Day Time - Night Time Lighting

I was originally worried about the red having too much of a strange darkroomy kind of look to it. Emergency blackout lights kind of thing. Its not really that red, it has a warm but natural feel to it and I like it much better than I thought I would. But I am planning on trying a blue bulb as well. When I dig out my oldstyle camera I'll try to post pics of each, the digital camera can't catch enough of the low light.

As we discussed on a different thread, red is less visible than blue to a lot of fish. Blue wavelengths penetrate water better and deeper. Bottom dwellers, like catfish and my loaches, many of whom are nocturnal, probably don't bother developing full color vision and probably can't see red. This was a consideration when I picked the color bulb. My rasbora on the other hand, being surface-feeding insectivores, apparently did go and develop vision into the red spectrum. They react to the red target flashlight on the digital camera. The moonlight, being so short, acts as more of a spot than anything else -- the loaches wander around in it, but the rasbora "sleep" off to the side in an unlit area of the tank.
 
your catfish does not come out in blue light? Interesting... Mine does come out... Red light does NOT look good at all IMO. Can we spell UGLY? Blue light acts in the same way as red light, but are nicer on the eyes as well..
 
Hi Jameson,
I honestly like a lot of the rolling debates you bring to the board and I've been forced to go look up a lot of things that I wouldn't have learned otherwise just because I needed to explain to myself why I thought something sounded wrong. I think, with your obvious entusiasm, you have a lot to contribute. You're style is a little combative -- I think if you'd ease up on the right-and-wrong and stay more with the "this has worked for me" and "this why I made this choice" end of it, you'd have an easier time.

Fish, much like us mammals, vary. In size, in shape, in diet, in details of the construction of their eyes. Some see red, some don't. A lot of the bottom-dwellers, especially the nocturnal ones, don't. Several feet down, in the bluish moonlight, what need would they have for it? Red is frequently used as a nightlight for this reason. Blue would seem more naturally moonish to me as well. The red looks much more natural than I'd anticipated. It works. I'm going to try the other for comparison sake as well. Will post results.
 
I was looking for a few facts on the web, I couldnt much find any eithor. Just conjectures. Such as color light does not penetrate more than 3 feet deep. The light that does penetrate further then 3 feet deep is blue light. If fish live deeper then 3 feet, they would not be able to see those colors. especially RED LIGHT, which disperses fast before it reaches to any depth. In SALT water, that is correct. HOWEVER, MANY freshwater fish live in the first 3 feet of water. So, in theory, they should be able to see the red light because they have been "raised" in those conditions. For those fish that live deeper than 3 feet, they would not "see" the red light.
As for which is better? I cant find a source at this point that says RED is Less stressfull to fish as a BLUE Light or the other way around. All I can say is Fish need a light/dark cycle to lower stress.
Can anyone tell me if having red LEDS or Blue LEDS cause stress to fish? If they can "see" the light....does this interupt the light/dark cycle? Im not talking about BRIGHT red or blue light....Just a few LEDs....
On the internet, I have seen pics of Red light tanks and Blue light Tanks. Im still trying to find some factual info on blue and red light...
 
puts on thinking cap....

Let's get into physics and wave formation here for a sec...thinking back to astronomy class....

Blue light resonates at a much shorter wavelength than red.

Given that fact, the doppler effect states that the further a short wavelength travels, the longer the wave becomes as viewed/heard/detected from distance. In essence, if you are standing far enough from a blue light source, the light waves will be bent by the atmosphere between here and yon, eventually to the point of being in the red or infrared spectrum.... this is known as "redshifting".

While blue light waves are much more intense than red ones are, the red waves, with their slower rate of modulation, will actually travel deeper into things than the shorter, faster waves will.

Think back to your friend's car stereo system.... If you are standing right next to the sound source, you hear all the highs and lows. The further you get away from the speakers, however, the less of the high-pitched parts you will hear, eventually only hearing the "thump" of the bass. The higher pitched sounds have a much shorter wavelength than the low-pitch sounds do. Which one travels further?

Knowing all this, it is only reasonable to think that in a natural deep-water environment, the red light would penetrate the water much deeper than the blue would, even though the blue end of the spectrum is more intense to the human eye. Bear in mind that the light reflected from the moon is white, or full-spectrum light. Only the red parts of the light, the part of the spectrum with the longest wavelength, would reach the bottom of the lake. As for whether the fish sees this light as being "red" or just being "light" is anyone's guess. For my money, if you are going for a "natural" deepwater environment, red would be the logical choice, ugly or not.

