In a recent article in the Museum Journal, much reflection was given on the process of changing from the historic tungsten to the LED lighting future. Wisely the article concluded that the museum should proceed with caution. Stephen Cannon-Brookes made the traditional observation that CRI is the key and that traditional lighting therefore satisfies this demand. Certainly high CRI is often desirable but many collections will have different colour temperature depending on the nature of the piece which they are lighting. Certainly in my own dealing s with the National Portrait Gallery they have actually looked for warmer colour temperature in the Victorian rooms and a cooler colour temperature in the contemporary galleries. Stephen is correct today but the CRI accuracy is improving daily with the best LED manufacturers and this will be an issue resolved within two to three years.
LED lighting is a technology ideal for lighting artefact and art, but not only because the temperatures are lower and the energy consumption is so much less. The real benefits are in the controllability which this technology affords. The world now exists in which each light can respond to the natural light levels and adjust output levels accordingly. Now that same light can be tuned to the specific colour demands of the bright contemporary Marc Quinn piece in a NPG exhibition to the warm tones of a Leighton masterpiece in the subsequent exhibition in the same room. Finally each light can respond to occupancy in the room thus further saving energy. The manufacturers who have developed such flexibility have not yet approached the museum and gallery market, but it does make sense to bring these benefits to a market which so evidently can use them.
And finally the bugbear of the multi chip light source. Despite hours of design commitment from celebrated designers, I struggle to like the look of the large LED lights employed by museums in their large exhibition spaces. The aesthetic is boxy and the rows of lights may suit Lords and Wembley but not the reflective pantheons of art.
Stephen Cannon-Brookes goes onto observe quite rightly that manufacturers make claims on efficiencies that do not include the system consumption. This lack of certainty even from highly respected familiar names in lighting makes selecting such expensive light sources very difficult. But the future is brightening. The Lighting Industry Federation working with the Lighting Association have drawn up a very useful “Guidelines to specifying LEDs” which at least gives the specifier the questions to ask of the manufacturer and the Lighting Association are drawing up a verification Tick logo which then gives third party authentication to the claims.
So do tread warily, but demand that the manufacturers address these issues. The technology allows it, the manufacturers just need to know there is demand. The consequence will be brighter collections, cooler, more comfortable galleries and much lower energy and maintenance bills. Health warning - because of this longevity, these manufacturers are only going to get one bite at the cherry and are pushing for immediate adoption…..
