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

Tester Needed - Let's Try Out Some Cheap Goggles

I think we have slightly different goals.

I'd like to find another source for cheap, but "good enough" goggles like the radiant option, but preferably for a bit less, where the guy who comes on the forum and says "Hey I just bought a 1W laser from chinese dropshipper such and such, where can I get cheap goggles." and you KNOW he will not buy expensive ones.

100% agree that testing needs to be done per wavelength, say 405nm, 445nm, 532nm.

What I don't see happening, or being realistic though, is having sellers actually test goggles prior to selling them.

Whenever bluefan is ready, I'd like to get a few of the Uvex goggles out to him, to see if the results are consistent for them.

BShanahan14rulz said:
I suggest we come up with a "good 'nuff" procedure for testing goggles, i.e. nothing completely destructive. Then, it can be up to the sellers to serialize, test, and pass off the data to the end user.

I have some red goggles, they look exactly like the ones that everybody says are great. They let a lot of 445nm through.

I have some yellow goggles. Nobody here seems to use them. They let no 445nm light through.



Bases that need to be covered:
OD rating per wavelength
time for a standard power to completely defeat barrier

When a seller tests goggles, they can etch, carve, or somehow mark that specific pair with an identifying mark and prove that THAT particular pair performed within the community "good 'nuff" specifications.

But yeah, I cringe every time I see someone recommend "Just buy a pair of the red lensed goggles" or something like that.

Oh, and I also suggest we call it something besides "good 'nuff," that was just my example....

Those abex look like they might be worthwhile, they seem like they're specific and non-generic enough to have relatively consistent results across teh board.
Click to expand...
 





Why couldn't one of the forum stores do that? There isn't enough business for it to take up too much time and they make some profit. I would assume that individual tests, once they got the set-up down and pat, would take all of 1-2 minutes per pair.
 
Wolfman29 said:
Why couldn't one of the forum stores do that? There isn't enough business for it to take up too much time and they make some profit. I would assume that individual tests, once they got the set-up down and pat, would take all of 1-2 minutes per pair.
Click to expand...

Well, the UVEX goggles, for example, are available on amazon.com for about $8 shipped. So I don't see where a vendor can make anything on them. They obviously aren't certified laser goggles, but they (in my testing) appear to be very capable goggles for 405-532nm wavelengths for anything generally available to most members here. If you start getting over a watt of green then you might need to look into something better. They seem to handle well over a watt of 405-445 though.

And you should keep in mind that some greens have undocumented IR that these are not blocking either. You can buy expensive multi wavelength goggles for that, or buy cheap ir filters from o-like and put them in your high power greens.
 
Last edited:
Well yes. The point would be that you would pay the vendor here a few dollars more for testing. I know I would pay a few dollars more for testing =p
 
Wolfman29 said:
Well yes. The point would be that you would pay the vendor here a few dollars more for testing. I know I would pay a few dollars more for testing =p
Click to expand...

You would. I bet you would also pay for certified goggles.

Problem is the target demographic for whom these are intended.... I highly doubt that they would:undecided:
 
Err, yeah. :whistle: I haven't just now bought my first pair of certified goggles in my entire laser hobby... that would be hypocritical... :whistle:
 
Last edited:
Right now I'm rather busy unfortunately, or I'd already be on this. I've got a move coming up, my whole lab will have to be moved and lots of other things need to be done. And the research at the university already takes up most of the day.
 
Bluefan said:
Right now I'm rather busy unfortunately, or I'd already be on this. I've got a move coming up, my whole lab will have to be moved and lots of other things need to be done. And the research at the university already takes up most of the day.
Click to expand...

There is absolutely no rush. If you can do it after the move, that's great, if not... well we'll need to come up with another plan.

Good luck with the mone:beer:
 
We've noticed this trend as well. Radiant is already working on securing many new lower priced goggles for testing. We've found several types in the same style as the current RadiantShades that cover red and IR spectrums as well as green/blue blocking with higher OD values as well. We plan on updating our site with spectral analysis as well as destructive testing like we did when we originally tested the RadiantShades. I've also got my Coherent Fieldmax which will be able to give more accurate results.
 
