Features of light catching

Can you tell us more about these special lamps?
And what other lamps exist that are similar in UV radiation to DRL?

To the first question: I believe that this is not yet of practical significance for entomologists. Mercury-xenon lamps are ultra-high-pressure gas-discharge lamps designed on the principle of xenon, but with mercury vapor, which provides increased production in UV. In English-language literature, they are called super quit mercury xenon lamp. We also have similar ones (I can't vouch for the quality), for example, DRCs lamps. And in the USSR, for the same applications, high-pressure mercury lamps were simply produced (for example, DRSH), and it seems that their remnants are still being sold (or maybe they have learned to do it again).
So far, these are very special lamps that give a high-intensity and rather narrow beam of light, for various kinds of analyzers (plate analysis, blood analysis, spectrophotometry, etc.), point disinfection, photo processes, etc. Imported lamps are very expensive. Ours don't seem to be very good, but all with a capacity of 500W or more. We need special starters. High inrush current. They usually work only vertically (with the cathode facing up) with a deviation of up to 10-15 degrees. They are afraid of dust and dampness .
The figure below compares them with xenon and halogen lamps for similar applications. It is noteworthy that there are pronounced peaks in the UV region of interest to us, including at 365nm and 313nm:



Here is a comparison of mercury-xenon lamps with just mercury lamps of ultra-high pressure (super high pressure mercury lamp):



Please note that the UV output is two to three times larger.
For more information, please read here or google it yourself.

To the second question: there will be no pennies for a penny .
With DRL lamps, I believe, only some metal halide lamps (MH, HQI, MGL in Russia) can be compared (or even slightly surpass them in terms of UV output and recoil in this area), but only those of them that do not have special built-in filters in the glass of the external bulb that cut off UV, or these filters cut it off below 300nm. At the same time, they will naturally have to be used without glass or with quartz glass of the lamp, to which they are usually more sensitive. Since the entire evolution of these lamps followed the development of such filters (to ensure safe use), it is not easy to find such lamps, and they will be much more expensive than DRL (and starters for them, too).
Another alternative is a set of special LEDs, but:
1) monochrome 365nm spotlights cost quite a lot of money so far;
2) typeset floodlights with LEDs that give different UV light in the range of at least 300-365nm, in general, I did not see, except for artisanal low-power lamps;
3) since they compete with DRL lamps with a power of mainly 250-400W, and if necessary-and more, which cost a penny, such spotlights do not it will be until mercury lamps are banned everywhere, and the technology of LED production does not advance significantly.

The post was edited by Barnaba - 03/11/2020 01: 23

Barnaba, have you had any experience working with a "stab" DRL?
Interested in protecting the inner bulb, because, as far as I understand, they should be hidden from the rain,
but what about small insects that stick to the lamps? For example, my DRL was covered with so many midges during the season that I had to wash it.

Barnaba, have you had any experience working with a "stab" DRL?
Interested in protecting the inner bulb, because, as far as I understand, they should be hidden from the rain,
but what about small insects that stick to the lamps? For example, my DRL was covered with so many midges during the season that I had to wash it.

I haven't used pricked DRL for a long time, and I don't recommend it to you.
When I used it, I had a lamp for it type of NSP with a protective grid and a reliable ceramic chuck. It is sealed on top, if you use a hermetic lead and a little sealant. The glass ceiling, of course, was removed. A circular tinplate visor (with a hole in the center under the top of the lamp) with a width of 10-15cm was placed on the lamp shell for better protection from rain. A mosquito net made of anodized aluminum was placed on the grate. It was sewn like a net bag with a sling shell on the upper rim, put on from the bottom and fastened inside with a couple of buttons. You can sew a couple more hooks at the top of the grid for better fixation on the lamp, but I made do with two wires. The grid doesn't significantly affect attraction.

I haven't used pricked DRL for a long time, and I don't recommend it to you.
When I used it, I had a lamp for it type of NSP with a protective grid and a reliable ceramic chuck. It is sealed on top, if you use a hermetic lead and a little sealant. The glass ceiling, of course, was removed. A circular tinplate visor (with a hole in the center under the top of the lamp) with a width of 10-15cm was placed on the lamp shell for better protection from rain. A mosquito net made of anodized aluminum was placed on the grate. It was sewn like a net bag with a sling shell on the upper rim, put on from the bottom and fastened inside with a couple of buttons. You can sew a couple more hooks at the top of the grid for better fixation on the lamp, but I made do with two wires. The grid doesn't significantly affect attraction.

