreed! Thanks for the info! -Dan

Here's what the ebay seller's light looks like without the fixture: