Light and visual comfort
Applying the same scheme to both spaces produces a dark lobby and a canteen-like restaurant: it is the commonest mistake, and also the easiest to avoid.
Two problems that look like one
In a hotel lobby the eye moves constantly: it reads the signs, looks for the lift, recognises staff, judges the distance to the desk. An even level and controlled glare are needed, because whoever comes in has arrived from outside and their eyes are still adapting.
At a table the eye stays on two surfaces only: the plate and the face opposite. There, direction, contrast and colour rendering are what count; general uniformity is not needed, and in fact flattens everything.
The mistake that repeats, and how it starts
The single scheme nearly always comes from reasonable motives: one supplier, one fitting repeated, one colour temperature for simplicity of stock. None of those choices is wrong in itself.
The outcome, though, is predictable. The lobby stays dark because the level was chosen thinking of the restaurant's atmosphere, and the restaurant looks like a canteen because the distribution was chosen thinking of reading in the lobby.
The lobby: the problem is adaptation
Whoever comes in arrives from daylight or from a dark street, and the eye needs time to readapt. A lobby level has to be thought about around that transition, not around the average value of the room, and that mainly changes the zone near the entrance.
By day a lobby has to be brighter than seems necessary, because it competes with the outside light coming through the glazing. In the evening the same level would be excessive, which is why a lobby without dimming only works well in one of the two conditions.
The table: the problem is direction
A table needs two different things at the same time. A concentrated source on the surface, separating the plate from the cloth and showing the food; and a soft light on the face, which does not carve shadows under the eyes of whoever sits opposite.
Those are distinct functions and almost always distinct fittings. Trying to solve both with one produces either a flat plate or a hard face, and the face is what the guest will remember.
The corridor, which joins the other two
Between the lobby and the dining room there is nearly always a transitional space, and it is the only place where a jump in colour temperature is noticed while walking. The eye has no time to readapt, and the difference reads as a change of building even when it was not intended.
That is why the corridor should not be designed last with whatever is left over. It is the point where you see whether the two rooms belong to the same building.
Four quantities, and where they change
The same four quantities describe both spaces, but with different values and different priorities. They are worth holding in mind before looking at any fitting.
- the level, which a lobby needs high by day and low in the evening
- uniformity, which helps in a lobby and harms at a table
- direction, which is everything at a table and matters little in a lobby
- colour rendering, which at a table touches the food and in a lobby the faces at the desk
Colour rendering at the table is not a whim
Food is made of reds, browns and greens, which is exactly where cheap sources render worst. Meat that looks grey and a salad that looks dull are not an aesthetic problem: they are a commercial one.
The value to ask for is not the highest available, but the one that service needs. In a room working with fish and vegetables it counts for more than in a bar, and the price difference is only justified where it shows.
Glare is the lobby's most expensive defect
Whoever comes in still has street-wide pupils, and a source in view hits them squarely. The defect does not show in a rendering and does not show in a photograph: it is felt by standing at the desk for two minutes.
The best test needs no instruments. Stand where the staff stand and where a guest queues, look straight ahead, and count how many sources are directly visible.
The evening level, which is not a reduction
Dimming in the evening does not mean turning everything down in proportion. It means changing which fittings work: general light drops a great deal, light on tables and counters drops very little, and the scene stays readable.
That is why a room on a single circuit does not work at both moments. No complicated system is needed: two or three separate groups are, decided while the installation is still on paper.
The surfaces work as hard as the fittings
A lobby with a dark ceiling and stone walls absorbs most of the light it receives, and reaching the same result as a pale lobby takes far more fittings. It is something discovered once the calculation is done, or not discovered at all.
In the restaurant the opposite holds: dark surfaces help, because they lower the background and make the table stand out. The same choice of materials changes sign moving from one room to the other.
Ceiling height changes everything
A pendant one metre above the table top and one two and a half metres above do two different jobs, even if they are the same fitting. The first defines the table, the second lights the room and leaves the table without character.
In rooms with high ceilings, which is the norm in historic buildings, the choice is not between fittings but between strategies: come down onto the tables with pendants, or give that up and work with spotlights from above.
Staff see the room more than anybody
There is a point of view that never appears in a render: that of somebody working eight hours in that room. The counter, the route towards the kitchen and the till position have needs different from those of the tables.
Asking the staff where they cannot see properly is the cheapest check there is, and hardly anybody does it before handover. The answers are always concrete and nearly always solvable cheaply.
What to look at on an evening visit
An evening visit, with the room open, says more than any document. The four things to look at are few, and none needs instruments.
- how many sources are directly visible standing at the entrance
- what colour a white tablecloth is, compared between two distant tables
- whether the face of a seated person is lit, or only their plate
- where the staff lean in to read something
The room that changes function during the day
Many rooms serve breakfast in the morning and dinner in the evening, and they are two different rooms with the same furniture. Breakfast wants high, diffuse light, dinner wants the opposite, and no fixed scheme can satisfy both.
The solution is not technological but organisational: two scenes, decided with whoever runs the room and callable by a member of staff without explanation. If calling them is not simple, after a month only one scene gets used.