Thank you so much for the information.

By the way, I read that you can catch on two DRL: 250W and (it seems) 140W, in turn including one or the other. It seems like the catch increases due to this. I wonder if anyone has tried the same thing, but with DRL 400W and 250W? Will there be any difference at all?

Thank you so much for the information.

By the way, I read that you can catch on two DRL: 250W and (it seems) 140W, in turn including one or the other. It seems like the catch increases due to this. I wonder if anyone has tried the same thing, but with DRL 400W and 250W? Will there be any difference at all?

It is with the DRL-400 and, to a lesser extent, with the DRL-250, even with whole ones, and even more so with "mallets", this makes sense. The fact is that powerful lamps, although they attract insects from afar, still create a sufficiently bright zone at a significant distance from the screen (sometimes two to three tens of meters, from the properties of the ground, the openness of the terrain, the illumination of the moon, the type of insect, etc.) so that insects land on the ground and plants, not allowing them to it reaches the screen. This is also facilitated by the fact that many insects (due to the device of their apparatus that determines the direction to the source) tend to lay "arcs" and "miss"near the source. The weaker and smaller the light source, the less pronounced this effect is, respectively. Therefore, when working with a strong source, you either have to periodically inspect the surrounding area with lobnik, or temporarily reduce the strength of the source so that they fly closer, preferably directly to the canvases. Completely turning off the light at this time is bad, distant and approaching ones are no longer attracted. When working with the "beater", this also allows you to examine the canvases more carefully, without being exposed to harmful radiation. But you have to wait until the lamp cools down, until the next time it is turned on, and then it does not immediately return to operating mode. 140W DRL does not exist, I use 125W DRL or 160W DRV paired with either a more powerful DRL or HSW Blacklight, which I sometimes turn off.

Hello.

Has anyone tried catching on to this?:
http://www.gunnarbrehm.de/en/contact.html
https://www.bioform.de/shop.php?action=tree...692&treeid=5273
Is there any use for such crafts?

The price is inadequate, but there is a sense. Even on UV LED strips fly.

The price is inadequate, but there is a sense. Even on UV LED strips fly.

It's clear.

If anyone caught on to such crafts, can you tell us how they compare with ultraviolet tubes, which are usually put in light traps?
I wonder how much better or worse they are.

13 watts at the most powerful - are you kidding me? This will probably only work in the wild, dark wilderness. Buy a spotlight with ordinary white diodes (6500K) with a power of 100 W or more for a price 5-10 times less and it will be more useful. It flies on them even better than on DRL of similar power. For fans of expeditions to hell on horns, there are options with a battery and a solar battery (a little more expensive, of course, but still far from the price of that golden Europ miracle flashlight). By the way, such a flashlight can be soldered yourself or ordered from those who sell LEDs in stalls. With any spectrum.

I clarified the model of the most evil searchlights in our neighborhood, under which I regularly observe animals gathered from all the surrounding areas, despite the fierce light pollution - here-such. Pay attention to the service life. According to my observations, three years burn nightly and at least henna. This thing is the size of a tablet computer, connects directly to the 220V network and does not require any kilogram chokes. After the DRL, at least I don't stab, I look like shit.

The message was edited INO-05/04/2020 19: 11

I clarified the model of the most evil searchlights in our neighborhood, under which I regularly observe animals gathered from all the surrounding areas, despite the fierce light pollution - here-such. Pay attention to the service life. According to my observations, three years burn nightly and at least henna. This thing is the size of a tablet computer, connects directly to the 220V network and does not require any kilogram chokes. After the DRL, at least I don't stab, I look like shit.

Thank you.

Judging by the description on the site, they have no ultraviolet radiation at all, and this is not very good.

Well, if you need it so much, hang a 20-watt "black light" lamp next to it. But only IMHO this is a pure placebo. Visible white light, unlike yellow, is also very attractive, the main thing is its brightness. And according to this indicator, such a lamp is significantly superior to a similar DRL in terms of power. And I don't know, from the brightness only and also from the spectrum, but insects under them gather in the city conditions by an order of magnitude more. What happens if in a remote forest or in the steppe on a good day to shine such a light, I'm afraid to even imagine. But I am absolutely sure that there will be many times more sense than from that bourgeois dim lantern for the price of a steamer.

