where are the polarizing filters?
Is the anti-glare layer a plastic film, or is it some kind of coating that you clean off the glass surface? Exactly how did you do this?
(I imagine you did not just soak the whole Lilliput in a bucket of water overnight!)
Was there a polarizing filter that you had to remove first, and then later replace? Or is the polarization underneath the anti-glare layer?
Is the anti-glare layer a plastic film, or is it some kind of coating that you clean off the glass surface? Exactly how did you do this?
(I imagine you did not just soak the whole Lilliput in a bucket of water overnight!)
Was there a polarizing filter that you had to remove first, and then later replace? Or is the polarization underneath the anti-glare layer?
the antiglare is a kind of the plastic film on the top of the polariser. This is on the side which is in front of the viewer when the lcd is use as it should be with a backlight etc...
I did a try first on a dead lcd and yes i soak it in the sink with water overnight🙂 the day after the film came out in a second. just have to use a blade in a corner to get the film and pull out.
As you said i didn't use that method on my working lilli. I just put some paper towel with water to put on the lcd.
I took out the lcd a remove all ribbons controler etc.. just to get the lcd.
put the lcd on the table face with antiglare up. put the wet paper towel on the top and wait for few hours. (When I say wet, I mean very wet)
In fact this is a film which as half the thickness of a tranparency that we use on ohp.
After one hours and half I got a corner and peal off slowly the antiglare it came with a small resistance.
The more you wait with water easier it is.
Then just clean with water trace of glue and finger. Wait it dry . That's it.
So the polariser are still there. If you want to remove them , this is more difficult the glue is very strong and you'll have problems😀
I'm not sure this removal with water will work for all lcd but you can try since there is no risk as far as you dry evething before use.
I did a try first on a dead lcd and yes i soak it in the sink with water overnight🙂 the day after the film came out in a second. just have to use a blade in a corner to get the film and pull out.
As you said i didn't use that method on my working lilli. I just put some paper towel with water to put on the lcd.
I took out the lcd a remove all ribbons controler etc.. just to get the lcd.
put the lcd on the table face with antiglare up. put the wet paper towel on the top and wait for few hours. (When I say wet, I mean very wet)
In fact this is a film which as half the thickness of a tranparency that we use on ohp.
After one hours and half I got a corner and peal off slowly the antiglare it came with a small resistance.
The more you wait with water easier it is.
Then just clean with water trace of glue and finger. Wait it dry . That's it.
So the polariser are still there. If you want to remove them , this is more difficult the glue is very strong and you'll have problems😀
I'm not sure this removal with water will work for all lcd but you can try since there is no risk as far as you dry evething before use.
mmm, sorry i didn´t notice this trhead's new posts until today.
congratulations renan. Yes, the difusivity on the antiglare is killing the image brightness 😀.
about the precondenosr lens lamp placement dependency, yes, there is a phisical relation on the precondensor lens focal and the lamp placement. In geneneral terms, the without precondensor setup will have the lamp farther than the with precondensor setup.
see you.
congratulations renan. Yes, the difusivity on the antiglare is killing the image brightness 😀.
about the precondenosr lens lamp placement dependency, yes, there is a phisical relation on the precondensor lens focal and the lamp placement. In geneneral terms, the without precondensor setup will have the lamp farther than the with precondensor setup.
see you.
Well rox, i understand the relationship between precondensor and bubl-fresnel distance since i read the postuntitled "understanding the precondensor lens..."
my point is: if my precondensor is suppose to increase by 1.25 my arc size.
when i put precondensor and reflector it increase in fact of 1.56 ( like 1.25*1.25)
is there any rational for that or it is just because i do not adjust the precondensor to the right distance
my point is: if my precondensor is suppose to increase by 1.25 my arc size.
when i put precondensor and reflector it increase in fact of 1.56 ( like 1.25*1.25)
is there any rational for that or it is just because i do not adjust the precondensor to the right distance
i guess you reflector is spherical... then the refelctor does not introduce any magnification to the arc. Only the precondensor will introduce (and the fresnell system as well...).
If you know the arc to precondensor lens, then you can work out the virtual arc size (is what you did to work out 1.25 magnification?)
If you know the arc to precondensor lens, then you can work out the virtual arc size (is what you did to work out 1.25 magnification?)
yes 1.25 is based on the math you post on the 'understanding the precondensor.."' post.
in fact without precondensor and with spherical reflector and 132/380 fresnel setup i get an arc size of 7cm for an initial arc of 24mm. So the theorie works perfect.
with the precondensor i get 11cm arc image while i should have around 9cm.
So the point is there some unknown reflector /precondensor relation ship affecting the image size increase?? it increase of 1.25*1,25= 1,56
It seems no.
So the other solution is that i do not place correctly the precondensor maybe to close from the bulb?
in fact without precondensor and with spherical reflector and 132/380 fresnel setup i get an arc size of 7cm for an initial arc of 24mm. So the theorie works perfect.
with the precondensor i get 11cm arc image while i should have around 9cm.
So the point is there some unknown reflector /precondensor relation ship affecting the image size increase?? it increase of 1.25*1,25= 1,56
It seems no.
