Ok i got it figured out. It all makes sense now.
= 1
Well, they work for what? More lux? More lumens? Both?
I do believe that they probably increase lux some (probably small amount), though at the expense of lumens. I am not interested in more lux. Aspherics are already good at that by themselves.
I might as well buy the equipment that I need to start measuring this stuff. Now I gotta know.
how you describe what’s happening with a wavien collar, makes me lose about all interest in the concept… 
I lost all interest when I saw it was patented and cost a stupid amount of money for an inverted reflector. Some things are easy to pass up…
20% more lux its still a considerable gain. If u managed to make an 250 k lux thrower adding waiven will go 300 k lux if u have it 500 then will go 600 k lux .
Sec. I believe one can gain even more with a proper implementation, its just very difficult to make it right.
3. There are big chances that if u don’t know what u are doing and law of physics, one will end up gainin almost 0% or even reduce output of lux.
To me it seems it’s only suited for normal / low power (driven) LEDs, so you don’t have too much extra heat problems.
Btw, sorry, i’m not capable making sense of the elaborate equations and formulas…
I avoid such if possible, i just mess around with available (affordable / recycled) optics sometimes, see what it does(n’t).
Perhaps if all these great minds were to step aside from the problem of tweaking the last available proton from an emitter and instead focus (no pun) on increasing capacity of Li-ion cells, or developing an entirely new chemistry to allow high capacity and high terminal performance, then we’d be much better off as a whole and the gain in performance would be seen across the board from flashlight addicts to contractors , impacting the realm of long lasting cordless tools and such.
All I want is an f/1 800mm Image Stabilized lens that doesn’t weigh a ton and is cheap enough to actually buy. It’s JUST glass, right? 