Transformers!
ROFLMAO!
[quote=Sharpie]
Sharpie, a RA does not try to focus stray light to a direction. It simply reflects the emitted light directly back where it came from.)
Reflector. Light from point A goes to point B depending on angle. (A spherical parabolic or concave or any shape can do this with differing results and efficiencies
RA. Light from point A is reflected back to point A. (A flat mirror can do this with a laser, but it’s a different story with an LED because it emits light in a wide pattern.)
I haven’t followed this whole thread so my observation here may be irrelevant, but I think one thing you may be missing is that one of the primary functions of wavien collars and the like is to use that “misdirected” light to excite underutilized phosphors and thereby create more output from the emitter than it would normally provide.
Sharpie, you bring up some interesting points, and to optimize an LED/RA system lots of these points should be considered. But it is an observed fact that dedoming (some) LEDs significantly increases the intensity of the flashlight beam, and use of a hemispherical RA also increases the beam intensity. I don’t think people here have all the answers, but let’s start with the facts, that these modifications do work to increase beam intensity. They don’t necessarily maximize the total flux output, but beam intensity is the main concern for some flashlights.
Sharpie,
de doming, light recylcling, pre collimator lenses and multiple lenses system really works
Saabluster 1,3mcd monster here
Gaston 1,3 mcd monster here
Mem 1,5mcd here
Ervin Anastasi 1mcd here
They are good for breaking candela records but usability?
When someone makes this with all characteristic of good modded zoomie I’ll buy it 
I guess this sort of conversation could go on forever; me telling you we have all observed these modifications increasing beam intensity, and you saying it just can’t be?
It sounds like you have not read this thread. Also this thread has a good measurement of the luminance increase upon dedoming.
BLF is fun and educational place.
Thanks LI, those are the over-the-top examples I knew existed but didn’t know where to find. 
I’ve done one at 665Kcd before and it was pretty impressive to me. It’s funny to see someone explain why it won’t work, when you’ve built em and know it does.
So, they collimated the light with an aspheric condenser, then reflected it back to the LED with a flat mirror, and didn’t get results like MEM has claimed are possible from a totally different arrangement. So… this is relevant, how? :person_facepalming:
Sharpie your own “proof” that it cannot be done actually proves that it can 
First they used a flat mirror which would be of very limited value
From your link
Secondly I think that the graph shows a dramatic increase in output considering the flat mirror.
Again from your link
While the improvement is small in the 596nm range it is gigantic at 570/580 and 600/610nm and we see all of those frequencies :laughing:
Also that paper is from 8 years ago, led technology has moved forward a lot since then, I could not even find any info on the led they used it is that out of date.
Cheers David
oh yeah, I can only see those fairies when I am on those little green pills the purple pills cause the dragons to scare them away :cry:
The laser headlamps are, as far as I have found, not legal in the United States.
Not gigantic, are you looking at the same graph as me, 38% average increase or are you looking at the red line that shows the measured increase with no correction for the test method ? look at the dotted blue line that shows the increase with the correction!
When testing using this method you DO need correction for all the bits the light has to go through before it gets back to the led.
Why would they put money into developing “light recycling” when led technology was/is moving so fast,
From this giant, yes I found an image of the led used in that paper 
to the current crop of leds and that alone makes that paper outdated and irreverent as newer leds use different technology to the one tested.
And on that note I am done as you can never be proven wrong in your mind.
Cheers David
“I have no interest in projecting a tiny spot onto a watertower…” lol
Yeah, that’s what I always thought about the tight pencil beam throwers… they reach further than I can see anyway, right? But for the process of reaching new heights, I have become interested in just what actually IS possible…
The beam profile from my Z1 with the SBT-70 is impressive, but not in the max thrower sense. It’s a narrow cone of light that does reach fairly far but it grows larger out there as well, the neat thing is how little spill it makes, as in almost none at all. So a subject can be illuminated without causing much distraction to others nearby. I keep coming back to the Theater Spotlight when I have to describe it, just a nice round circle of light.
Which brings me back to how far can a LED be projected? That square of light on a water tower, won’t be tiny by any measure when the right distance is employed, but just being able to illuminate something that far away is the key. Searching on open water, shining across a valley from one mountain to another, or even just being in big space in the country… a mile eats up virtually every light out there, but to be able to see that mile, or more, could be lifesaving in some instances.
Maybe some can’t understand this concept, but we have places here in Texas that you feel like you can see into next week, and it would take days upon days to walk out to the distance you can see. Up in the Panhandle, it boggles the mind… the country is ruggedly rough, travel of any kind is almost impossible and would take great lengths to traverse. The visual impact, the possibility to search at length, intrigues me. Google Earth search for Canadian, Texas. You might start understanding, even though pictures or satellite images simply can’t convey the sense of standing in it, looking out….
Laser flashlight is something that could attract attention although we already have them(laser genetics) green :confounded: diffused laser lights. I had them and they were not any better than UF T20(10:money_mouth_face: flashlight. I also had version that refused to work on - temperatures
So how they can achieve right (CW or NW) tint projection with lasers? All that would be interesting to see…
It would be nice to see a flashlight that can light up water tower mile away and have flood mode of 1000+ lumens. And trust me plenty of people would want to light something at that distances.
And my vote and bet is that future light will be zoomie… Laser or LED? I don’t care if it will work but I want all (throw + flood).
Wait, I missed this part. I must confess I didn’t read the whole paper through. A monochromatic LED without phosphor would make this paper even less relevant to us. It appears that they were only trying to get the surface of the LED to act as a simple mirror. Light recycling as we are discussing is more than that. The phosphor is very much involved. Also, it doesn’t take anything special to return a perfect image of the die to the LED. The hemispherical mirror does that already, if it is focused properly. But, as you’ve already noted, the image would be inverted. Since we’re talking about white light, not a theater projector image, inversion doesn’t hurt anything at all. But, for such things as RGBW emitters, where the color needs to hit back on its own square die, not on the opposing corner, Wavien had claimed to have a solution. It was a collar that had two reflections (one internal) instead one, so the image was basically re-inverted before it went back to the die. That’s the one that wouldn’t have been a hemisphere but some other shape.
Guys, I’m not really all that knowledgeable. I just know how to read. Everything I’ve said on the subject of light recycling is info which is available in the wild. Having read some of Wavien’s marketing material, and MEM’s threads on the subject, as well as various build threads which utilized RA collars, it all makes perfect sense to me. Of course, one would need to understand some basics about light, LEDs, optics and mirrors in general. All of that is search-able as well. Almost everything I know that is relevant to this discussion, I’ve learned since being a member of BLF.
“At least take an interest, and please discuss.”
That would be all well and good in a thread you started about laser projection, but of course this is MEM’s thread about the Tuning Process of Reflective Apertures which of course, incites interest in the application of refining the output of an LED and is why most of us are here.
12V car laser headlamps are in their infancy, developing drivers is something perhaps YOU could be working on so we could get a head start on development, perhaps you could start a thread on that…
Quite a lot of audacity, don’t you think? To hijack another’s thread on the premise that you decide what is relevant? Rudeness, incarnate.
Chalk me up my first rude point, but I for one am very surprised you’re still here.
Whether the admin see’s fit to allow you to continue the turmoil, I no longer wish to see you or your comments. Goodbye Sharpie.
Seriously? :person_facepalming:
Not that I am defending you but threads often goes off topic on BLF. This is interesting technology and please open up your own thread. Hope you could demonstrate that…
MEM already demonstrated his RA.