I understand Mikelish, I'll do what I can as far as getting a good price for us. I pointed it out that we were not interested in having the polar replaced laminated to the panel but returned seperated and that most of the time these panels will be already stripped from there housing which sounded even better to him.

By the way, just how many panels did you destroy?
sim

I spoke to the maintenance guys where I work. They said if there was anything out there that could handle the job of buffing the screen to a glossy finish it would be MicroMesh. They use it to buff the windscreens on aircraft. They showed me a kit(kits are around 28 bucks at your local airport aircraft supply store). The samples they showed me ran from 220 grit all the way to 12,000 grit.

They said you could probably buy single sheets for around 2 bucks or order online.

I'm thinking of just buying a kit and trying it since it would come in handy for other uses.

DeathRay: I think I read in you PLOG that you are a Mac user. Take a look at this: Front Row. Wicked.Just to be clear my gospel isn't quite that . MUST NOT BE DIFFUSED. WOULD IDEALLY BE REFLECTIVE (as apposed to absorption type).

There is no chance it is going to be reflective. 3M are the only ones who make a reflective polarizer big enough, as far as I can tell.

Could somebody please take a photo of thick black and white stripes encompassing a taped off section and not? This is a black level and brightness test.

Then some Red Green and Blue stipes. Use true RGB values.

Here is a test image I whipped up to use. You may need to resize (without dither compensation).

Click to view attachment

It is one step forward towards quantifying the difference.

One update for those interested: it seems to me that the Vikuiti Prismatic Filters do not work the way they have animated. I actually think the only light they allow through is light from the edges. This would mean a diffused light source as discussed earlier would ideally place the light source at the sides of the box.Noooo SIM! He said don't ask .

Mark.

That would be of some good information sav8or, appreciate you going out of your way in the spirit of this experiment with us.
sim

I've read that the grit on those is not standard. They are measured in the AO scale (whatever that is). Bottom line is 12000 OA is 2 microns wide granules. Sweet.

Hopefully you don't find the anti glare structure is as I have deduced.

Mark.

Just out of curiosity sav8or, are you planning on swinging that bad boy on your panel or do you have a testor? Cause I can send you a strip if that would help.
sim

I just tried toothpaste on an old lcd and it was no go....that anti glare is some tough stuff!plus it "jiggled" the lcd way more than I would feel comfortable with on the real lcd... I think its either a laminate of some sort or removal.... unless elkin has a secret formula...

I've already built one projector and am starting on a new one. Went out and bought a westinghouse 15" the other day. So was thinking of using old panel for testing.

Both LCDs i cracked were broken before i touched them. However....im about to tackle the real deal, the risk is worth the gain, it makes my PJ worthwhile.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I'm pretty sure that anti-reflection (not anti-glare) coating would/could be a good thing in our application, depending on how it's accomplished.

My understanding that in general anti-reflection is achieved by matching the refractive index of the screen and the air. In other words an anti-reflection (gloss type?) lcd panel would have a polarizer that has a refractive index of very close (or closer than normal) to one. I can't seem to find any science to back me up here (What can I say? I'm lazy, or possibly wrong... but most likely just lazy) but I seem to remember that when the indices of refraction are closer (or more accurately their ratio is closer to one) that reflection is reduced and transmittance is increased. Therefore anti-reflection coatings would aid the transmittance of our panels if it was accomplished through matching indices of refraction. There are probably other types of anti-reflection coatings, though, so we need to be careful.

Anti-reflection only works so well, though, so they usually use anti-glare on our monitors. Anti-glare, as we know, is the devil (well, at least to us)!

So hopefully this helps those of you who are trying to get the polarizers we need understand what (I think) we need!

Jason

is this the 3m product that was mentioned before. I can't seem to find any price lists so it's likely exspensive.

http://multimedia.mmm.com/mws/mediawebserv...1CCCT85nYhhthO-

SHE IS ON THE OPERATING TABLE, WISH ME LUCK.

PATIENCE IS A VIRTUE! GOOD LUCK!

Not sure what films you are talking about. That's the first time I've seen 3M adhesive clear films. Sweet.

Duec985: To summarize here is what would be ideal:

Reflective polarizer with optical anti-reflective coating.

Absorption analyzer with optical anti-reflective coating.

Both must be oriented at 90 degrees. No confirmation wether the 3M reflective polarizers are directional.

That said, I haven't heard of any polarizer sheets having an anti-reflective coating, let alone one tuned to RGB. I discussed the difference between anti-glare and anti-reflective early in this thread. Basically anti-reflective works by throwing the reflections out of phase such that incoming light cancels them out. This is a good thing to have. Unfortunately anti-reflective coatings must be matched to specific wavelengths. On a camera, they cancel Red Green and Blue (RGB). This is what we would want. RGB coatings look purple because that is the largest visible wavelength cross section that is not cancelled.

The reason I recommend an absorption analyzer is because I don't figure you want any light reflecting back through the panel. It could diffuse it's polarization, and thus on return could pass when it should not.

Mike: I hope you mean your test panel.

Mark.

TEST PANEL, INDEED. WINK WINK

I CANT HELP IT

I GRIP IT AND I RIP IT

Grip it and ease it. A plastic knife is a must.

Mark.

Ok dudes, supposedly I can get a large 36 inch wide clear adhesive material from home depot (tape) I could cut this down to size, moisten it up and apply it, I'm just wondering, last time as the tape dried air bubbles began to appear. I don't how they got there AFTER placing the tape on, maybe they were already there, and became more noticable as the water dried. But my biggest concern is the edges of the lcd. I don't want to get them wet when I applly the tape and that seems almost impossible. Do you think it would be allright if I gave it a while to dry?