Here's the really neat part about it... did you know that when you turn the lights down really low, red is much easier to see with our eyes than blue? Try it. Take a red piece of constuction paper and a blue piece of the same intensity colorwise, and lower the lights down.... the blue piece will begin to look gray long before the red does (we humans lose our color vision, starting at the high-wavelength colors, whenever we are in low light situations... just an interesting tidbit...)
 
I have an interesting book called Understanding Tropical Fish, very good, about $15. It has a whole chapter on the senses. In the section on sight it talks about rods and cones. Rods are responsive to light intensity, while cones are responsive to wavelength (color). It explicitly says that most fish have color vision. But (always a but) "The ratio of rods and cones… vary considerably between the species… nocturnal fish… may have large eyes… and an abundance of rods in the retina… a daytime-active fish… perceives color because of the greater number of cones inits retina." At some level its just about real estate: the nocturnal fish benefit most from having a lot of rods and fewer cones. (Perfect example of having to go look up something interesting).

So what does that mean in terms of blue and red (both colors)? The book doesn't say. Blue light, penetrating more deeply, would have greater intensity (rods) at depth. The red makes it to the bottom of my tank. Is there a difference in our very small little tanks? Dunno.

I think light behavior in water is similar if not identical in salt or fresh.

A lot of my fish are stream and swamp (shallow water) fish. A lot of other commonly kept fish come from lakes and rivers where the bottom is often deeper than 3 feet. Some of these fish may spend most of their time near the surface. Or near the bottom. Or live in murky water. Or in shady rainforests. Or may need to worry about predation from birds, or not. I think there is probably a lot of variation from species to species on what they can see. My rasbora and barbs definitely react to red. My loaches seem oblivious, but then the loaches always seem oblivious… they're quite mad.
 
Pinball: Well..the point is which light as a "night light" will cause LESS stress on fish at night? Red or blue? BTW.... you are correct in your theory on light. HOWEVER...in WATER.. blue light actually penetrates alot deeper in the water then red light does. Red light can go no deeper then 3 feet...only BLUE light can penetrate at deeper depths,...
 
I don't have any experience to say any more about the color shifts/ or visibility. I do want to give up some props to Jamison for always having an opinion (which isn't a bad thing), and most importantly for doing LOTS of research on anything that interests him. I would definately say, Jamison, that you have forced out alot of great detailed info on topics that probably would not have come out normally. I agree with Carpguy that your wording probably rubs alot of people the wrong way sometimes, but I'm starting to see a genuine search in your for the truth. You are not willing to just take what you hear once and hold on to it as fact. I really think you have alot to offer all of us on AC. Also I really would like to thank you for not taking personally what I was saying to you. I didn't know how to word it any differently while getting to the point. I was kinda scared you would blow up on me about it. It shows alot of maturity (at any age) to be able to do that.

Your research into the LED area of nightlighting is something that was well-timed on this forum. Not many people have done ANY real personal research into this. I think it was a great idea to try, whatever the outcome. You had a problem with jumpy fish----you sought out a way to fix it while maintaining a beautiful view. Good for you! Just don't want you thinking I hate your input or anything:)
 
Originally posted by carpguy
My loaches seem oblivious, but then the loaches always seem oblivious… they're quite mad.
Click to expand...

You mentioned this before :) I bet they are your favorites? What type are they? I only use 2 LEDS in my 60 gallon and 1 blue led each in my other tanks. So, its not adding a WHOLE bunch of blue...just enough to see the fish... I would suggest ANYONE interesting in a moonlight effect- whethor blue or red- use a LED. The miracle Beam system is cheap and worth the money. TRY IT! If you dont like it...well.. Walmart has a GREAT return policy! :)

Try a blue and a red and which ever you dont like..just return back to the store for a refund :)
 
Originally posted by carpguy


So what does that mean in terms of blue and red (both colors)? The book doesn't say. Blue light, penetrating more deeply, would have greater intensity (rods) at depth. The red makes it to the bottom of my tank. Is there a difference in our very small little tanks? Dunno.

I think light behavior in water is similar if not identical in salt or fresh.

.
Click to expand...


Blue light actually doesn't penetrate as deeply as red does. It's like a really rapidly spinning top... it slows down when it encounters resistance. Light does not travel as well through water as it does through air. Whenever a blue light and a red light of the same intensity are shone into the same patch of water, the blue light wave would have to resonate several thousand times more often than the red one would to reach the other side. Red is much more efficient, taking much less effort to travel the same amount of space. Therefore, the blue light will slow down.... redshifting in action.... (The visual effect might not be visible to the naked eye when we're talking about the very short distance involved in a fish tank). Red light exhibits a similar redshifting effect, moving into the infrared spectrum. Why do you think they use infrared led's in remote controls for tv's? The infrared light will travel further with less degradation of the wave than a visible light or a microwave would....
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
AquariaCentral.com
Top Bottom