I agree but I don’t think anyone is listening to us here about design?
It won’t affect me at all anyway, just something else to work on.
I just really liked that plain button cover
It could have been worse like on the actual body. (No more ideas LT!)

the logo is to place a stamp with their logo on the light, since this light will sell outside blf on banggood, ali, ebay etc, they want protect so that nobody can claim its light by anyone else, u know in china they copy everything…

There will always be people buying this flashlight whatever the changes but i’m not a compulsive buyer who will let them taking over the original concept that was already largely revamped.
Where are the machining marks on raw aluminium without logo ?
Very lately the only raw piece with machining marks without logo was the button : gone !

The TLF/BLF team has put a lot of free time and efforts to serve them a beautiful concept that they are not respecting since long, because of their own will or because of their inabilities to stick with it (inabilities to make a clear anodization (raw aluminum was changed to clear anodization at one time), etc.
How many changes were made and accepted so far ?

I can totally live with those changes and the long wait for LH351D version (4 pieces to start with), but I can also totally live without this flashlight when I’m considering they went too far by not respecting what I signed for !

For me there is a limit to what people can and can’t do. Will you let someone you invited in your home push you outside of your home ? Taking over a project by doing the exact opposite of what was initially voted/decided has a limit at some point for me. They pushed me out of the list !

Logo : no money. No logo : maybe.

Are a slightly darker anno, easily removeable symbol on the tailcap and one emitter option being different from what was voted on (due to difficulties obtaining the original choice) really “drastic changes”?

tatasal wrote:

April 8th, 3:41pm FW3A update:

Barring any unforeseen circumstance, this week, 2 samples will be sent to 2 members here in BLF and one sample to a member in TLF.

The final approval from the three persons will pave the way for the light’s mass-production.

Are any of these three persons going to ask that the logo be removed, as per the original instructions of the group buy? If they won’t speak up I’m not sure how Lumintop will know that “No logo” was a requirement before 1,000 people signed up.

I really don’t care if Lumintop puts their logo on the FW3A, but etching it on the switch where you have to feel it every time you use the light is pretty lame.

http://budgetlightforum.com/comment/1329633#comment-1329633

Sat, 06/02/2018 – 17:21……….. #3300

fritz15 wrote:

To put an end to the tapered body discussion

The reasoning behind it is indeed to make it easier to use the clip. Having the light I built and the prototype made by LT I can directly compare those two. And the clip of the version with the tapered body is definitely nicer to use compared to the sharp edges. Clipping it in the pocket is much smoother – or rather removing the clipped in light is much smoother with the tapered edge.

Additionally, I can confirm it is still my design. That’s the reason why the the chamfers have a different angle rather than the same I like the design like it is now but I am sorry that those design changes ruined the light for some people!

To summarise, putting angles to the body had a practical reason and since it did (in our opinion) not take away from the overall design we didn’t see a reason not to do it.

… (snip) ….

BurningPlayd0h wrote:

Are a slightly darker anno, easily removeable symbol on the tailcap and one emitter option being different from what was voted on (due to difficulties obtaining the original choice) really “drastic changes”?

I was following this thread since day one (Thu, 05/04/2017) and I can make concessions because of difficulties (ano, sourcing emitters, etc), several where made so far. Adding a logo is a change because of difficulties ?
No it is a change that prove that they took over this project and that they don’t even care of the original concept and don’t care about people designing it and don’t care about people who signed for the original concept.
Machined marks on a button don’t look the same as sandpaper marks.

As I said, there will always be people to buy it whatever the changes. I’m not.

The BLF/TLF team had put the good aspects in their hands for free, but they are doing whatever they want with it to make money and reputation. Thanks !
“Now that your concept is our…shut your mouth and buy our flashlight, it’s good and beautiful !”

I’m not going to talk about it over and over and I don’t expect people who signed for it lately to understand my point. I said what I had to said. The decision isn’t in my hands except where I will put my money.

IMO, I’ll just buy the light, use NaOH to strip the light of any branding, and copper plate it if possible.

Sounds cool

PBWilson wrote:

Honestly, Lumintop would be foolish to not let the public have an idea who made the light. There are going to be thousands of these in pockets, in backpacks, in desk and side table drawers and not giving the public a clue about the manufacturer would be a colossal blunder. They could’ve made mention of it earlier on, but can you blame them for advertising?

I agree with PBWilson about advertising, with on one stipulation. That being: IF the light turns out to be pretty damn good.
If the light turns out to have even one serious flaw, the resulting backlash would be extremely detrimental to Lumintop’s reputation.
On the other hand, if the light is near-perfect and is well received, Lumintop’s rabbits will be jumping over The Great Wall! Think about it, thousands of the most devoted flashaholics ALL telling their friends about their new open-source flashlight. There is no better form of advertising than devoted fans spreading the word. … and they (we) all paid for the priveledge!

Fortunately, Lumintop’s innovative products to date have not had any major difficulties that I’m aware of, and they often hit targets with sniper accuracy, I have complete confidence in their ability to get it right the first time.
Let’s just not lose sight of the fact that this could still go either way. The long development period is a very good thing. They want to get it as close to perfect as possible. Coordinating across three continents and languages is far from an ideal situation. There’s a thousand pits to fall in. The most important thing – really the only thing – is to get it right.

So let’s do that.

You been triggered Tally-ho?

Maybe you should be thankful they are even making the light.