What is decided, and when
Lined up, the things that separate a successful lobby from a failed one are not decided at the same stage of the project, nor by the same person. Some are fixed on the plan, others on site, and one is decided every evening.
Photographs are not a verification
A well photographed room always looks better than it is, because the camera compensates for exactly the things the eye suffers: glare, excessive contrast and colour drift. Judging from a photograph means not judging.
The reverse holds too: a room that looks dull in a photograph can work beautifully in person. The only test that counts is sitting at a table for ten minutes.
What changes for the operator
For a management team, telling the two problems apart means being able to spend where it is needed rather than everywhere. Nearly always the lobby needs more fittings than it has, and the restaurant fewer but different ones.
It also means being able to act in stages. Changing the pendants above the tables is a night's work; redoing a lobby installation is a building site. Knowing which of the two solves the problem avoids doing the second to obtain the first.
The bar, which sits between and always comes last
Between the lobby and the dining room there is nearly always a counter, and it nearly always gets whatever light is left over from the two neighbouring designs. Yet it is where staff read, count and prepare, and where a guest stands longer than at any other point in the lobby.
The counter needs something neither of the other two spaces asks for: light on the working surface with no sources in the eyes of whoever stands opposite. Those are two conflicting constraints, and resolving them takes thinking about it on purpose rather than inheriting.
The cost of getting it wrong, in the two spaces
Errors in the two rooms do not cost the same. In a lobby a wrong level is often corrected by adding fittings, which is tiresome work but contained; at a table a wrong direction is corrected only by changing the fittings or their height.
That suggests where to put the attention when design time is short. The lobby forgives and can be adjusted, the dining room does not — and the dining room is also where a guest spends two hours instead of two minutes.
The three lines to settle at design stage
If only one thing survives from all this, let it be three points to close while the installation is still on paper. They are short, and they cover most of the errors seen on site.
- separate circuits for general light and table light
- a continuous colour temperature across lobby, corridor and dining room
- one lobby level thought about for daytime and one for the evening
| What gets decided | When | Who decides |
|---|---|---|
| How many separate circuits | on the plan | whoever designs the installation |
| Continuous colour temperature | in the specification | whoever writes the document |
| Height of the pendants | with the site open | whoever installs, with whoever designs |
| Colour rendering in the room | when choosing fittings | the service being run |
| Daytime lobby level | at the calculation | the glazing and the surfaces |
| Which scene is called | every evening | the floor staff |
In a lobby you look around
The eye moves and has come from outside. An even level and no source in view are needed, because whoever enters is still adapting.
At a table you look at two points
The plate and the face opposite. Direction, contrast and colour rendering count, and general uniformity here flattens instead of helping.
The transition reveals the errors
A temperature jump between lobby and dining room is noticed only while walking. The corridor is where you see whether the two rooms sit in the same building.
The questions we are asked most
How do you design restaurant lighting, step by step?
You separate the two problems before choosing a single fitting. First, decide what the light has to do in each zone: movement in the dining room, and reading the plate and the face at the table. Second, look at adaptation at the entrance, because whoever walks in comes from another light. Third, plan two distinct functions at the table — a concentrated source on the top and a soft light on the face — which almost always means two fittings. Fourth, set colour rendering against the dishes that service actually sends out. Fifth, plan the evening level and the corridor, where a shift in colour temperature is noticed while walking. The numbers come afterwards, from the lighting calculation: settle the functions first, or you buy fittings that are then asked to do a job they cannot do.
How much light is needed at the table, and how much in the room?
It is not a single number. In the room the level is set for movement and changes between day and evening: by day it competes with the light coming through the glazing, in the evening the same value would be too much — which is why a room without dimming works well in only one of the two conditions. At the table direction matters more than level: plenty of diffuse light flattens the plate, a weaker concentrated beam lifts it. Minimum values for service areas and the kitchen come from the design against the workplace lighting standard; the value in the room comes from the kind of service.
What colour temperature is used in a restaurant?
One per space, consistent across the zones people walk through. Consistency matters more than the number: a shift between room and corridor reads as a change of building, because the eye has no time to re-adapt. The choice follows the food and the surfaces the room already has — timber, textiles, metals — not the fashion of the moment.
How do you avoid glare without dimming the light?
By taking sources out of the line of sight of those entering and those seated, and by lighting surfaces instead of eyes. It is the most expensive defect because the only real fix is moving the fittings, and whoever walks in still has street-wide pupils.
Why does colour rendering matter more at the table than in the room?
Because food lives in reds, browns and greens — exactly the parts of the spectrum where cheap sources perform worst. Grey meat and a dull salad are not an aesthetic problem but a commercial one. The value to ask for is not the highest available: it is the one that menu needs, and the price difference is justified where it shows.
Does a restaurant need a lighting design?
It does, and it is not a long document: what is needed are the three lines to settle at design stage — level and dimming in the room, direction and rendering at the table, consistency in the passage. The lighting calculation starts from those three lines and says how many fittings are needed and where; we do it free of charge, even before an order.
The real projects, with the measurements
Lobbies, restaurants, bedrooms and shared spaces: the gallery shows completed projects, with dimensioned drawings and measurement tables, not only photographs.