Well, if you need it so much, hang a 20-watt "black light" lamp next to it. But only IMHO this is a pure placebo. Visible white light, unlike yellow, is also very attractive, the main thing is its brightness. And according to this indicator, such a lamp is significantly superior to a similar DRL in terms of power. And I don't know, from the brightness only and also from the spectrum, but insects under them gather in the city conditions by an order of magnitude more. What happens if in a remote forest or in the steppe on a good day to shine such a light, I'm afraid to even imagine. But I am absolutely sure that there will be many times more sense than from that bourgeois dim lantern for the price of a steamer.

In general, if anything, I did not intend to buy this flashlight. I'm just wondering if they make any sense at all, with such a design, with such a set of LEDs, in comparison with the tubes that are usually used in light traps.

In general, almost all bourgeois traps cost $ 300-500 (you can view prices on NHBS or here http://leptraps.com/lighttrappricing.htm). Apparently, this is an adequate price for them.

I clarified the model of the most evil searchlights in our neighborhood, under which I regularly observe animals gathered from all the surrounding areas, despite the fierce light pollution - here-such. Pay attention to the service life. According to my observations, three years burn nightly and at least henna. This thing is the size of a tablet computer, connects directly to the 220V network and does not require any kilogram chokes. After the DRL, at least I don't stab, I look like shit.

What kind of animals do you have out there? Midges, mosquitoes, cockroaches and crickets? These spotlights have one significant drawback: their directional beam, the butterfly went beyond the "beam" and remember what they were called. In addition, it is completely unclear how to place them in an open area? On a three-meter pole, or maybe on the ground and direct it to the sky, in general, it is not clear.

All the same as under the nearby DRL hanging, but more. In a wide range of systematic groups, a variety of butterflies are naturally present. But I didn't see cockroaches and crickets, they don't really respect the light at all. But there are a lot of grasshoppers. The beam (it is wide) is directed to the screen, as always. If a place with light ground without vegetation, then you can use it instead of a screen, the power is enough. In general, I have never seen any phenomenal trapping features of DRL (not pricked) with their suppressed UV in attracting insects. To powerful halogen spotlights, the same number arrives. Here, just above the krypton incandescent lamp was praised, but there is also no UV, but there is a huge power. In general, the question of the attractiveness of a particular spectrum for certain groups of insects requires further study. Blindly believing that 10-20 W of UV is better than 100 W of white light is part of the realm of religion. Here the orange-yellow light of DNAT really works much worse, this is a fact.

The post was edited INO-05.05.2020 13: 54

All the same as under the nearby DRL hanging, but more. In a wide range of systematic groups, a variety of butterflies are naturally present. But I didn't see cockroaches and crickets, they don't really respect the light at all. But there are a lot of grasshoppers. The beam (it is wide) is directed to the screen, as always. If a place with light ground without vegetation, then you can use it instead of a screen, the power is enough. In general, I have never seen any phenomenal trapping features of DRL (not pricked) with their suppressed UV in attracting insects. To powerful halogen spotlights, the same number arrives. Here, just above the krypton incandescent lamp was praised, but there is also no UV, but there is a huge power. In general, the question of the attractiveness of a particular spectrum for certain groups of insects requires further study. Blindly believing that 10-20 W of UV is better than 100 W of white light is part of the realm of religion. Here the orange-yellow light of DNAT really works much worse, this is a fact.

I personally am only interested in butterflies, so of course it is interesting to try such a lantern, I have met them, but I have never been able to catch them directly. It is necessary to advise someone to let it go, and while I'm still trying to catch it on the page, on DLR / DRV

If you already have a DRL and throttle, as well as the ability to carry it or pull it on a hump, then, of course, there is no special point in investing in an LED spotlight. But for those who have not yet acquired such prichdalami and plans IMHO, the alternative I proposed is more attractive.

DRV is about nothing at all, but only slightly better than DNAT.

The post was edited INO-05.05.2020 18: 59

If you already have a DRL and throttle, as well as the ability to carry it or pull it on a hump, then, of course, there is no special point in investing in an LED spotlight. But for those who have not yet acquired such prichdalami and plans IMHO, the alternative I proposed is more attractive.

DRV is about nothing at all, but only slightly better than DNAT.

I've been fishing on the DRV for 10 years and I'm happy, the only thing is that they are afraid of water. And in the Tropics I caught on the DRV and in Primorye and in the Caucasus, and everywhere an excellent result. If you of course collect some specific insects for you can DRV and nothing, for butterflies that's what you need.