Wouldn't the most sensible thing be, to ask Lumintop if they could make the lights for the people on the interest list (or simply the first 3000 pieces) without logo (as originally intended)? I'm sure most wouldn't mind if later pieces have the bunny logo (and/or other Lumintop logos). Plus this would make the first pieces a little bit special.

Adding the logo does seem like the last nail in the coffin of the original intent. But he knew it was going to happen eventually.
The original intent was too lofty for it to ever be mass produced at the price point specified, he knew that too.
Watching your baby slowly die is what hurts.

Noir wrote:

Wouldn’t the most sensible thing be, to ask Lumintop if they could make the lights for the people on the interest list (or simply the first 3000 pieces) without logo (as originally intended)? I’m sure most wouldn’t mind if later pieces have the bunny logo (and/or other Lumintop logos). Plus this would make the first pieces a little bit special.

I asked if this can be done… but I don’t know what will actually happen.

It just happens to be finishing up at the end of the school year?
This has obviously been someone’s Masters thesis or some study.
Well maybe.

That button though? Outrageous! It may as well have a big “caution! Hot light” and Armtek logo on the side!! Didn’t they keep up with this thread?
Looks like a giant turd now. Might as well be brown.
Still in for 2.
And thanks to all of the patient members who acted as go-betweens on this.

I will just spin myself a new button in the lathe if the bunny is there. Brass, copper, stainless, aluminum, whatever I want. And maybe I’ll play with some CRX style trit slots finally. Maybe I can spin a handfull of each material and send them out to folks.

so what is this driver fit issue?

any last minute backup driver design needed?

junkyardbiker wrote:

I will just spin myself a new button in the lathe if the bunny is there. Brass, copper, stainless, aluminum, whatever I want. And maybe I’ll play with some CRX style trit slots finally. Maybe I can spin a handfull of each material and send them out to folks.

Lexel wrote:

so what is this driver fit issue?

any last minute backup driver design needed?

Lexel wrote:

so what is this driver fit issue?

Proto4’s driver cavity wasn’t cut out wide enough, so the driver rested on top of that area instead of inside.

It should be like this:

But proto4 was like this:

I hear it’s fixed now… I think. But it’s hard to say much for sure, because the response about this issue has been literally just three words: “it is fit”

I mean, functionally, it’s still going to be the same driver and triple optic in the same small size with a rear e switch. The emitters were always vague; I certainly wouldn’t rather to use the original options. If you are leaving because of the aesthetic appearance, leave, that’s up to you and nobody has to validate you. Don’t get stuck in the door.

But personally since the anodization and tailcap logo are only skin deep, and won’t impact the actual performance, it’s hard to call it a significant change or even some sort of unexpected statement. They are the ones making the light; that’s been the dynamic this whole time. It’s just an annoyance, which doesn’t actually make it worse than any other options I can think of to buy instead.

Tally-ho wrote:

BurningPlayd0h wrote:

Are a slightly darker anno, easily removeable symbol on the tailcap and one emitter option being different from what was voted on (due to difficulties obtaining the original choice) really “drastic changes”?

I was following this thread since day one (Thu, 05/04/2017) and I can make concessions because of difficulties (ano, sourcing emitters, etc), several where made so far. Adding a logo is a change because of difficulties ?
No it is a change that prove that they took over this project and that they don’t even care of the original concept and don’t care about people designing it and don’t care about people who signed for the original concept.
Machined marks on a button don’t look the same as sandpaper marks.

As I said, there will always be people to buy it whatever the changes. I’m not.

The BLF/TLF team had put the good aspects in their hands for free, but they are doing whatever they want with it to make money and reputation. Thanks !
“Now that your concept is our…shut your mouth and buy our flashlight, it’s good and beautiful !”

I’m not going to talk about it over and over and I don’t expect people who signed for it lately to understand my point. I said what I had to said. The decision isn’t in my hands except where I will put my money.

Remember that nobody here on BLF has invested money in the project (AFAIK), nor is Lumintop under any obligation to stay strictly to the original design – CERTAINLY not when there is potential risk involved in doing so.

…say, like not having any branding at all on your newest and very anticipated product.

Maybe I’m more of the function > form type though. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Tally-ho, I do understand your point. Everyone has a different limit of what they will accept, and a different tipping point. We will all vote with our wallets, one way or the other.

bansuri wrote:

That button though? Outrageous! It may as well have a big “caution! Hot light”
………… (snip) ……………..
Looks like a giant turd now. Might as well be brown.
Still in for 2.
……. (snip) ………..

I get your drift bansuri and to think… one little bunny wabbit almost instantly caused all this uproar.

Well….maybe “brown” anno is an option. This could be the logo..

.
I kinda like that “CAUTION! Hot Light” thing you mentioned too. Maybe they could even do that in Neon Orange so it would show up good.
Reckon some would like that better??

What do ya’ think??

I see your still in for yours & I am certainly still in for mine.

Perspective people, perspective.
……
Edited to try & remedy my royal screw up…. detailed in a post below.

Actually, I would find that logo you just posted pretty funny, but I’m not sure many others would.

cabfrank wrote:

Actually, I would find that logo you just posted pretty funny, but I’m not sure many others would.

cabfrank wrote:

Actually, I would find that logo you just posted pretty funny, but I’m not sure many others would.

Firelight2 wrote:

cabfrank wrote:

Actually, I would find that logo you just posted pretty funny, but I’m not sure many others would.

Perfect logo for “Turdfire” brand light.