Arkay will never find out......

Any luck with the 'hardware' image flip?

(...and just a side-note on the Osram and coil ballast I'm using (basically a copy of Arkay's setup), I've been pj'ing for about 5 hours/day over the last week and I haven't had a second of trouble with the lighting. Takes about 5 mins to get over the green startup tinge then all's good!)

I'm currently projecting onto a flat grey wall (some grey paint I had left over from when we painted the office..), 70" 16:9 image about 600 from the floor to the bottom of the image. The PJ lens is about 150mm away from the wall. 3dlens (no-adhesive) polar is currently loosely taped to the LCD side of the collimating fres:

(Screenies taken from coffe table height at about 30° off-axis)

Hey Oz

luv the decor, over PJ........

So, whats your perception of the new enhancement oz?
sim

Wow, you really ARE a lawyer!

Yes, your phrasology better states my intention. I don't think there is permanent damage to the PVA due to ragging. There is a temporary state change that I believe to be reversible with the evaporation of the water. It is, at this point, all educated conjecture.

SIM: I am not really viewing these posts as a "defend your method" debate. For one, because I don't have a method! I think questioning/hypothesizing is useful because it helps us view all sides of the problem. I agree, it is not the most enjoyable part of the process ... BUT, if we can expand our theories to explain what we are observing, it just may help keep people from ruining a panel and HAVING to decide which method is safest on their own. Your own quote is appropriate here: "the enemy is antiglare!".

PS: I think I am going to make that my new footer

Sorry guys, long days at work and not enough sleep. Just wake me up when the smoke clears out and .....whe...n............zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

So we agree. Hmmmm. Your Honor, I need to request a short recess while I figure out if this is good or bad for my client. . No wait... Yeah it's good.

Mark.

Hi Sim, I'm making improvements to all aspects of the PJ. Unfortunately after I made the antiglare change I hit the auto adjust button on the LCD control (nothing's labelled yet) so the before and after readings might be a bit off. Non quantitatively, it looks a whole lot better!

I just took a measurement on a white screen (notepad background) and with the LCD turned off. Both came in at 106 lumens at the brightest part of the screen. My previous testing showed a max of 103, but I had my LCD reversed for the previous measurements.

I'm still getting some pretty vicious dropoff towards the corners, I've still got a lot of aligning to do. I'm using a 3dlens 330mm front fres which is shifted up. The top of the projection lens is almost in line with the top of the LCD. Combine this with a pretty lousy reflector, a bulb that's not quite showing all through the luminaire's window - there's still a bucketful of improvements to be had. Having said that, I have been happily watching TV on it for the past 8 nights, mostly with a 25W halogen lamp burning in the room, along with the massive lumen leak from the 'housing'

Trials and adjustments still to come:
- affix the polar to the collimating lens frame
- Less lens-shift and a touch more keystoning.
- Pro Lenses are on the wishlist although I really like the location it's in now. It really is perfect for our viewing area.
- Get a tuning DVD
- get a proper screen
- get a proper casing...

Ozstang,,, try moving the lamp closer to condensor fresnel, I have found that since enhancement, that the lamp position is much more sensitive, this was previously hidden by the A/G..

with unsplit to distance is reduced to about 175mm yep 175mm to get full illumination to corners.

with split optics it is about 195mm - 200 mm

As you guys probably already know, PVA (polyvinyl alcohol) is very soluble in water. It is actually a very common glue used in many adhesive lamination applications, which is what this antiglare layer resembles. As long as the water penetrates the top layer and assuming that the PVA has not been altered (cross-linked or some other form) the PVA will be dissolved, which allows us to peel up the A/G layer.

There are two things to cause the PVA polymer to dissolve more quickly. Heat and agitation. I would highly discourage the attempt to agitate the PVA layer due to possible damage to the screen. However, the use of heat is quite promising. When solutions of PVA in water are made, they are typically made at 90degC (194 degF). Again, I would discourage going this route due to the possible damage to our LCD screens. However, any heat whatsoever is very beneficial. I would suggest placing a wet rag on top of the A/G and then passing a hair dryer over the rag. Keep in mind that the rag will have to be re-soaked numerous times.

Also, as the water begins to leave the dissolved PVA, it will begin to gel. Then, as more water leaves, it will re-solidify.

