Wait a second. Do you mean to tell me that shadoming eliminates tint shift vs full boogie chemical dedoming?
If so, then why in hell chem dedome?
PS. Oops……
Here’s your on-topic that addresses that ? I do believe.
By Enderman……
“Also, my first hypothesis was that dedoming removes a layer of the new phosphor, but I read somewhere that there might actually be phosphor mixed INSIDE the dome material, which might be the reason it gets more lumens.
Different technique, same purpose. In my experience even with shaving domes the tint can change sometimes. I sliced my 219b 5000k’s in my s41 and they went to around 4000k.
For gas dedoming I like to start with a 3D tint to get an acceptable tint.
That topic about the XP G3 is very old, it’s already been found out that there is light emitted from the side of the die which increases the lumen output but doesn’t add to the throw.
And chemical dedoming is good if you want a perfectly clean die without the lumen decrease from dome shaving. It’s just a lot more things that can go wrong.
It sounds alright to me, koef3’s xhp70.2 topic shows ~32mm^2 of die area with the dome on.
The XHP70.2 has four 2x2mm dies so total 16mm^2, so by removing the dome you essentially cut the area down by half which would double the intensity, and then you factor in the losses and get ~80%.
I no longer dedome XPL, XML2, or XPG2. I used to dedome them in Coleman fuel. This dramatically increased their throw but gave them horrible green tint. Haven’t dedomed these emitters since XPL HI came out.