You can also catch on a 60W incandescent lamp and be satisfied without comparing it with something better. I write this from personal experience. DRV is a completely delusional design. That tungsten hair burning on a dull yellow glow barely shines through the phosphor at all. Only eats energy. Probably, it would have been possible to implement this concept smarter by making a hybrid DRL not with a hundred-year-old Ilyich light bulb, but with a krypton or halogen bulb in a separate bulb, but they did not implement it.

For example, here DRV deservedly reasoned with shit watered.

Hello.

Has anyone tried catching on to this?:
http://www.gunnarbrehm.de/en/contact.html
https://www.bioform.de/shop.php?action=tree...692&treeid=5273
Is there any use for such crafts?

Dear entomologists, can someone tell me how to assemble such a thing?

I clarified the model of the most evil searchlights in our neighborhood, under which I regularly observe animals gathered from all the surrounding areas, despite the fierce light pollution - here-such. Pay attention to the service life. According to my observations, three years burn nightly and at least henna. This thing is the size of a tablet computer, connects directly to the 220V network and does not require any kilogram chokes. After the DRL, at least I don't stab, I look like shit.

Have you ever caught such spotlights yourself somewhere outside the city? Maybe there are photos of screens?

Still interesting, what do you catch? Given the attitude to DRL/DRV, definitely not on them.

You can also catch on a 60W incandescent lamp and be satisfied without comparing it with something better. I write this from personal experience. DRV is a completely delusional design. That tungsten hair burning on a dull yellow glow barely shines through the phosphor at all. Only eats energy. Probably, it would have been possible to implement this concept smarter by making a hybrid DRL not with a hundred-year-old Ilyich light bulb, but with a krypton or halogen bulb in a separate bulb, but they did not implement it.

For example, here DRV deservedly reasoned shit watered.

First of all, they are reasonably watered with shit, only their economic component, and not the spectrum. I do not care about saving electricity in parallel, I either feed it from the generator or at camp sites where electricity is included in the price of living.
Well, about the delusional design, if the results of the fees I would not be happy, maybe I would be looking for something else. I compared the DRV with both halogen and BlackLight. Halogen lamps are not about anything at all, in black UV flies worse, but maybe a little different. I don't want to try all these diodes in the Middle Lane because the toad is choking me to buy them, and it's even more expensive to go to the tropics and check their failure there. A good review of their catchability has not appeared, it is not the first year that everyone has been testing. As for your enthusiasm for a diode lamp in which even the developer declares no UV, apparently you are simply not interested in butterflies. Well, I'm not interested in midges and every little thing that even flies to the light of a cigarette.

Gee-gee. I don't do anything at all. I've got someone to shine a light on for me. And the screens are so put that wow, not like sheets on a stick. My job is to approach-go through and collect for free. Commensalism as it is. But in this way, you can collect much more statistics about the attractiveness of various types of light sources for insects than if you shine it yourself. After all, you can't put screens with halogen, DRL, DRV, DNaT, sweet Ilyich and LEDs next to each other in one night. And if it catches in the city, then it will catch even more outside the city, this is self-evident.

And yes, stop looking at pictures of screens as proof of the mega-effectiveness of a particular light bulb. This is basically the same as watching an advertisement for a miracle spinning reel from a TV store on TV and believing that the cage that was honestly filled with the help of this division, the fact of its completeness is due to it, and not to a specific time and place of fishing. This is absolutely unscientific!

Sanyamukholov, than have vozmozhnocht instead of, say, 100W DRL to use 200W DRV for the same money happy for you. But many here complained about the lack of luminous flux power due to weak portable generators.

I generally don't approach entomology from an economic point of view. In a sense, I was lucky with the objects of study - they are daytime. But if I specialized in those who are caught in the light, I would definitely buy such a searchlight, as the most effective option that I have seen. The price is not so terrible for an almost eternal light source. Even with my very modest income. And what is the reason for your confidence that butterflies necessarily need UV, and representatives of other orders - not? I once caught a lot of butterflies of various systematic types on a 75-watt incandescent lamp aimed at a window on the 5th floor. And most of all I saw large insects at one time under powerful halogen spotlights, which, as you say, are "about nothing".

Gee-gee. I don't do anything at all. I've got someone to shine a light on for me. And the screens are so put that wow, not like sheets on a stick. My job is to approach-go through and collect for free. Commensalism as it is. But in this way, you can collect much more statistics about the attractiveness of various types of light sources for insects than if you shine it yourself. After all, you can't put screens with halogen, DRL, DRV, DNaT, sweet Ilyich and LEDs next to each other in one night. And if it catches in the city, then it will catch even more outside the city, this is self-evident.

