On Tue, Feb 9, 2010 at 5:06 PM, Peter wrote: > I believe that the discussion "pulsed is brighter than continuous" does not > refer to "pulsed fast enough to appear as if continuously on" LEDs. Maybe some > authors misquote things out of context. Well maybe it does if you want to go off down that road, however that's taking this thread completely away from the original subject of how many lumens you can get out of an LED for continuous illumination (which is the whole point of the LED which originally started this thread - I don't think anybody will be using it pulsed in ultra-low power applications!) Of course no reason why threads on here can't drift, but certainly the original arguments about pulsing LEDs were suggesting it might be a way of producing more light for continuous illumination (where flicker is imperceptible). Chris -- http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive View/change your membership options at http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist