Either way, there will be a protective layer over the polarizer that could be removed. This is likely where the scratch is. The polarizer itself is VERY thin; you would not be able to distinguish any "edge" per se. That's why it is sandwiched between supporting TAC layers.

My instructions in the other thread shows photographs of the entire polarizer laminate as it is glued to the glass substrate of the panel. The anti-glare is just the topmost layer of the polarizer laminate. If there is no anti-glare (unlikely), then there will at least be a layer of protective TAC or PC. My point is that it sounds to me like you are confusing the anti-glare layer with the entire polarizer laminate including the anti-glare layer. Put simply: when you are done removing the anti-glare there should be something plastic still glued to the glass.

There should be little question as to wether you have anti-glare. Can you read text in a reflection as in my photo's in the other thread? If you cannot, you have anti-glare. Anti-glare is that familiar dull surface of basically every LCD ever made. The exception is the almost unusual looking anti-reflective screens that are just starting to come out. They have a shiny glass like surface, and therefore do not have anti-glare. These have a different (beneficial) technology to reduce reflections.

Mark.

Hi Ricoks

I just bought a new SGI LCD module from the same head engineer (do we need to keep his identity secret?).
I also asked him about removing the ag on the SGI. He said the ag is applied as a spray. Off the top of his head he thought acetone would remove it, but no guarantees. He also sent me a sample of the polarizer for the SGI so I could run some tests (haven't had time yet).

Just from visual inspection I think that the ag layer on the SGI does not diffuse the light as much as on newer panels. I have a stripped CMV 17" and when I look through them I see a much clearer image through the SGI than the CMV. I already think that the SGI lets through alot more light than other LCDs as I only use a 150W lamp.

I also have a broken SGI panel that I intend to test removing the ag on.

I just made time to test the SGI polarizer sample.
Click to view attachment
I cut a 100 mm square piece and applied paper towel and water.
Click to view attachment
While doing this I noticed the TAC had seperated at the edge of the polarizer where I had cut it with scissors.
I found I could lift the TAC and peel it off with very little force. I did this on both sides, one side seemed slightly more resistant but nothing to worry about.
Click to view attachment

Has anyone else tried removing the TAC on a new piece of polarizer? Was it as easy as this?
The ag must make removing the TAC much harder on other polarizers.

edit: Silly me this was just protective film, not the TAC.

This is what I was afraid of...sometime back when I got the sample of polarizer from that company I noticed that it was shiny on both sides and assumed that it was polar without the a/g. But when I was able to remove the cover film with just my finger nail which was just a clear layer that covered the antiglare underneath then I knew what I had mistaken it for. Plus when removing the rear clear layer it revealed that it was adhesive as well. In a 'dunk' method NOT 'rag' the a/g and TAC then came off.

prime: Just to make sure...after lifting this clear sheet do you see any dullness on the surface of the polarizer piece you have? Better yet, can you still see clearly and completely thru the polarizer still after removing this clear sheet?
sim

Sim
ok maybe you are right about that, one side does seem slightly sticky.

I should have known it was too good be true

I just ripped a piece of the polarizer and it does seem to be made of at least 3 more layers.
Also the sticky side is reflective and the other is not so it must have the AG on it.

Oh well. at least I learnt something. And now back to the rag test...

Understood, but still, assuming you have this clear sheet on both sides, when removing these (front and back) was the polar itself still clear? If I'm truly right then this clear protecting film on both sides encapsulates the polar film itself thereby giving the appearance of a non a/g polar and most probably adhesive.

btw...saw your pic before you removed it..hehehe
sim

oops....cross posting.....DON'T YOU JUST HATE THAT!!!
sim

From the pic you may have noticed that it was actually clearer with the film on it. It must be behaving like the tape tests that where done much earlier.

With the films on it seems clear. With the films off, the side with ag becomes dull and non refective, but not as dull as you would expect, maybe. I'll post some pics that show that the SGI LCD does not diffuse the light as much as other LCDs.

A key photo to include would be one of the surface reflections. Like a lamp or something.

FYI: The plastic film on the adhesive side is called a release sheet.

edit: actually those photos tell the story just fine .

Mark.

Comparison of light diffusion by different LCD panels
(slightly off topic?)

These pics where taken looking at a window through different LCD panels to show how much less diffusion is done by the SGI panel.

BENQ FP737s-D
edit: This Benq has ag on both sides!
Click to view attachment

CMV CT-720D
Click to view attachment

SGI 1600SW
Click to view attachment

reference pic of window. just so you know what we are looking at.
Click to view attachment

I think this is why owners of projectors with SGI LCDs are just amazed by them.
I'm hopng that the ag removal on the CMV will make it as good or better than the SGI.

edit: I've been attacking the ag on these panels with Mothers Mag and Aluminium polish. maybe I'll post an update someday

This pic explains the layers very well. I should have understood it better before.