And yes, stop looking at pictures of screens as proof of the mega-effectiveness of a particular light bulb. This is basically the same as watching an advertisement for a miracle spinning reel from a TV store on TV and believing that the cage that was honestly filled with the help of this division, the fact of its completeness is due to it, and not to a specific time and place of fishing. This is absolutely unscientific!

A picture of the screen, that would be something.
So to believe in your great experience is also unscientific.

And when you read articles in magazines without photos, you don't believe it either? A picture of one screen does not say anything at all, except that somewhere and once flew there, which can be envied. I know where and when to shine a table lamp through the window, so that it will be covered with insects on the back side. But, for example, yesterday and today, nothing at all flew into the light anywhere, at least in the city. A complete analogy with fishing. Now, if you put a row of screens in one place with different light bulbs and take a picture at the same time, then this will already be scientific data. But I've never seen a photo like this in my life.

I don't have any photos from under the floodlights, and I won't have any. There and so the security sometimes finds fault with what I catch, and even if I start to take pictures...

I thought that I did a useful job when I scouted the brand of the most catchy spotlights specifically for this forum, but as always, with good intentions... If you don't want to believe it or check it out, try arc welding, because there is a lot of UV in it.

The post was edited INO-05/07/2020 05: 30

I don't have any photos from under the floodlights, and I won't have any. There and so the security sometimes finds fault with what I catch, and even if I start to take pictures...

I thought that I did a useful job when I scouted the brand of the most catchy spotlights specifically for this forum, but as always, with good intentions... If you don't want to believe it or check it out, try arc welding, because there is a lot of UV in it.
an
amazing approach, I didn't catch the spotlight, there are no photos and there won't be any, take my word for it, and then I wonder why people don't believe it and twist their finger at their temples. If there were any empirical data on the catchability of these lanterns, we would be happy to take a look. And so, I saw some midges, did not come close, but from this they concluded that the DRV was about nothing, and even the article of an electrician was attached, and not an entomologist. Not a serious approach, not scientific and amateurish.

I tried to catch it, but I didn't shine - others did it for me. So my approach is both scientifically and economically justified.

I tried to catch it, but I didn't shine - others did it for me. So my approach is both scientifically and economically justified.

You're hallucinating. Please re-read my posts again and sort them out.

But at the DRV, yes, I only saw some midges and half a piece of dustpan with moths. But, of course, if you lean it in a warm place against a warm wall and hang it in a remote seaside taiga, it will definitely shoot.

See right through don't scroll

Went and begged on the screens or something? Very scientifically and economically justified.

And why not? If a bunch of insects fly to one screen lit by an LED spotlight, and two cripples fly to the next one lit by an AWR (and this situation repeats itself many times on different nights and in different places), then what is not scientific data? Screens, of course, are not made of sheets, but with all sorts of ads.

And why not? If a bunch of insects fly to one screen lit by an LED spotlight, and two cripples fly to the next one lit by an AWR (and this situation repeats itself many times on different nights and in different places), then what is not scientific data? Screens, of course, are not made of sheets, but with all sorts of ads.

Well, so that there would not be such unsubstantiated statements (a bunch of insects and two cripples), people came up with a photo, and insects are very common. Maybe two cripples, but some, and maybe a thousand of some listobolshek, and then and then insects.

And why not? If a bunch of insects fly to one screen lit by an LED spotlight, and two cripples fly to the next one lit by an AWR (and this situation repeats itself many times on different nights and in different places), then what is not scientific data? Screens, of course, are not made of sheets, but with all sorts of ads.

What do you mean by "with all sorts of ads"?

Then had: there are all sorts of signs.

Sanyamukholov, and then if I posted a photo from under the spotlight with a bunch of butterflies and a photo from under the DRL with a couple of mosquitoes, saying: "this was shot at the same time in rememya at a distance of 10 m, and not with a difference of 1 month and 10 km, I swear to my mother" - you would they believe me more than just words without photos? And where is your dialectic here?

The most amazing thing is that many of you, babochnikov, are really led to a photo of a "black" screen under a miracle light bulb, made by H. Z. where and when, although in fact there is almost zero useful information in it-marketing miracles!

The post was edited INO-05/08/2020 17: 56

Then had: there are all sorts of signs.

Sanyamukholov, and then if I posted a photo from under the spotlight with a bunch of butterflies and a photo from under the DRL with a couple of mosquitoes, saying: "this was shot at the same time in rememya at a distance of 10 m, and not with a difference of 1 month and 10 km, I swear to my mother" - you would they believe me more than just words without photos? And where is your dialectic here?

