Haven't been out there at night since those went up, actually, though I've seen them during the day. But this is of some interest (as a landscape architect) so... consider this additional info to judge by, but not necessarily meaning they're *not* too bright.
Anyway, are both the old (non-LED, non-solar) lights and the new solar ones on at the same time? That'd contribute to the "too bright" feeling (by being actually too bright). If not...
LED lights tend to be much better directed and more even in the lighting than non-LED lights (usually Metal Halide, which I think the ones on the path were), and have much better cut-off at the edges of the lighted area, which means you're seeing that area better but your eyes are still trying to take in details outside that are in deeper shadow (because they're getting less light pollution). The nice thing about that would be that if you're in an area near, but not in, the lighting (like, say, adjacent homes) there's much less light pollution. (I can't wait till they switch the light outside my bedroom window over to LED, for example, but I doubt it'll happen anytime soon.)
LEDs are also a cooler white most of the time, which can lead to them seeming harsh, and the lamping is often more directly visible so they can seem sort of glare-y if you look right at them. All three of those things combined are probably why they feel "too bright" in comparison to the old ones - because I'd be really, really surprised if they'd lit the path to a different "use standard"/target average light level than it had been before, unless it was way less than the guidelines recommend.
(Unless it also felt too bright to you with the old lights, in which case, maybe it's just a matter of lighting preference.)
Anyway, maybe that's informative and maybe not; there's a lot about lighting that's a matter of taste.
![[community profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/community.png){kind=small}
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2015-10-12 01:56 pm (UTC)Anyway, are both the old (non-LED, non-solar) lights and the new solar ones on at the same time? That'd contribute to the "too bright" feeling (by being actually too bright). If not...
LED lights tend to be much better directed and more even in the lighting than non-LED lights (usually Metal Halide, which I think the ones on the path were), and have much better cut-off at the edges of the lighted area, which means you're seeing that area better but your eyes are still trying to take in details outside that are in deeper shadow (because they're getting less light pollution). The nice thing about that would be that if you're in an area near, but not in, the lighting (like, say, adjacent homes) there's much less light pollution. (I can't wait till they switch the light outside my bedroom window over to LED, for example, but I doubt it'll happen anytime soon.)
LEDs are also a cooler white most of the time, which can lead to them seeming harsh, and the lamping is often more directly visible so they can seem sort of glare-y if you look right at them. All three of those things combined are probably why they feel "too bright" in comparison to the old ones - because I'd be really, really surprised if they'd lit the path to a different "use standard"/target average light level than it had been before, unless it was way less than the guidelines recommend.
(Unless it also felt too bright to you with the old lights, in which case, maybe it's just a matter of lighting preference.)
Anyway, maybe that's informative and maybe not; there's a lot about lighting that's a matter of taste.