Whilst waiting for my lux-meter to arrive (despite me paying more for it as DX claimed it was ‘AU-direct’, & tracking says it’s lodged in Shenzhen (guangdong) - CHINA…), I’ve been looking at some threads on light-boxes, etc., & came up with a different approach to what I have seen so-far;
The box-type rigs that I have seen all use some form of diffusion so as the light is not directly on the sensor - I figured the 90deg bend would suffice.
I’m open to suggestions from those in the know, prior to cutting the pipe to length, & gluing it together.
I’m thinking the tube will absorb too much for it to work; also it would favour throwers because light going straight forward would be more likely to get to the sensor. Perhaps you could coat the inside with some highly reflective material??
I'm using the turboBB method: three 90 degree bends, without the straight sections. It seems to work well, based both on his measurements and my initial tests.
Perhaps you could try a diffuser placed directly in front of the flashlight so that you get diffuse radiation into your lightbox to even out the thrower/flooder differences.
Or you could see if aiming a throwy flashlight in different directions into the tube makes the results vary widely. If it doesn’t, it should be all OK.
I had not seen the turboBB thread, interesting reading.
I have a couple of variations in mind to my original design after reading that thread.
The main objective for me was to be able to compare the same light before & after modifications, but if it can be used effectively for multi-light comparison then that’s great.
The sphere would be the ‘duck’s nuts’ - I will be keeping an eye out for something like that when I’m out & about…