Click to view attachment

Updated other thread with current total of antiglare attemps. Rag method is in the lead...heheehehe
sim

Again, thanks to Supraguy for his help in keeping the thread clean. Guys we have to keep it specific for easier references for others since some find this thread to overwhelming to read.
sim

finally got around to stripping my newest panel, gateway fpd1530(lg phillips lm150x05 lcd)... as with my last panel it has anti-glare on both sides...did one side last night,ragged it, no problems...and I finally have a shiny rear polar like everyone else, when I do the other side tonight I'll post in the other thread.... I might mention that not only did it have AG on both sides, it seems to be a very light coating...the film that came up was fairly sturdy(about polar thickness) but not as hazy as the psone screen I did... I have seen on some older specs, treatments ranging from "13% haze" to "28% haze" treatment .. I don't expect a lot of brightness increease(though I'll measure it with my meter) but the tape test showed a nice increase in color and detail...oh! and by the way...walking thru Sams Club last night I saw the new HP1905b(b for "bright view" technology;-) and its an anti-glareless monitor...the colors were incredible...sitting next to an AG monitor the difference was astounding(just as stated by many here after stripping) .....so if you still are wondering, check it out...my first thought was that with the pro lens(its a 19") it would make an incredilbe pj..

edit: looking at the picture above of the SGI, I'd say my AG was just a tad heavier than that but not much...

Here is a link to HP's bright-view technology explanation.

http://h50022.www5.hp.com/docs/2%20-%20BRI...Y%20SUMMARY.doc

Does anyone else know of other monitors like this? SOrry if this is OT.

no , actually its a pretty good recommendation for this whole thread;-) ...

This link has a list of anti-reflective (no a/g) manufacturers and includes a nice explantion of the differences between anitglare and anti-reflective.

http://www.pixelclean.com/index.asp?PageAction=Custom&ID=5

Here is a short exerpt..
An anti-reflective LCD screen does not use a rough matte, anti-glare polarizer. Instead, an LCD with an anti-reflective polarizer has a high-gloss finish. The anti-reflective layer of the polarizer is made of magnesium fluoride which actually reduces reflected light by lowering the Refractive Index of the surface of the LCD panel to a number closer to that of air. This process is known as index matching. This greatly reduces the reflection and refraction of ambient light as it hits the surface of the LCD display. Also, because the surface of an anti-reflective LCD has a smooth gloss finish, the image is crystal clear.

ANy scientific types know if this is good or bad for our application? If good, i might be heading this route.

A note to all......

Minoten's WUXGA screens use this technology..........

Glad you guys found this, i dont need to strip my lid now then!!

I stumbled across this topic yesterday after finally (mostly) finishing a basic LL design projector. While my initial projection results were good, I was left wanting. So, I pulled my panel (Benq FP591), freed it from the metal frame I had siliconed it to, and then proceeded to apply the H2O ragging method of a/g removal. I laid the panel on a clean dish towel and cut paper towel to reasonably conform to the panel dimensions. I applied ~1/2 cup of distilled water in drops over the surface of the paper towel such that the moisture was evenly distrubuted and added a second layer of toweling. I then covered the whole affair in a layer of wax paper to slow evaporation.

After approximately 90 minutes I gently probed a corner with a hobby knife was able to peel it up. Once I could get my thumb and index finger on the corner, I removed the wax paper and paper toweling quickly and then with little difficuly, slowly peeled the a/g layer off the panel. The a/g film came off in a single piece There was a little residual adhesive which I easily removed with a damp, soft cotton cloth, using a fresh patch of the cloth after each stroke so as to remove the glue without smearing it around too much. The result was a shiny, unharmed panel. Attached is a photo of the liberated a/g sheet.

Put the panel back in the projector and the resulting projected image is markedly improved. I had to actually reduce the contrast settings on the projector and HTPC. Much brighter, much sharper and much more saturated colors. This mod makes so much improvement it really should be a requirement of the design.

Click to view attachment

Maybe I should have gone with his 15.4" instead of buying the sharp 15.4" off of Ebay. I saved a few $$$ but now I have to remove the Anti-glare.

Are the reflections off your sharp screen like a black mirror or are they blurry?

If its the first type then you dont have an issue!

It's blurry. It's definately the enemy ---- ANTIGLARE.... (cue evil Darth Vader music)

LOL
Hold that thought, I need to go home and check my panel now... My Dell laptop has the 17" version of Minotens screens... I need to go check 15.4" one i imported from tiawan has the same coating!!

Woah. What? What makes you think that minoten's wuxga's don't have a/g? I think I would probably just keel over and die from excitement if I didn't think that was too good to be true! Man I hope you're right!!

Anyway, where are you getting this? Is it just that bit about anti-reflective coating? I think anti-glare and anti-reflection are interchangable to the average person, and therefore the marketing types use weird language sometimes. I dunno. I hope you're right!

I don't think it does. I think it still has the Antiglare.

Minoltens screens are just the Sharp LQ154M1LW02 - 15.4" laptop screens . And they come from Sharp with the antiglare on them.

