- Joined
- Jun 22, 2011
- Messages
- 2,431
- Points
- 83
That's the thing, 589nm looks more orange to me than those pictures. It's more of a fire color.
LPF Donation via Stripe | LPF Donation - Other Methods
Links below open in new window
ArcticMyst Security by Avery
Question about 593.5nm wavelength classification
- Thread starter NightExplorer96
- Start date
- Joined
- Nov 12, 2011
- Messages
- 956
- Points
- 43
DJNY has a pretty good comparison of 589nm & 594nm on my review thread of the 593.5 I bought from him.
Look for yourself:
http://laserpointerforums.com/f52/cni-glp-593-5nm-review-90097-2.html
Edit: I personally would call 593.5 orange. To me it dosen't show the slightest hint of yellow, but then again I have never seen 589nm.
-Alex
Just four nms makes a big difference. I think the 589 is the last occidental befor we are talking orange
zyxwv99
0
- Joined
- May 6, 2013
- Messages
- 178
- Points
- 0
Sellers of 594nm lasers usually describe the color as amber, which is subjectively beyond golden yellow, but not quite orange.
Contrary to popular belief, most of us see color the same most of the time. Even through our eyes and viewing conditions differ, we have excellent color-correction software in our brains that automatically calibrates with how other people see color (based on the words they use to describe what they see).
On the other hand, this color-correction software only works under a limited range of conditions.
Object color v. aperture color The light needs to be reflected from an object. It doesn't work with self-luminous objects.
Blackbody radiation with Boltzmann curve Sunlight, daylight, and incandescent lamps (including quartz halogen) are all good. Lasers are bad.
Gray card There needs to be a gray card in the scene, or its functional equivalent (gray clouds, stone, concrete, etc.)
A few other requirements, but basically the more natural the light and color, the better our color-correction software works.
Contrary to popular belief, most of us see color the same most of the time. Even through our eyes and viewing conditions differ, we have excellent color-correction software in our brains that automatically calibrates with how other people see color (based on the words they use to describe what they see).
On the other hand, this color-correction software only works under a limited range of conditions.
Object color v. aperture color The light needs to be reflected from an object. It doesn't work with self-luminous objects.
Blackbody radiation with Boltzmann curve Sunlight, daylight, and incandescent lamps (including quartz halogen) are all good. Lasers are bad.
Gray card There needs to be a gray card in the scene, or its functional equivalent (gray clouds, stone, concrete, etc.)
A few other requirements, but basically the more natural the light and color, the better our color-correction software works.
- Joined
- Mar 10, 2013
- Messages
- 2,918
- Points
- 113
This is absolutely true. I mentioned lighting conditions earlier, but this is taking it just a step further. There are a lot of little factors that determine how we see things.
To my eye 590 is still yellow with a hint of orange, it's certainly yellow relative to 600+ nm. 589 is also a deep hue of yellow, the same colour as the sodium doublets. You can easily confuse one for the other if you don't know what you are looking at.
Attachments
- Joined
- Dec 10, 2013
- Messages
- 1,343
- Points
- 83
That diffraction grating image is rather nice, is that what any light source with multiple emission lines looks like through a diffraction grating? If so I have got to get one..
KrowBar
0
- Joined
- May 3, 2014
- Messages
- 125
- Points
- 0
Now wouldn't that kind of depend on what your personal perception of "grayish" is? I'm pretty sure this is clearly in the black area.
Yes, this one had 600 lines/mm, the same kind often used in grating spectrometers.
- Joined
- Dec 10, 2013
- Messages
- 1,343
- Points
- 83
Can you tell me where you got it please, or where I can go to get one just like it? Let alone the fact that it's beautiful, it would be very useful to me.
Sigurthr
0
- Joined
- Dec 11, 2011
- Messages
- 4,364
- Points
- 83
Eisco Premium Quantitative Spectroscope | eBay
Grab one of these, you won't regret it. Calibrated scale that's usually pretty close to accurate. Easy viewing, much less fragile than the bare film gratings.
Oh, it's from where I work at uni. I don't know the brand, but if you search for transmission gratings you should find something similar to this. It replaces the prism in the spectrometer-goniometer arrangement.
- Joined
- Dec 10, 2013
- Messages
- 1,343
- Points
- 83
Thanks, yes I found some online, 600 lines/mm local to me and surprisingly cheap. And Sigurthr that spectro doesn't deliver to the UK, but I'll try and find a version of it closer to me.
Sigurthr
0
- Joined
- Dec 11, 2011
- Messages
- 4,364
- Points
- 83
Ah, I forgot to check shipping locales. They're all over the place though, china made. They've got a 600line grating in them, but they're really a step up from using a bare grating.
- Joined
- Dec 10, 2013
- Messages
- 1,343
- Points
- 83
So how does it work? Does it project th image onto a screen,load it into a computer, etc?
Sigurthr
0
- Joined
- Dec 11, 2011
- Messages
- 4,364
- Points
- 83
It's completely old school, haha. No computer interface or anything, you look through it, point the slit at the light source you want to see the spectra of, and look through the window on the pointy end. You want to look to the right of the slit when using it. You'll see a graduated scale in nanometers and the spectral lines will appear superimposed on that scale. You can calibrate it using known wavelengths by widening, thinning, or moving the slit (by making a new slit and covering the old one). It does an excellent job of blocking out other light and it spreads the spectrum well enough that bright spectral lines won't usually swamp your vision of weak ones.
- Joined
- Dec 10, 2013
- Messages
- 1,343
- Points
- 83
sounds good, problem is I can't find any that will ship to the UK.
Last edited:
