1041

I do not understand this? What do you mean by diffuser losses?

The losses are factored into the calibration, they are what makes the sphere read correctly.

We also do not know what the lights would read since we have no data to backup any of this.

I know that on my personal sphere I measured an MT09R and MT03 that have VASTLY different beam patterns but almost exactly the same internals and the readings were within margin of error of each other and these are ~15k+ lumen lights.

I also said this earlier but it must of been skipped over.

Haikelite had an MT09R measured on a professional ANSI sphere and got ~13K lumens at one point, using the same setup I measured it on mine and got almost exactly the same numbers once you factor in the new calibration.

This is another reason why I feel that the tube itself is working as it should. It is so darn simple there is just not much that could be effecting the readings internally.

1042

Ok, see this is actually one of the most constructive and logical statements you have made.

You are saying that the entire calibration may be off, this is a much more practical option then thinking that the calibration changes depending on the output of the light.

It is also very easy to test, simply order a light from Muakka and test it yourself and we will all know for sure. I am VERY interested in what the results are.

1043

Not at all. Do you have a cut of the sales?

1044

There are four irrefutable variables I can think of that give a different reading between a flashlight tested on yours and a flashlight tested on Maukka’s/vinh’s/mine.

Diffuser losses. 15%

Pre-diffuser side wall losses. 5-30%

Where abouts the majority of light hits the tunnel wall after going through the 1st diffuser. 0-5%

Bounce back glare from very high Candela lights. 5-30%

1045

Please do share your data that allowed you to arrive at these “irrefutable” numbers.

The light hitting the walls and the “bounce back” is part of the calibration, it is supposed to happen. Without it the calibration would not be correct.

In particular I want to know where you are getting the 15% diffuser losses. The diffusers should in fact be blocking close to 80-90% of the light. If for some reason they were only blocking 15% then that would be a big problem indeed. I am not sure how that would be possible unless most of them were removed though.

FYI, I am not going to go into details but Vinh “Skylumen” has 2 of my spheres and has compared them to his own sphere with lights spanning the entire range of lumen outputs he has.

The spheres measured within margin of error relative to each other from the small lights up to 10k+ lumen monsters

Another reason I do not think there is an issue internally with the sphere itself or with the readings being off with high output or floody lights.

1046

You do realize that all said and done I barely made minimum wage off these spheres?

Which is why I won’t be making anymore after these last few are sold.

1047

The level of miscommunication happening here is too damn high. Both of you seem to be partially reading each other’s posts and responding prematurely, sometimes even talking about different things entirely. And the fact that you lump your experience as a customer of his with a thread on a forum in which he has no control over what the members of said forum may say or how they may react is beyond unfair. This isn’t HIS site. Just think about that, man.

I don’t own this tube and have never purchased anything from TA, but I’d gladly do so just by seeing how professional he has been with you thus far. The amount of support and time he has spent on this to try to make your experience a better one is insane, honestly. He’s already lost and doesn’t need to spend any more time on you. I don’t see how that can possibly be negative. You say you want to help other enthusiasts save money and avoid dealing with an inaccurate tube, but what I see is if other enthusiasts were to buy this and were not satisfied, they’d get partially refunded, sell the item to recoup the rest of the cost, and be on their merry way.

1048

Another childish reply from you rather than address your ‘False & misleading statements’.

My “1000 lumen Fenix light” actually reads a bit over 1000 lumens when measured properly with the ‘TA Lumen Tube’. That would render your statement above…. balderdash.

Again your statements are False & misleading.

1049

I will admit I am at least partially guilty of this.

I have found that the best way to keep myself from getting personal on the internet is to ignore as many personal comments as possible, this sometimes causes me to miss important aspects too.

Not to mention I have a job and don’t have time for all of this to start with.

That is not a excuse though, I should be taking the time to read everything and simply be a big enough man to deal with personal comments.

For that I am sorry.

1050

I just want to say from what I see Texas Ace has worked very hard on making these be the best product he can. He’s taken full responsibility for the tubes that went out before he had the benefit of maukkas lights by sending out the correction diffusers, and is very highly responsive to his threads. In my book that is the mark of a good seller if ever there was one. Your a credit to this community TA.

1051

Exactly. Nothing he has done could possibly warrant negative feedback.

1052

I believe that almost everyone other than KG_Tuning that has been involved with this project agrees with this and appreciates the effort you put into this.

Thank You

1053

Sorry I missed this very important data you provided. I punched in the numbers in my calculator and can confirm that the relative differences between your ceiling bounce measurements and TA tube measurements are practically the same, which rules out your original concern that TA tube readings are only reasonable for low output lights and more inaccurate for high output lights. Now this makes everything easy. It could likely be there’s a problem with the calibration on your specific unit, which is easily fixable, which TA did for us a while ago. All you need to do is buy the Maukka calibration lights. If TA tube indeed measures lower, then let TA know and he will provide a solution to modify apply a correction factor. If it reads the same, then some of your high output lights are indeed that low. There were many postings of high output lights measured by TA tubes before on this thread and elsewhere and their numbers were very reasonable (e.g., my M43 measures 6,950 lumens whereas you measured 4,550 lumens), so what you reported is definitely a one-off experience thus far.