So the other solution is that i do not place correctly the precondensor maybe to close from the bulb?
could you tell me the distances from lamp to precondensor as well as precondensor focal?
do not forget that the precondensor lens introduced magnification is in terms of ideal flat lens assumtion we are doing... so the arc to lens distance is not from the arc to the first surface of the precondensor lens but to the optical center in somewhere inside the precondenser lens. Lets assume the optical center is at fisical center... then pleas elet me know the arc to lens optical center distance (and lens focal) so i can tell you the expected arc magnification...
do not forget that the precondensor lens introduced magnification is in terms of ideal flat lens assumtion we are doing... so the arc to lens distance is not from the arc to the first surface of the precondensor lens but to the optical center in somewhere inside the precondenser lens. Lets assume the optical center is at fisical center... then pleas elet me know the arc to lens optical center distance (and lens focal) so i can tell you the expected arc magnification...
Hi everybody,
Thanks renan for the information on removing antiglare. Here is my today's experience on this subject:
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=68235
Regards
Thanks renan for the information on removing antiglare. Here is my today's experience on this subject:
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=68235
Regards
rox,
here is an xls file based on your math for the precondensor. Note that in the xls this is diameter value represented and not half value (there is a 2* factor hidden).
pepe,
nice test. I'm not convince that all ag removal will represent a significant improvement for all lcd. You should have different quality of ag and may be a good quality ag removal will not improve your setting.
The thing i can say about the lilliput is that the tape test was negative but the ag removal is a big improvement. I'm not selling anything anywhere related to diy pj so this info is for free.
I try to get objective measurement using a luxmeter and i show and increase of brigthness and also a decrease of contrast in my settings. This is true for my settings
Concerning your experiment, I'm not sure if you do not have enough lux behind your lcd you'll be able to evidence the effect of ag removal. (although this is only a speculation from me concerning your setting).
I just notice today that there is also an ag like fiilm on the other side of the lcd. So i still have 1 ad on the lamp side. I'm not sure i'll remove it since i try to limit the work on the lcd minimal.
everybody has to check the benefit/risk of ag removal. The thing is we don't know for a new lcd what would be the benefit (hoping that info provided on differents forum for a particular lcd is true) and also sometimes we overemphasize the risk.
here is an xls file based on your math for the precondensor. Note that in the xls this is diameter value represented and not half value (there is a 2* factor hidden).
pepe,
nice test. I'm not convince that all ag removal will represent a significant improvement for all lcd. You should have different quality of ag and may be a good quality ag removal will not improve your setting.
The thing i can say about the lilliput is that the tape test was negative but the ag removal is a big improvement. I'm not selling anything anywhere related to diy pj so this info is for free.
I try to get objective measurement using a luxmeter and i show and increase of brigthness and also a decrease of contrast in my settings. This is true for my settings
Concerning your experiment, I'm not sure if you do not have enough lux behind your lcd you'll be able to evidence the effect of ag removal. (although this is only a speculation from me concerning your setting).
I just notice today that there is also an ag like fiilm on the other side of the lcd. So i still have 1 ad on the lamp side. I'm not sure i'll remove it since i try to limit the work on the lcd minimal.
everybody has to check the benefit/risk of ag removal. The thing is we don't know for a new lcd what would be the benefit (hoping that info provided on differents forum for a particular lcd is true) and also sometimes we overemphasize the risk.
renan, I know you don't sell anything, so I trust you have the results you described. You read the "other" forum, so you may have noticed some "test" picture, that was showing a huge improvement, from crappy image to a brilliant one, and that one I don't believe, but you never know for sure until you try it yourself, so I did.
My concern is now whether there would be no side effects of this modification. There is a very fragile polarizer exposed to air now, may be it's not supposed to work like that for a long time, we will see. And this polarizer on my LCD is not like a photographic one (piece of solid glass or plastic), but it's rather a thin and soft deposit on the glass surface. Easy to scratch with a piece of cosmetic cotton.
As for having enough light to see an improvement, yes, I do have a 400W short arc lamp, reflector and condensor, and my pj is noticeably brighter than a typical one, I can tell it from images people post here and there, if they include screen and camera settings.
I believe there are some LCDs, that can be improved this way, but I'm now pretty sure there are ones, that will not benefit at all.
Regards
My concern is now whether there would be no side effects of this modification. There is a very fragile polarizer exposed to air now, may be it's not supposed to work like that for a long time, we will see. And this polarizer on my LCD is not like a photographic one (piece of solid glass or plastic), but it's rather a thin and soft deposit on the glass surface. Easy to scratch with a piece of cosmetic cotton.
As for having enough light to see an improvement, yes, I do have a 400W short arc lamp, reflector and condensor, and my pj is noticeably brighter than a typical one, I can tell it from images people post here and there, if they include screen and camera settings.
I believe there are some LCDs, that can be improved this way, but I'm now pretty sure there are ones, that will not benefit at all.
Regards
mmm, very good work on the excel. I always wanted an excel to do that work for me, thanks.
About why you are having bigger projected arc than teh expected (90mm arc expected, 110mm projected...) I don´t know where are we introduccing the error. Did you try without reflector setup?
are you shure your precondensor lens is 75mm focal?
About why you are having bigger projected arc than teh expected (90mm arc expected, 110mm projected...) I don´t know where are we introduccing the error. Did you try without reflector setup?
are you shure your precondensor lens is 75mm focal?
well rox i determine myself the 75mm focal. Although i did many different measurement this might be 75+/- 10mm
i did try without reflector but i do not remember the result. just have to do it again.
There is so many mistake possible in the position and settings that for sure this is difficult to match the theory !
i did try without reflector but i do not remember the result. just have to do it again.
There is so many mistake possible in the position and settings that for sure this is difficult to match the theory !
- Status
- Not open for further replies.