P.S. I'm quite new to this topic, and I'm very interested in helping out. I haven't had the time to read all of the posts, so my fundamentals are a little bit off. Please correct me I've misunderstood any of the concepts.

Zete you are more than welcome,, we need fresh victims,,

your statement is perfectly correct..

The panels will stand high temps whilst not running,, maybe not as high 90° C maybe upto 60° C,, but care with localized heating, or seals will lose intergrity, and cracking of panel.

I have already done a test using hot water over a panel,, but I took the precaution to seal off all around the edges isolating the FFC's and backside,, the A/G came off in a few minutes,, was almost like a piece of soggy gladwrap.. but I have not gone back thus far to do more tests using this technique.. Oh ps this was a small 11.4" panel, and A/G film hardened under cold water rapidly too,, but went brittle, I figure that the hot water changed its molecular chain structure by losing or gaining electrons or something like that.. forgotten all my physics stuff

Was it soaked for only a few minutes, or dd the peel only take a few minutes? I'm very interested in testing out this theory, so can you give me some details on your method all the way down to the peel method?



I'm still in college and I can't even remember that stuff. But from my work experience, I do know that this is one of the primariy characteristics of plastics and films in general.

Is there any information so far on the MOC (materials of construction) of the A/G layer itself not including the adhesive?

Buried deep within the 2700 odd posts here have been mentioned,

there are several methods of A/G,, I have not as per say kept track of them all, some are chemically etched, some are possibly microspheres imbedded in layers of pva, some have resisted attempts of removal,,

however if it fails there is still the option of total removal and installation of a brand new shiny Polarizer sheet,,

is anti-reflective coating diffusive?

I'm running split optics, about 200-205mm seems pretty good.

[quote

however if it fails there is still the option of total removal and installation of a brand new shiny Polarizer sheet,,
[/quote]

Where Can I buy a polarizer sheet? I ruined a samsung monitor a couple of days ago when a small scratch in the polarizer allowed some stripper to seep in and bubble up the polarizer. You wouldnt believe how hard it was to remove the A/g I still havent removed all of it becuase it was so difficult. The rag method and the stripper would not touch the A/G even after hours of soaking

AustinT , check out 3dlens, might take awhile to ship but the nonadhesive polarizer is nice.

So Your saying there's a chance

Thanks for your reply. How do I remove the rest of the polarizer?

Thanks again

AustinT: run a search for your name in this thread. There is little worry. Everyone who wanted to replace their analyzer in this thread had success doing so.In many cases there is thought a separate water soluble adhesive. It is this adhesive that we hope to disslove while remaining under the PVA dissolution cuttoff. The purpose of using the rag is to keep dissolution at a minimum by simulating a smaller volume of water. It is thought that keeping dissolution of the PVA at a minimum (if any) the procedure is safer.

I don't know about heat. The dissolution rates of PVA is exponential with heat. The process as it stands right now intentionally allows minimal dissolution. My hope is that the water soluble glue is giving up at room temperature, while this grade of PVA is largely untouched. I don't have any of the test anti-glare that others have had so much trouble with, but it has been largely proven that these people have impermeable TAC (Triacetyl Cellulose). In this case is actually likely PC (Polycarbonate). So even with the application of heat these polarizers would not likely de-laminate.

Some information on the possible glue from earlier in this thread:

Quote: There is no specific limitation on treatment for adhering the polarizer (polarizing film) to the transparent protective film that is a protective layer. Adhesion can be carried out, for example, by using an adhesive such as an adhesive including a vinyl alcohol-based polymer, or an adhesive including at least a water-soluble crosslinking agent of vinyl alcohol-based polymer such as boric acid, borax, glutaraldehyde, melamine and oxalic acid. A layer of such an adhesive can be formed by, for example, applying and drying an aqueous solution. In preparation of the aqueous solution, other additives, or a catalyst such as an acid can be blended if necessary.

I am not sure how Elken had such luck with hot water. I tried boiling a sample way back in the day. It was a gradual increase in temperature that took about 15 minutes, and I couldn't get it to de-lamitate.

Mark.

Good and bad news. Found some aircraft remover paint stripper that would remove the A/G . Bad news is I broke a corner of the lcd and lost 3/4 of the picture.
I still do not regret trying to take off the a/g the picture is amazing!!!
I will try again as soon as I can hunt down a new monitor.
Thanks to all

I feel that

I have my new LCD with antiglare removed sitting on a dirty overhead until i build a box and im amazed at the color saturation.

