The Up-Side of Wicked Lasers

InfinitusEquitas said:

I don't get the WL approach to goggles... I really do not. Making them darker does not make them safer! I mean I've seen a pair that was ridiculously dark, 20% vlt maybe, but STILL passed through lots of blue light.

Perfectly possible to have 40-50-60% vlt with goggles, and a good OD rating, enough for 4W+ but that's clearly not what WL is doing.

@Smeerworst - Can you please let us know if your LPM results match up to what the WL results show?

Click to expand...

Sure, i can make a LPM video if you like....

Here's a picture of the goggles.

Old above
New under



Cheers, Sm.

LPM videos are always great

I really want to see if your results match what WL posts, or if they are even close. For a 445 results should be pretty consistent across LPMs.

Btw, those glasses the new ones are on the bottom? The ones I was talking about, the very dark, seemed even darker. If my friend still has them I'll snap a pic.

InfinitusEquitas said:

LPM videos are always great

I really want to see if your results match what WL posts, or if they are even close. For a 445 results should be pretty consistent across LPMs.

Btw, those glasses the new ones are on the bottom? The ones I was talking about, the very dark, seemed even darker. If my friend still has them I'll snap a pic.

Click to expand...

Yes the new ones are on the bottom of the picture.

I just gave them a quick test, and they seem to block better then the old ones WL sended out.

With the old ones you can still see the beam, and the dot looks blue with 445nm lasers (looks washed out with blue halo)

The new ones make the beam invisible and the dot seems olmost white ?
You can only see the dot or in this case the line of the 445nm output.
No blue halo's around it.... pritty weird to see.

Well, beam should not be visible AT ALL with safety goggles on... if it is, forget them.

With my goggles I only see a whitish dot. Not sure what you mean by halo... bottom line is good goggles shouldn't allow you to keep seeing any blue light imo.

InfinitusEquitas said:

Well, beam should not be visible AT ALL with safety goggles on... if it is, forget them.

With my goggles I only see a whitish dot. Not sure what you mean by halo... bottom line is good goggles shouldn't allow you to keep seeing any blue light imo.

Click to expand...

Well then the New WL goggles seem to be working pritty well

Sounds like good news... better later than never.

The first thing out of the mouth of those I show my lasers to, when they’re wearing goggles, is how difficult the beam/spot is to see. While few can deny wearing the goggles offers protection, many question the merit in owning and operating a laser so strong, it cannot be operated WITHOUT goggles. Because while wearing the goggles, what you wind up seeing is, in most cases, something akin to a 1mW laser on a bright sunny day. And there isn’t much “Wow” factor in that, is there?

When operating a 2W 445nm laser diode, for example, if I want to SEE the beam and enjoy its beauty, in all its Class 4 splendor, then (I've been known to) sometimes take the risk, and operate the device without goggles.

WL ships their products with goggles. I suspect for the most part, they do so for product liability. If someone gets hurt, they can ask “duh, well, were you wearing your goggles?” I suspect some, if not many, operate their Class 4 laser products without goggles in order to enjoy the product at its most impressive display.

Shipping the products with darker goggles may be safer, but I wonder if in the end, fewer people will be wearing said goggles, and thus, more injuries result.

Something completely different i noticed today.

You would never notice it, but when you have 3 of them to compare, you see different coatings on the 100% glass lenscap.





Never noticed it, thought it was funny.

Presuming those are Anti-Reflective coatings:

I have experience applying anti-reflective (AR) coatings to optics that look a great deal like those shown in the photo. AR coatings are made by applying alternating layers of SiO2 and metal oxides to the surface of the substrate (glass). The apparent reflected color of the final product can vary from batch to batch, and even within batches. The final color has something to do with the thickness of the last layer of SiO2 applied to the surface.

I don't think it's anything to be concerned about. It has little measurable impact on the wavelength of light transmitted through the optic.

pschlosser said:

Presuming those are Anti-Reflective coatings:

I have experience applying anti-reflective (AR) coatings to optics that look a great deal like those shown in the photo. AR coatings are made by applying alternating layers of SiO2 and metal oxides to the surface of the substrate (glass). The apparent reflected color of the final product can vary from batch to batch, and even within batches. The final color has something to do with the thickness of the last layer of SiO2 applied to the surface.

I don't think it's anything to be concerned about. It has little measurable impact on the wavelength of light transmitted through the optic.

Click to expand...

It's nothing im con (c) sry ^^verned about ^_^ ...... Consered.

It's just that i've never noticed yet.
I don't think they all have different coatings for just one color wavelenght.
Those 3 in the picture are 473nm 445nm and 532nm.
I just found it funny that they all use a different color coated dust lens.
Something one might oversee when they just have one WL.

That's all

i have a arctic that was sold as 1.25W i LPM'd it at 1.48W.

InfinitusEquitas said:

@Smeerworst - Can you please let us know if your LPM results match up to what the WL results show?

Click to expand...

LPM video

Interesting that their LPM graph begins at time-zero way up there at 1420 mW. Are they pre-saturating the read head of their LPM, and switching over to the test subject?

And that brings up a question I have had about the startup curve of most (if not every) LPM graphs I've seen on this forum:

Is the (relative) lengthy warmup times shown on the graph a result of the laser diode coming up to full power? Or is it the LPM sensor that needs time to register the actual output of the device? Or is it a combination of both?

Would a lab laser, already warmed up, and then directed at the LPM show the same 15 to 30 second rise to full power on the graph?

Well yours tested higher than they tested it at...

Hmm, it's possible they are just running an LPM continuously, put a laser onto it, move onto the next one, and just set the graph to show as starting at zero.

The difference in their results vs yours are consistent - depending on temperature, battery, battery charge, etc,.

I'm surprised, but looks like after two years, they may have finally gotten their act together, and they are hitting hobbyist level outputs from 1.5-2 years ago.

@pschlosser - Darker or not, safety goggles should be capable of doing what they are supposed to do. IMO it would be worse, a lot worse, if people had a false sense of safety... which is what I think has been going on the last couple of years.

As long as a laser is stable, not moving... the danger is really minimal. The best safety tool that people need to use more is common sense, with an understanding of laser safety... goggles are nothing more than a seat belt imo, a last resort means of dealing with an accident.

InfinitusEquitas said:

As long as a laser is stable, not moving... the danger is really minimal. The best safety tool that people need to use more is common sense, with an understanding of laser safety... goggles are nothing more than a seat belt imo, a last resort means of dealing with an accident.

Click to expand...

I agree. Also, operating a laser takes time to learn and gain experience. As you move it about, be it outside or in, there comes a time when you say to yourself, "oh, I better not shine it on that, it may come right back at us." Or, "It should be okay to shine it on that tree 50 feet away. It seems improbable the beam could bounce of the bark..." etc.

For those new to leasers and reading, it is for this reason it is wise to start out with something less harmful. Were you to zap someone in the eye with 50mW the victim is going to notice the saturation straight away, and their eyesight will likely recover. Waving a 2000mW around, there's no going back if someone gets hit in the eye directly or by a clean reflection.

Edit:

Ok, before I am flamed for my use of 50mW as being something safe, I acknowledge even an unfocused 1mW HeNe laser has a brightness equal to sunshine on a clear day (0.1 watt/cm2) and is just as dangerous to stare at directly. (source: Elsa Garmire)