Last edited:
@MarioMaster -

That's great news. To be honest I think the ones you offer now do a fair job, but they seem to be just a bit out of the price range of some people.

If you find goggles that you could sell for say $10 shipped, the purpose of this thread would be moot IMO.

While at the bottom of the list, as you can see I'm already linking to you for goggles. It would be nice to just continue to link/recommend someone from right here:beer:
 
How many times must I say this is a BAD idea?

Where are you going to get the spectrophotometer to check across a band of wavelengths? Last time I checked diodes can vary as much as 20 nm, and how in the heck does joe blow know exactly what wavelength he has?

You have to express "that" the so called goggles undergoing the so called "test" are only useful over a very limited range. A typical laser user works with a signal to the eye that varies over six decades of magnitude...

Dont even THINK of doing this in the IR.

Thin coatings are bad, dielectric coatings are bad... Your going to need a very strict set of rules. And when some punk kid gets on youtube (Remember Mr Theatrical gels?) and says a pair of glasses meets "LPF" rules, and they do not, when retested, what are you going to do about it? How are you going to prevent that? Who is going to assure quality control across batches and time? I know plastics companies that change blends from lot to lot, and month to month. "Asian quality control" is a oxymoron.

A slippery slope indeed.

Before some one jumps me for being negitive, remember without objective peer review, there is no accountability...


Steve
 
Last edited:
Tech_Junkie said:
LED_Museum has a spectrophotometer. :whistle:

This is right up his alley.
Click to expand...


You core out/bandsaw out a large section, remembering that the stress of sawing changes the goggle quite a bit around the edges of the cut. That sets inside the spectrophotomer sample holder. You run a scan across the max wavelength range of the unit, or at least 400-700 nm. Then you scan at least 40 nm either side of the desired wavelength. in .1 nm steps, and save the file as a BMP or PDF. You want a unit that dumps out Log-T, not percent transmission.

If your going to do this, do it in batches, do a group buy or have a vendor who can check a batch.

I'd help you on one pair, however:

My ancient personal unit is so far out of cal its not funny, its drifting +/- 1% a minute when there is no sample. That is oodles of drift when you switch from %Trans to LogT. Mine is one of the first digital ones, and takes 25 seconds to move the grating for a 1 nanometer hop. Its interface is IEEE BUS, its that old. So I can only spot check a real scan for you.

The one at work is in some one else's lab. I thus cannot slip a sample through, as they bill per scan and email all scans to the boss.
Sorry guys. Where I worked before we wouyld have quietly slipped a few verification scans in just as a public service, and just emailed you a PDF.

Sorry, but I'm crippled in this regard.

Steve
 
I have a monochromator to check the wavelength of my laser(s). I took my spectrophotometer apart but even if I can't put it back together I'll ask if I can do it at the university, although that one had some problems, it only can measure up to slightly below OD 4 because of stray light. Double monochromators arent' very good available either.

It's not a conclusive test of which goggles are reliable, but it can certainly prove some aren't reliable. I'd still recommend certified goggles anyway, but at least we can say what doesn't work and show that, people can be stubborn otherwise. If we can show theatrical gels give up within a second then people will stay away from trying that.
 
Last edited:
@Steve - The points you're making are valid, and if we could force every since person who wants to play with a laser to grab a pair of certified goggles, I'd be all for that.

Unfortunately people will get their hands on powerful lasers.

So we're left with a situation where we can continue to just say certified goggles, and be ignored, or we can try to offer some alternative.

Will it be as good as certified goggles? Never.

Will it be better than nothing, or a pair of sunglasses? Probably.

Also if some pseudo standardized testing reveals that there are no uncertified options... so be it.

What bugged me with tsteele93's approach is that only ONE test was done, on one set of goggles.

We're all ok with and recommending eagle pair goggles... out of china though. The reason being that a whole lot of us have tried them out.

So at worst some time and money will be wasted, but at least we might learn something new.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.


Back
Top