I just picked up the 15 inch Westinghouse monitor and stripped it apart last night. I managed to mess up my Samsung panel with the paint stripper method ( cracks developed in the polarizer ). I would like to remove the A/G from my new monitor but I am feeling a little uneasy now. Does anyone know if the Wet Rag method will work on this monitor?


DarkWin2k

I damaged the polarizer as well while removing the antiglare. All you have to do is remove the polarizer and buy a new one. You probably didn't have to buy a new monitor.

So, does the polizrizer from 3dlens.com be good enough to kick standrat polar?

there are 2 types - wirk 38 and 48 degrees.. which is better? i suppose with 38 degree contrast should be better,.. but brightness

Delfins,, the

non adhesive one is ok, but get bigger sheet to cover all possible angles

I am using one here myself

I think its code is poa1

Thanks, elken.
So i thought too, 38degree will be better (55$/sheet).

Now i am qaiting for response from 3M about "Vikuiti DualBrightness" polar sheet/film... if it cost less and it help me to restore my LCD, i'll get one from them.. just to test...

I believe that panel is the same as the CMV. CMV's thus far have not taken well to stripper, although andysharifi stripped his Westinghouse with stripper. To my knowledge, no one has ragged a CMV as yet, but there is anecdotal evidence that it should work - namely the a/g layer on this panel has been shown to be water permeable.

I would go ragging before stripping with that panel, but there are no guarantees either way.

Good luck with it!

Sonic

Looks like Yoda had good success using the rag method on the cmv-529A. Great news for cmv users (that includes me).

Looks like it's the rag method for me.

Yes, you are absolutely correct. My bad for not having checked the 'results " thread before sticking my foot in my mouth. Mmmmm, dirt tastes especially good when you're hungry ...

OKAY, whos the slacker that allowed this thread to go beyond a day without a post??? HUH?, HUH?

oh, that be me....hehehehe

helllooooo....hellooo?....anybody out there?

I,mmmmmmm still here, in da underdown zonies,,

My PJ is in Launch position, awaiting final countdown...

Know what you mean Elken, I'm just waiting for more free time to revamp my box design and go folded as well. Less space and correct alignment. As your going vertical, I'll just maintain horizontal for now. Hey, btw, where are you getting your fs mirror?
sim

I'm still in parts acquisition mode, but I do have my Samsung 512n sitting here begging to have
the anti-glare removed.


hmmmm what to do what to do

Good luck if you attempt it. In succeeding you'll make the rest of us 512N users proud... and jealous... and insane weighing the pros and the cons/possible failure...

Failure is not an option !!!

If anything try the stripper method. The ragging method did not work on my 512N and doesn't seem to be working for any samsungs.

My thought right now is if he takes your experiences as caution, that zero harm will be done if ragging does not work. I don't feel there have been nearly enough panels modified to establish what works undoubtedly with what. Example: there has been at least one Samsung panel successfully water ragged http://www.lumenlab.com/forums/index.php?s...indpost&p=99485 I can't remember how many were not successful (2?: Mikau, AustinT). Based on the minimal mixed experiences we can't even say that stripper or even tape is working on every panel. My suggestion of water first is based to a small extent on expense, and more importantly what I have heard: it seems to leave you with something useable when things go wrong. Evidently, these were also my motivations for developing the technique. If anyone thinks I have/had this backwards, then by all means start by trying stripper. It is only my deduction.

Mark.

I have experience in making solutions of PVA. PVA definately dissolves more readily with the application of heat. What I don't understand is why do we only want to partially dissolve the PVA when removing the anti-glare? Is it to insure that the polarizer stays adhered to the panel?



The possibility that the PVA is cross-linked is very interesting. It would in fact insure that the PVA holds up to a greater extent, causing the anti-glare to have a longer lifetime when in the consumers' hands. Chances are that Elken had a monitor with a lower molecular weight of PVA.

I have an Acer 1772h whose anti-glare I would like to remove. I'm not sure yet if I'm going to do it or not because it is a very nice monitor and I have yet to even build my box. mikelish: Do you have any pictures of your a/g stripped Acer so that I could compare them and hopefully figure out if rag soaking will work for me?

