Welcome to Laser Pointer Forums - discuss green laser pointers, blue laser pointers, and all types of lasers

Buy Site Supporter Role (remove some ads) | LPF Donations

Links below open in new window

FrozenGate by Avery

GB: 1W 520nm diode information/giveaway

Would you consider sending me the code? I could try to improve upon it.
 





ARG said:
Haven't done anything in ASP before, but working on projects in new languages is how I pick them up, so why not :)
Click to expand...

Here ya go - it's only two files. The ASP page and the DB it runs on. The DB contains both the CIE and the chroma compatible data. There's also a table in there for stats tracking (300,000 + uses, wow).

Some interesting stats that I never looked at until now - the most common pairs searched (most common first):

532 532 (yep... that's really the most commonly searched comparison :thinking:)
532 450
532 500
532 400
532 515
532 505
808 532
532 460
596 532
532 455
660 450
540 532
640 532
635 500
800 532
532 200
532 100
740 532
542 455
532 425
564 532
561 532
 

Attachments

  • Like
Reactions: ARG
Come on man, I never meant it that way. Even though I have posted many times about the inaccuracy I still use it all the time :P It's better to have an inaccurate calculator than no calculator at all.

The real problem is that the CIE data is bad, specially the 1931 data. It considers the blue end of the spectrum far less visible than it really is. AFAIK the reason "everyone" still uses the old data when an improved dataset exists (the 1978 data) is because luminosity measurements happened to be written in stone before that.

One thing that would make a massive improvement to your tool would be to use the 78 data as default (i.e. force the "ChromaCompat" parameter to be always yes).

Another source of problems might be that we usually see beams under mesopic vision and the data is for photopic vision. I know for sure there is data available for scotopic (i probably have that here somewhere). One idea would be to have a slide bar that averages the two datasets (you'd set it according to ambient light),

As for allowing comparisons, I think you're right in that it's definitely not linear. But from what I've read the CIE data isn't for comparing "how many times brighter" one color looks in relation to another, but how many times more power you'd need to have an equivalent brightness - in fact I remember reading somewhere that the experiments for acquiring the data were done this way (the subject would increase/decrease the power of one monochromatic light source to match the brightness of another source). In that way it'd be better to leave only comparisons with "100%" on both sides - just like when you fill one wavelength, one power, the other wavelength and let the tool compute the other power. That's how I use the tool most of the time.
 
Last edited:
rhd said:
Here ya go - it's only two files. The ASP page and the DB it runs on. The DB contains both the CIE and the chroma compatible data. There's also a table in there for stats tracking (300,000 + uses, wow).

Some interesting stats that I never looked at until now - the most common pairs searched (most common first):

532 532 (yep... that's really the most commonly searched comparison :thinking:)
Click to expand...

Thanks for sharing it! :D
 
Atomicrox said:
Come on man, I never meant it that way. Even though I have posted many times about the inaccuracy I still use it all the time :P It's better to have an inaccurate calculator than no calculator at all.
Click to expand...

It's all good - it wasn't your comment that triggered this. Well - triggered perhaps - but taking it offline was something I had wanted to do for a while. I just don't have the time to make all the improvements I always wanted to make.

It's actually better to have no calculator at all, than one that is inaccurate. When there are sub-optimal options that "sort of work", people tend to keep using them. Think about how long we continued using FlexDrives even though they didn't do the job right. People used to parallel two of them together just to get the current they needed. It wasn't until there was a shortage of FlexDrives, and people weren't able to build, that the community came up with better options, and now we've got tons of great drivers.

That's the deal here. I'm not saying "I'll take my marbles and go home". I'm saying "here, you can have my marbles, turn them into something great!" :)

You guys are all welcome to use the code. Once there is a new tool (or tools), I'll put up redirects and send the traffic in a new direction :)
 
Last edited:
Re: Murphy's Law: ARG I think you're a plant for DTR, that just made me want to buy it even more.

Re: Calculator: please don't take it down,I've never had the pleasure of using it. If there was someone here in an undergraduate experimental psychology class this would be an awesome project to publish. When I was at Texas A&M University back in 1987 I was in an AP experimental psych class and got to design and carry out my experiment on over 600 freshman. As a freshman in introduction to psychology, one of the requirements to pass was to enroll in 2 experiments per semester which created a great test pool of subjects. I don't know if they still do this today but if they did this would be a great study. I bet it would be easy to enroll subjects too, who doesn't think lasers are cool?

Re: Flexdrives: someone above said they didn't do what they were intended to do. Can you elaborate? I just dusted off two that had been sitting in a package for two years and was preparing to put them in a couple of 445 builds.

Cheers!
JM
 
Smeerworst said:
God i love this new diode =)

Nice mint green.
utdHTe5.jpg


635nm 1W
520nm 1.4W
445nm 3W
Click to expand...

Even in this picture of the three different beam colors the blue looks about twice as bright as the green. Am I the only one here who thinks this?
 
Jmillerdoc said:
Speaking of drawings, any idea when this is gong to take place?
Click to expand...

I'm talking with a member who may want to do some more tests with the diode (beam size & optical correction). If that falls through I'll shoot a PM off to Dave to pick a number between 1 and 93 :D
 
Smeerworst said:
God i love this new diode =)

Nice mint green.
utdHTe5.jpg


635nm 1W
520nm 1.4W
445nm 3W
Click to expand...

That is really a beautiful picture. You should make a poll and ask "which laser appears the brightest". If I had to answer honestly I'd say that they all look fairly equal in brightness, despite the red being slightly dimmer. That's the thing when trying to compare monochromatic light. It's definitely not as straightforward as say comparing a 100 lumen and a 200 lumen flashlight with similar beam characteristics. Even with only a 25% brightness increase, the difference is very clear. It's simple to compare the brightness of two lasers with the same wavelength, but when you compare multiple wavelengths it really is a matter of personal perception.(unless of course you compare 1w of 520 vs 445, green is always brighter in those scenarios. although some people might even disagree). I'd vote to keep the calc regardless, but I understand if he wants it removed because of random confusion
 
Last edited:
JM:
FlexDrives are fine, but when currents like 1.8A were required, they couldn't provide it.

Sent from my Nexus 5 using Tapatalk
 
Quick find that may be of interest...

Looked up the 1W 520nm on O-like earlier today, and the new price for the 1 diode is $848!!!!! If this keeps going down in price, this diode could be just a few hundies in a couple of months :)
 
Last edited:
Tha Greenlander said:
Quick find that may be of interest...

Looked up the 1W 520nm on O-like earlier today, and the new price for the 1 diode is $848!!!!! If this keeps going down in price, this diode could be just a few hundies in a couple of months :)
Click to expand...

Actually I could have sworn that o-like had the diode for cheaper earlier.. DTR has them for $720.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.


Back
Top