Course the new batch may be different.

Just checked mine that i got off eBay and its blurry too

This is the photo of the panel that Minoten has on his website http://members.cox.net/minoten/contents.shtml

Notice you can see the reflection.

Miklopolis: Good finds! These links show illustrations that definately help others understand antiglare. Good to have you on board.
sim

Well I'll be the son of a motherless goat.

Looks like it doesn't have the AntiChrist....oops I mean Antiglare.

Just be certain it isn't the protective film covering the antiglare underneath like was mentioned earlier. I'm telling ya, these antiglare scums can really disguise themselves and ruin a day of a pj build.
sim

So does anyone think the magnesium flouride coating on these "anti-reflective" panels could hurt our projection?

And thanks simul8r, it feels good to add anything to this revolutionary thread.

Sorry, but this has been discussed to a lengthly degree throughout this thread. Long story short, this would be a good thing. Not only would you have lost the ill effects of an anti-glare surface treatment, you would also gain somewhere around 4% in brightness due to the index matching (less loss due to reflection).

That said, I would wait until someone can confirm if these panels are in fact anti-reflective before drawing any conclusions about those panels.

Mark.

I apologize. I have read quite a bit but must have missed that discussion. I appreciate your reply.

Actually, I shouldn't respond so definitively. I base the idea that there will be only gain to be had on my own deductions. It has never actually been tested.

And I must be getting cranky . I don't think it is a huge problem that this has been repeated .

Mark.

Guys, I hate to burst your bubble but I think that is simply a protective sheet of cellophane taped over the panel. You can see the white pieces of tape on the corners of the panel. Most stand-alone panels come shipped like this for protection.

ahuh, ahuh...

Sonic, quit slacking and get to screening, I wanna see your plog up here with new pics... hehehehe...
sim

, i have the cellophane too very hard not too see it. But its clear it does not reflect like the one on minotens site so i dont know how anyone would miss it. Underneath the cellophane the LCD is blurry

Okay:And worse :If it isn't going, and you have not waited 12 hours, then wait 12 hours. The first example here was a 3 hour soak, and the other was a 2 hour soak. For those to work would be an anomaly in the first place.

And people who are finding a lot of milky residue left behind, are probably just not waiting long enough.

If it doesn't go, do not use force. Just wait longer. Put differently (cough): IF IT DOESN'T GO, DO NOT USE FORCE (Yes, I am yelling ). JUST WAIT LONGER.

Mark.

Hi all

tried to strip my hyundai l72s with the rag soak method. to cut a long story short i tore a small (2cmx 2cm) triangle of the polarizer. My question is if i cut it to a straight triangle size and then purchase the Adhesive polarizer from 3dlens and just replace that small triangle section. does it sound feasible?

noddy43

not sure you'd want the adhesive type, you could probably tape the very edges to hold the non-adhesive type, I seem to remember elken saying something about the adhesive type not being good...speaking of which..... what is th elatest advice on replacement polarizers(as far as quality)? the 3d lens non-adhesive? polarization.com? my double sided anti-glare stripping worked fine on one side and went fine halfway on the other(and yes, I waited 12 hours) very frustrating why one side would work fine and only half the other.....so I may just order a new polarizer....

I'm about ready to try this - assuming I can work up the nerve lol.

I have a Samsung 512N in a vertical projector. The ag faces the lens not the lamp.

I'm leaning towards using the stripper method (trying saying that to your wife with a straight face).

Given the above and peoples' past experienes, are there any issues I should be aware of?

Thanks

I stipped a samsung 152t, not quite the 512n. I tried using the stripper method and it did not work at all. I left it on overnight and nothing. I used the rag method, left it on overnight and viola! Came off pretty nicely. In fact i would have left it on longer if i wasn't in a rush to go to work.

How soaked are these rags? I have to say I'm a bit nervous about leaving water on the lcd overnight or all day, but it does seem to be working for people.

I might try that first as I don't recall anyone damaging their lcd by trying this method.

I also have a Samsung 512n and am considering stripping the AG.
BUT if I do it I'll by trying the water/rag method.


Keep me informed of your progress and I'll let you know about mine.

I may try the stripper method first. It seems less dangerous.

I used three shop paper towels and about a cup or two of water. To be honest I think the stripper method scared me more!

I taped off the lcd. Layered towels cut to size and sprinkled about 1 cup of purified water on them.

We'll see how it goes, today.

I noticed in rereading the posts that some people stripping stuff off of both sides. Why?

for two different reasons.... me, because my panels had anti-glare on both sides(older monitors may have this) and simul8r and punisher just because they could ... ;-) no, I think it as to see if removing the clear TAC on the rear polar made a difference to the image...

WOW! The ag came off in one complete sheet like the protective stickers on your cell phone displays!

OK, haven't put the lcd back into the projector, yet. But, tentatively it looks like rag soaking for a couple of hours works for Samsung 512N

Good to hear! Another Samsung w/ the rag method. Seemed like a short time too!