Wow, I´ve been reading quite a bunch of pages and Im really interested to apply this rag technique to my new folded pj. As it is now, the lamp is hitting the NON antiglare side of the lcd (the light passes freely through the lcd and hit the antiglare from the glued side). Is this the same thing as the light hitting the antiglare first, or better? Do you recommend to go on and remove the antiglare anyway?

I thought with folded design that the lcd is oriented just as it was before it was stripped? This would mean the AG is facing the lamp. Wouldn't it?

It doesn't matter which way your light shines through, the antiglare will always diffuse the directed light lowering acuteness and brightness. Trust us, you will be amazed what your pj was capable of after removing this. Especially in a folded as you loose slightly little while bending light versus straight shooters.
sim

Okay fellow anti-glare busters, I finally took the plunge yesterday! Ragged my benq 567v2 panel. It was a success; the a/g came off in a large sheet after 4 hours with 2 edges needing a little bit more coaxing. (And yeah boss, I'll add it to the results forum ASAP! )

I can say without a doubt that the BenQ has glue in between the PVA and the TAC layers. Most of the glue came up with the a/g, but in the corners where I took slightly longer to remove the TAC, some of the glue re-solidfied leaving a slight haze over the PVA. Water/Acetone cleaned it up - no problem. The removed a/g film is still tacky as of this morning. My hats off to you Mark, you have been right at every point along this journey. I still love that we had our little debates though - hehe )

Now - for the outcome. I am sorry, but pics will have to wait. Borrowed my dad's camera but forgot the darn pc interconnect cable :angry:!

BRIGHTNESS: this is going to be a contraversial statement, but to my eyes, there is almost NO change in absolute brightness. My pj was plenty bright before, it is still plenty bright.

CONTRAST: The contrast was most certainly improved. The whites are now whiter (true white, not just a light grey), and the blacks seem to also be blacker!

SHARPNESS: No contest. The sharpness is VASTLY improved by this mod. Pixels were visible before, but they are much more sharply defined now. The borders between pixels are much clearer and I can actually distinguish 1 pixel spaced horizontal and vertical line patterns from a distance.

COLOR: OH MY FREAKIN' GAWD - HERE'S WHERE THIS MOD ROCKS. The color saturation is improved 300%. The colors are now much truer - yellow is REAL yellow, not a greyish-greenish-yellow. Red is bright and vibrant, not dark and muted. Green looks vibrant and alive And blue becomes almost iridescent. It is as if a light grey film of haze was lifted off the image. I am no longer needing to crank color saturation or use gimmicks like "cinema enhancement" to get the colors to where they should be. The result of this improvement in color is a vast *percieved brightness enhancement* even if the actual brightness boost minimal.

I noticed some time ago that color saturation might be even more important than actual brightness. When I used to watch my pj during the daytime (rare) I used to crank the color saturation to 200% to make the image watchable. This mod nullifies the need for that.

In dark scenes, it was always a peeve of mine that if I cranked the gamma high enough to view the shadow detail, the colors would wash out and the image would loose impact. I would have to raise the contrast and color saturation to compensate, thus "burning out" fine detail. No more. If you haven't done this mod yet, you are missing out on what your pj could be.

THE BAD: okay, along with the good, comes some bad. My fresnel lines are MUCHO visible and very distracting. Elken sent me a pm about how moving the field fresnel closer may compensate but so far, I am without luck in that endeavor. Can someone who has a greater optics knowlege than me please advise me on how to shift the "LCD virtual image" away from the collimating fresnel without needing to re-design my sled?? In my design, the collimating fresnel LCD separation are fixed to spec.

Congrats Sonic! Can't wait to see some screenies! I think you're right about brightness -- there's really no gain. But the extra sharpness, contrast and color gives you more perceived brightness.

When I turned my pj off last night, it defaulted to a blank white screen. My bulb alignment's always been awful, but this allowed me to see how much antiglare I still had on the corners of my panel. There's a yellow haze around the edges. These aren't the 'hard edges' where I still have strips of AG left - it's like glue residue. Can anyone who's used the stripper method confirm this?

Also -- is there any harm in letting Klean Strip KS-3 sit on your polarizer after it's been stripped? I want to do another 30 minute pass to clean up the corners and any glue residue, and I don't want to damage it. I know scratches can be a problem, but is it okay to re-strip if it's intact?

