yes good question! I’d like to see the smart guys talk about this too!
Not a smart guy here, just grounded in reality and evidence. You saw the beam shots right? What in them gives evidence that what is suggested is a problem? There’s a huge difference between theory and reality as it appears to the eye. Or at least that’s my take on it.
no it is valid IMHO, square LED die n a round reflector
too bad no real round LED dies are common practice, would be great in zoomies
Hail to The King (of all flashlights)
Making a decent reflector at all within the constraints of our budget is very hard. The short answer is no, there are no magic bullets and voodoo for that. The idea is also otherwise implausible.
Light emitted further from the center point will not make the hotspot brighter. The emitter square shape is irrelevant here, and the concept may be more properly understood through the principles in choosing a suitable emitter. Luminous intensity dictates throw for a given reflector, and/or reflector size defines max. theoretical throw for a given emitter driven at a given current. A higher total luminous flux helps make the light more useful and more than a maximum range thrower, but will not make it throw further with the same intensity.
“Extra light” from corners of a typical square emitter(compared to a theoretical round emitter) will not increase throw, just like a larger emitter with higher output, same shape and equal intensity would not increase throw(while of course putting out more lumens, a different beam profile etc).
The nitecore PDOT reflectors are also not mirror polished, they lave rings in them, however when one BLF member hand polished it to mirror finish the lux massively decreased.
In order to have it polished even more, and not reduce the surface lambda, very specialized optic machining equipment is needed, which may not be available for a low-cost manufacturer like lumintop, or may not be capable of polishing reflectors of this massive size.
An optic will project a square image of the source of light, this is a lot clearer with lenses since the distance between the LED and lens doesn’t vary as much as with a reflector.
For this example, just imagine the clear square die projected by a lens.
The optic is focused at the center of the LED, but since the LED is not an infinitely small point it creates a spot with the shape of the LED,
However, all surfaces of the reflector are being used for all points on the LED, it is not like “outer edge of reflector reflects outer edge of LED”
.
In order to “bend” the light from only the outer edges or corners of the LED, without affecting the light from the center of the LED which is already going straight, a special optic that has different indexes of reflection/refraction depending on the incident angle would be needed.
I’ not sure if that material is even possible or exists, but probably not because if it was possible to take the light from the corners of the LED and bend it to the center of the hotspot that would be violating the second law of thermodynamics.
.
The reason a small LED and large reflector is used is because the bigger the difference between the two is, the more collimated the beam is and the more throw you get.
I wasn’t suggesting that it wasn’t a valid theoretical problem, only that it wasn’t a problem via the evidence as seen by the eyes.
I can’t tell you how many folks I have known who believe the theory, or the computer, rather than their own observable facts. It’s reality that trumps everything.
Please quote who you’re replying to, otherwise it makes the thread very confusing.
I thought you replied to me since you posted right after.
Goddammit, I don’t have enough money for the GT and the Q8 to ship at the same time d:
What you say is true. I doubt I can tell the difference between 700k and 750k lux even in a side-by-side comparison. That and there are surely going to be slight differences from sample to sample.
To me, lights like the GT have long since abandoned the constraints of practicality and their credibility is solely based on numbers. I’m sure if the GT’s final numbers were 2m lux and another company produced a light that advertised 2.02m lux, that latter light would definitely have more popularity.
Q8 is about to launch, we have yet to see a proto IRL of the GT
Of they go as fast with the FW3A we could look at two very close, but luckily the FW3A had a lot of challenges like double tube, completely new tail switch not off the shelf, driver so who knows
If I saw it correctly Neal wrote Lumintop has measured 1Mcd (measuring at 10 meters)
I dont think the coolness of getting involved and seeing all the steps along the way can be matched by any manufacturer that just presents a light.
So BLF specials like the Q8 and GT are for us nicer. That is even without the price difference between our projects and normal commercial lights 
I’d like to be added to the list for one, thanks! : )
Looking good GT !
I should have asked for two :smiling_imp:
I absolutely agree, it’s nice to see the process.
Thanks BrianK 
I think I missed that email from him .
And yes, I’m really proud to be part of this team that has made the GT real!
wow, no need for that type of profanity here
thats pretty offensive, to say the least
when did they measure 1 mill lux?
i must of missed that
Please add me to the list. Thanks
They sent some numbers last night but they didn’t make a lot of sense. I would wait till they either get some numbers from further away or we test it ourselves to say anything for sure about the numbers.