We're refrusbishing all of a big victorian house (including removing various internal walls to make the whole ground floor entirely open plan). We're now at the stage of planning the lighting/electrics.
While we're basically keen on using some sort of downlighters almost everywhere (for a clean modern look), I'm a bit overwhelmed by the options - halogens, leds, fluorescents, and on top of that the 240v vs low-voltage options.
Does anyone have any recommendations as to which of these to go for -- in terms of initial cost, convenience (e.g. dimming?), long-term costs, etc?
For the master bedroom (e.g. 4m x 4m) about how many downlighters would be the right number? (We're planning 3 above the headboard for reading, but aren't at all sure about the rest of the room).
It depends on the effect that you want to achieve and the amount of light required.
One option with halogen downlighters is to mount them such that the cone of the beam intersects with the wall. Even 20w ones will be effective for this - perhaps 3 along a wall. This will create a parabola of illuminated area and will reflect into the room well if the walls are light in colour.
For the central part of the room, a matrix of 5 wide angle fittings would provide good coverage.
Halogen lamps are dimmable. This goes for both the low and mains voltage ones. For the low voltage ones you can get electronic transformers which will also allow dimming and are physically smaller. Using soft start dimmers seems to prolong bulb life and certainly halogens do dim effectively.
One thing that is important when fitting is to use lamp covers over the back - i.e. in the loft. These can be bought as special purpose items or earthenware flower pots can be used instead.
Purchase cost of halogen lamps is quite reasonable if one buys them in bulk from an on line place. It's a false economy to buy cheap unbranded product.
Running costs depend on the amount of use of course, although heat generated is within the envelope of the house, thus supplementing the other heating during autumn to spring. In the context of total energy use in a house, lighting is very much second to third order anyway. Arranging for the lights to be in groups and having them separately switched and dimmed allows for a variety of lighting effects and reduces the cost as well.
Fluorescent bulbs are available for downlighters but have a number of problems.
- They are not dimmable.
- Most project mechanically in front of the fitting making them look aesthetically ridiculous.
- The light is generally dull and to some people the colour rendition looks wrong, creating a kind of bilious effect.
LED lamps can be interesting. One application that I have seen quite frequently is in small reading lights with very directed illumination. Quite a few aircraft have these - the idea being to facilitate reading without disturbing the person in the next seat if there is one. The light does tend to be quite cold, however.
I wouldnt personally recommend downlighters. But if you must go with downers, LEDs put out little light, have poor light quality and high price, and are not a serious contender for general lighting. Lv halogens are more efficient and robust than mains halogen, but halogens of any kind will cost an arm and a leg to run CFL downlighters are by far the most energy efficient option
If you want the downer look I'd recommend a hybrid approach, which gives you the look of downlighters but with sensible energy efficiency and decent lighting. This means using very low power halogen downlighting (5-10w each) along with concealed fluorescent uplighting.
I'd suggest a bit of reading here, should explain all:
formatting link
relevant to you: dimmers & switchbanks fluorescent halogen LED rewiring tips
On the ground floor 3.7m. On first floor around 3m. What would you suggest, bearing in mind that we do want a clean, modern look, and that we don't really want pendant lamps?
The combination suggested by others in this thread of some fluorescent uplighters in troughs with some very low voltage halogen downlighters sounds workable (and quite good!), but I'm wondering if there are other alternatives?
Well there are just so many nice, affordable, decent-sized, well- designed modern houses on the market in London that we felt the need to go for something different ;-)
Personally I'm really saddened by people butchering period properties to try to create some sort of 'modern' look - clearly inspired by television reality programmes.
If there are "just so many nice, affordable, decent-sized, well-designed" houses, why not leave them to people who are prepared to keep them as such in their original form?
If there are so many there's no need to preserve. It's a house, so designed for living in. And modern living needs different facilities from Victorian days - after all they generally didn't even have electricity. Heating was by coal fires and even a modest middle class household had a maid - and the distaff side didn't go to work. It's not some rare art object.;-)
So saying most who buy Victorian properties do appreciate their finer points and preserve them - or even replace 'features' that previous less sympathetic owners had removed. But there's nothing wrong with tasteful modernisation.
HomeOwnersHub website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here.
All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.