You are not going to like this one . The polarizer is PVA. That is, the actual layer that does the polarization is made of PVA (not one of the extremely soluble grades, but still highly soluble especially given temperature, volume and agitation). What we have found, is that there seems to be another layer of adhesive just above the PVA layer that adheres the anti-glare treated TAC. The rag technique is designed to provide not enough volume, agitation, or heat (but mostly volume) to significantly dissolve the PVA. But it does loosen up this adhesive. The water technique only works if the anti-glare is permeable to water.

The rag also limits the amount of plasticizers in the PVA that leach out though the process. PVA, as you probably know (I wish you were here earlier in the game ) is brittle without these plasticizers. There is also iodine impregnated into the PVA at the stretch grain (the PVA is stretched in one direction producing the polarization axis as grain). It is this iodine that absorbs the opposing vector of light energy, and thus polarizes the passing light. Ragging helps prevent the iodine from leaching out. Iodine is not highly water soluble, so this is pretty unlikely anyway.

It is for this reason that heat is not recommended. The idea is to keep the polarization PVA dissolution low, while producing high or decent solubility of the adhesive. Of course, it sounds like the adhesive could be made of PVA as well, but is thankfully of a higher solubility.. Did you try reinforcing with tape? I don't think anyone has tried it but me yet. It really does seem to work. Of course, this won't help with dry glue in the visible area.That actually is a pretty neat idea. It seems what he is leveraging there is the idea that the depth of field increases with distance from a lens (or am I out to lunch on that one?). So by decreasing the distance from your panel to the lens you are decreasing the depth of field. The lens will seem to sample a tighter depth, now excluding the collimating fresnel.

I think you could get away with the original plan, which is to yank the collimator out and fix it to the back of your sled. The lamp would have to move back the same distance as well, but that should eliminate the shadow problem.

Mark.

Hey guys. After ragging my monitor (samsung 153t) I am having trouble getting hte polarizers clean. I used a little isopropyl alcohol which dried quickly and left streaks and smudges. Is there anyway to get rid of these completely?

Bummer. Hopefully it isn't too bad. I had this problem whenever I tried to clean the glue up. That is why I was pleased that the glue dried smooth on my panel. I think it may be the rags that we are using. I used the paper towel.

I would definitely avoid as much cleaning as possible. If it is descent, then I would just call it a day.

One idea may be to not rub the surface dry. Let it quickly air dry (with a fan). That means that you will be cleaning by dilution, as whatever you don't dilute out and off with the rag, will just dry back onto the surface. I think rubbing the surface just as it dries is what causes the dulling.

Maybe try dipping a rag in water, and then in alcohol?

Dweezilkid http://www.lumenlab.com/forums/index.php?s...ndpost&p=101405 had luck with lens cleaning solution and lens paper.

Mark.

A couple of questions from a noob. I am in process on my first projector and will go ahead and remove the aniglare coating before I assemble it but I had a couple questions after reading this thread (yes, the whole thing):

1. What is meant by split and unsplit optics?

2. To remove the frensel rings people are moving the collector frensel back from the lcd an extra 1/4". I assume this means they are moving the bulb/reflector back a like amount to keep the bulb at the focal point of the fensel, correct?

Acetone worked for me . It is not recommended that you immerse the PVA in this stuff, but elken used it with no apparent harm to his polar bear. Acetone dries quickly and I think this is key to getting that glue off. Water/alcohol alone didn't work for me.

Dweez,

I wish I could offer you a definitive answer. On my test panel, 50 hours of Jasco on bare PVA didn't react. Others have not been so lucky. If it were my panel, I would go for it because sloppy corners would certainly bug me. Worst comes to worst, all-out polar bear replacement is an option.

I have contact with the head engineer that designed the SGI 1600SW LCD. I am going to contact him regarding whether they used an AG on these monitors. I can feel a lip of some sort on my SGI, but want to make sure it is actually an AG, and not just the polarizer (if i understand the make-up of the LCD correctly). I found a slight scratch on my SGI, and am hoping that if it is indeed an AG, then it will help it. If not, well, oops!!!
I know there are others on the forum with this monitor, and I have a few to sell, so this info will be valuable, i'm sure!!!

Ricoks

Split = collimating fresnel / LCD / field fresnel

Unsplit = collimating fresnel / field fresnel / LCD



Yes. In theory. Keep the bulb position adjustable for best results and fine tweaking.