The most amazing thing is that many of you, babochnikov, are really led to a photo of a "black" screen under a miracle light bulb, made by H. Z. where and when, although in fact there is almost zero useful information in it-marketing miracles!

First, take a photo with a bunch of butterflies and a diode lantern, against the background of your advertising posters, since the season has just begun. Photo DRV is not worth it, here and without expensive photos, people are well aware of the capabilities and catchability of these lamps. Well, as for chudolamp and the marketing move, this is also past. Personally, I know several people who took them on trial even that year, and that while they either didn't have time to write an enthusiastic review, or they didn't have anything to write a review with.

Wow, the terrorist made demands! I could have taken that picture, of course, despite the inevitable explanation with security, but what good would it do me? I don't get paid for advertising lanterns. In addition, as I have already explained several times clearly (but obviously not for everyone), even under an incandescent light bulb, you can take such a photo on a good day, even in the city, not to mention the wilds. And the only useful information that can be extracted from such a picture is the fact that I still know how to photograph butterflies.

To begin with, I gave you a model of a lantern on plates with a gold border. Specially, by the way, I went to find out. You can say "thank you" and leave it at that.

Wow, the terrorist made demands! I could have taken that picture, of course, despite the inevitable explanation with security, but what good would it do me? I don't get paid for advertising lanterns. In addition, as I have already explained several times clearly (but obviously not for everyone), even under an incandescent light bulb, you can take such a photo on a good day, even in the city, not to mention the wilds. And the only useful information that can be extracted from such a picture is the fact that I still know how to photograph butterflies.

To begin with, I gave you a model of a lantern on plates with a gold border. Specially, by the way, I went to find out. You can say "thank you" and leave it at that.

For what do you say thank you, for the fact that you in one fell swoop "shat" lamps that catch here a good half of the forum for more than a dozen years? And at the same time stating that UV is not important for insects? Presenting to the public some of their "saw"?

ENO, can you make a list, according to your experience, of the most catchy light sources for butterflies, from worst to best?
The same applies to screens, i.e. which fabric or other material is best suited for attracting insects?

It's possible:

1. The previously mentioned LED floodlight.
2. DRL and powerful halogen spotlights ( those that shine white without a yellow tint).
3. DRV and low-pressure fluorescent lamps.
4. DNaT and ordinary incandescent lamps.

I won't say anything about special UV sources, because they are not used in street lighting, and therefore my statistics on them are very poor and not comparable with others. I've also never seen a stab DRL at work, but I believe it will work.

I didn't say that UV is completely useless. I suspect that with a similar light flux, a source with a larger share of near UV in the spectrum will catch better, but you will not find such a powerful one on sale at an affordable price. And I strongly doubt the quality of self-made ones. After all, it is not so easy to power the LED from the AC network so that it can live without flickering for a long time. In searchlights, such as those I wrote about, this problem is solved 100%. Much better than in cheap LED bulbs for a regular cartridge. As for household fluorescent lamps, there the lion's share of UV is cut by glass, the remaining placebo. I have never seen special low-pressure UV lamps more powerful than 20 watts. It is possible that if you hang it to a 100W white LED spotlight or halogen lamp, it will increase the arrival rate by the same 20%, but is it worth such a tambourine? What's left? Only a stab DRL, I believe that it is effective, but still scary. And a quartz lamp, but that's even scarier.

Here's where UV, regardless of intensity, really has no alternative - so it's in catching scorpions. But there the principle is different.

I didn't want to write, but I couldn't resist. I have been using the advertised LED floodlight for more than a year to illuminate the site at night. If on a certain night I do not catch, then a certain number of butterflies fly to it. If I light the drl250 15 meters from the other side of the house, there is practically nothing on the LED spotlight, everything is on the drl. The amount on the drl is not comparable to an LED floodlight. What is not surprising, it is good for its application (lighting the site), but not for catching insects. So think for yourself whether you should buy it or not.

Never caught the light, but after reading a few pages of the forum, I decided to try it. I bought a DRL 250 lamp, a throttle to it, a wire, a screen made of white fabric. The DRL also emits an ultraviolet spector (the main radiation is cut off by the internal coating of the lamp). The instructions for the lamp say that the safe distance from the lamp is 4 m. In this regard, I have an amateur question. How is the safe collection of incoming insects carried out? Go to the screen in safety glasses, turn off the lamp when approaching the screen and turn on the forehead foparik, or...? How do you do this?