My complaint is principally aesthetic. They're so ugly! Who in their right mind would ever put something that looks like this into a fixture that showed the bulb? It's as if they drew their inspiration from the lamest balloon artist ever.
Really? An egg-beater? |
Let's see, ceiling fan? octopus? flower? |
Rectangles? Did you even try? |
What's worse, even when their ugly form is mercifully hidden, these bulbs give hideous light. There's an overbearingly yellow glow that sucks the richness out of any saturated colors (I have a deep red throw blanket that looks gorgeous in any other light, but which looks like dead flesh in the EnergySaver light). Or there's an evil-looking "cool" shade that could never be appropriate anywhere outside of an insane asylum. Honestly, there has to be something wrong when there isn't a single setting on my camera that doesn't try to "fix" the light in my apartment. Canon wouldn't lie.
What's that? Do I hear objections? Oh, I see, you're insisting that there are actually nicely shaped eco-friendly bulbs that give off lovely shades of light. Well, that brings me to my second complaint, which is economic in nature: If what you're saying is true and there is actually some version of eco-friendly bulb that isn't completely devoid of redeeming aesthetic qualities, then I should be able to find it on the market (egad, capitalism!). And by "market" I mean my local Home Depot. But no! I spent an hour tonight shuttling between the Home Depots in my neighborhood and found only two versions that would fit the sockets in my apartment: "soft white" (aka, Death Ray 1) or "cool white" (aka, Death Ray 2). So, for all practical purposes, as far as I'm concerned, there is no acceptable version of eco-friendly light bulb on the market.
The only glimmer of hope that I could find is that one brand of the Death Ray 1 bulbs was moderately brighter than the other brands. So now my carrion-colored blanket is slightly better illuminated. Yay.
No comments:
Post a Comment