If you are concerned that using lower output lights for calibration might not be suitable for high output lights, I provided links in my previous post above to Maukka’s explanations that should alleviate your concern.

1054

This is an unbelievable comment.

So the tube is self adjusting? How can you calibrate once for different percentages?? Every single flashlight will send a different amount of light onto the pre-diffused tube walls and at different angles. The candela ranges from a few 100 to over a million.

The readings change dramatically depending on where the flashlight sits above the diffuser, you can have the same 1000 lumen led in a different reflectors or a mule and it will read differently every time.

We saw this with my Emisar D4 XP-L HI readings with the clear versus diffused optic.

As you fully well know due to me perpetually mentioning it the 15% is lumens loss on the total output, i.e a 1000 light might measure 850 lumens in your tube, again you twist facts to suit your needs.

1055

For someone doing this for two years you really don’t seem to understand the basic principles involved in measuring light. TA’s tube is based on very basic ideas and is not that complicated to understand. I don’t understand why you can’t seem to grasp the concept. It’s design is basically the same, but an upgraded version, that many hobbiests have been using for years.

For you to say “You can’t calibrate a system with one light, it’s utter madness” also shows you don’t understand how it’s done by professionals. All professional integrating spheres use a single calibrated light source. Here is the one Maukka uses.

People like Vinh and AKB (I think he’s M Hanlen on this forum) both use homemade lumen tubes which are calibrated from multiple factory lights. Neither of their setups use any type of real calibrated light source. I also don’t think either one uses any type of diffuser in their tubes (it’s just the curve of the tube that prevents direct light from hitting the lux meter) so they tend to have very large differences between floody lights and throwy lights. TA’s tube with the multiple diffusers seems to give much more consistent readings.

I’m not sure which members of Taschenlampe you are refering to. I believe Koef3 either has or has access to a professional integrating sphere. I don’t know about any other members.

Do you understand how illogical it is to try and calibrate your own homemade setup to other people’s setups just because you have the same model of light and assume it’s exactly the same brightness level as their light? This is not the proper way. For many people it is the only way because they don’t have access to a proper light source.

Also, if you would prefer to change the calibration, there are 2 small diffuser discs in front of the lux meter. Each one should be reducing the output by about 16. So if you want all readings 16 higher, just remove one disc. If you want the readings to be 32% higher, remove both discs. Once you do this though, it’s no longer a TA calibrated Lumen Tube. It’s your own modified tube meaning your numbers will no longer match up to any of the other actual TA Lumen Tubes.

1056

I’ve seen cw M43’s hit 8000 before and my M43 is the Nichia version so is a little floodier. The Tube is not far off for the lights TA calibrated it to but the recessed chamber before the first diffuser is causing havoc with lights that have a ton of very wide spill. Slightly angling a thrower to catch the Pre-diffused sides will prove it.

1057

Already covered it in the thread, sitting a light on the diffuser by passing the Pre-diffused tubing and removing one diffuser got me very close to Maukka’s and my app results.

It’s ok trying to discredit me and talk about TA’s charity work in Sierra Leone when all you have to do is stick an X80 on the bloody thing!!!

1058

You are misunderstanding how the entire process works. You do NOT want different percentages, that is exactly what you want to avoid.

You want a fixed percentage.

That way if you shine a light into the sphere it will read the output relative to the calibration factor.

What are describing is exactly what you don’t want to happen. Muakka said the same thing earlier. You want a fixed calibration factor, the diffusers build that into the tube so you do not need to use a calculator.

This sphere is special since it captures all of the light in the top section and thus “integrates” it. This removes virtually all variance between beam patterns.

As I said above, I HAVE tested this with throw reflectors, flood reflectors and naked LED’s and the readings were all within margin of error. Using the exact same LED, at the same power level on a massive heat sink.

You may not of been around for all my testing a few years ago.

You misunderstand why the diffused optic reads lower, that is because the optic itself is absorbing the light and it never makes it out the front of the light.

It has nothing to do with the sphere, it is purely the optic to blame. Muakka said he saw the same results in his professional sphere.

It is also COMPLETELY different then the diffusers inside the tube.

That has nothing to do with the diffusers, what you are complaining about is simply that the calibration reads lower then you expected. Which as I said above is a much more logical argument and one that is easily proven one way or the other. Simply get a muakka light and compare it. If that shows the sphere is reading incorrectly then I will gladly work with you to fix it.

I can’t fix anything right now because you have not provided any data that shows me where to even start looking for a problem that no one else has.

Do you have any data to backup the “irrefutable” numbers you posted above?

I am looking hard for facts, not twisting them. If you worked with me we might be able to systematically figure out what is going on here.

I am happy to explain the details of how this works and how to test it to people that will listen.

1059

For the record those numbers you saw as comparisons, are NOT calibration lights. In fact the only lights I own out of those were the Q8 and cometa IIRC.

All the other numbers came from other members, not from me directly and I have never seen those lights measured on this sphere before.

1060

I am not understanding what you mean by the “by passing the Pre-diffused tubing and removing one diffuser” part above, can you please post some pictures of what you are talking about.

Also please post some pictures of how you are taking the measurements of the X45 and X80. This is the first step in trying to diagnose the problem.

Didn’t you say you had to raise the light towards the ceiling so the spot of light was the same as other lights to get your “app readings”?