I think we should have an alternative to actually removing the antiglare.

.

What is the purpose of this product you have found?

The bubble/inconsitency issue has not been corrected yet. I found that wet application actually made matters worse over time, something like the bubble issue you mentioned (clarity dropped).

If you use distilled water, I don't see how it could be an issue if you give it plenty of time to dry. But this too is still an unknown.

You will obviousley also want to be sure this product works as well as packing/joining tape.

Mark.

halfway done, .

need more beer

Sorry, I completely forgot about the wavelength tuned (you like how I make up names for these things? Hehe, it made sense to me, anyway) anti-reflection coatings! I knew there were more types out there, and I remember you mentioning that before!

The camera-type (RGB) anti-reflection coating on the analyzer (the only place where the light is tuned to RGB) might be a good idea... I guess it just depends on how much in would hinder the polarizer's transmittance and how big a role light reflected back at the lcd from the analyzer plays. My guess would be that the coating wouldn't be worth it.

The only time I remember seeing anti-reflection (index matching) polarizers was on one the the lcd panel treatment links wooz put up earlier http://www.screentekinc.com/pixelbright-lcds.shtml

I kind of doubt if the added cost is worth it, though, but I don't even know how much they would want for the anti-reflection polarizers.

Jason

I hate to litter the thread with game breaking updates, but im about 2/3 done, with no cracks. Wendys knife, razor, and foam pad . I had to keep the FFCs connected because i heard horror storys about reattachmnent on the CMV-520D. This makes it a bit tougher, but we all love a challange.



heheheh , 3/4 's


off !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!,

What yall know bout switchin lanes with tha wood grain? (lyrics)

Ok, so elken how did you clean the polarizer you used to mount in front of the triplet . Its kind of cool to see no image and then have it appear, but my polarizer is all gunky >.<

I only used a camera as an example. The transmittance usually increases with both index matching and phase treatments. Anti-glare treatment is the only one that is not beneficial beyond reducing glare.

As far as I know these are the only anti-reflective treatments there are. The issue with the phase canceling technique is you must choose between specific (tight) wavelength ranges. I figure phase shifting would be more effective than index matching, so it would be the ideal in our situation. But getting our hands on RGB phase coatings is just one more parameter in an already demanding list. I can't think of a camera polarizer that would be big enough.

Mike: I'm glad you went with the Wendy's knife . Unfortunately the front polarizer cannot be used. You literally need to replace it (unless Elken seriously found a way to seperate the anti-glare). I hope that fact hasn't been lost in this thread's complexity somehow. Getting rid of the anti-glare is the vital step. Elken cleaned up another panel's polarizer.

Mark.

You used acetone, didn't you Elken.

Sat in a cup for 30 minutes. Found 3 layers - the a-glare, polar, and I beleive some sort of plastic support film. How you prevented the plastic from not being eaten up must have been a pain. Seems though that it did not affect the polar unless the plastic was also weakened.
sim

SIM: how on earth did Elken just respond as you ? Is that conclusively how to remove the anti glare?

Soaking the panel was the original plan way back in the day.

Mark.

Well it seemed it came off pretty good but it was sitting in the cup eating up everything. Crude but effective, perhaps Elken can ellaborate on how the glare can be carefully wiped off the film without affecting the edges of the film itself otherwise the polar would be all frayed.
sim

Its weird, the outer edges of the fresnel seem to be providing a source of polarization, i can faintly make out the image . Have another panels polar sitting in acetone, trying to clean it up .

Cheers


elken said this long ago, im just confirming.

so im curious if anyone else has feedback on what this company does. Sounds like they will replace the anti glare with the gloss finish just like we are wanting to do.

http://www.screentekinc.com/pixelbright-lcds.shtml

it is just a 100 bucks for everything

who knows, maybe they can even supply us some panels

For those searching for replacement polarizers:

You want an analyzer that has:

1. As high a standalone transmittance as possible.

2. As high a parallel transmittance as possible.

3. As low a crossed transmittance as possible.

4. As high an efficiency as possible (calculated based on the above parameters).

5. Would ideally have phase shift optical anti glare coatings tuned to RGB (I figure this is a long shot in sheet form).

6. Is of the absorption type.

You want a polarizer that has:

1. All of the above except #6. Instead of absorption type would be great if it were reflective type. However, there may be some birefringent issues with using a reflective type with your Collimator.

2. A polarization orientation that is 90 degrees to the analyzer.

Mark.

Got any leads on ordering something like that mark?

Wait, in how deep of acetone and how long?

Trying 30 minutes, its a 2x2 square, submerged

If it is has no anti-glare, then just wipe it. I wouldn't suggest having it soak for the reasons SIM has mentioned.

Mark.

Any explanation why the transmittance would increase with a phase treatment (much better term, BTW, is that the real terminology, or are you just better at making up terms )? It seems like the added interfaces would just introduce more possibilities for reflection.

I think you're right about the difficulty of finding the proper RGB anti-reflection polarizers (oops, sorry, I mean polar bears ) which is why I think for us it's either index matching, or nothing. Even the camera filters you were talking about are pretty iffy, I mean, the frequencies would have to be exactly the same as our the ones from our panels to do us any good, right? It seems quite possible that the camera filter's RGB is different (at least slightly) from our panel's RGB, but I guess we could find out with the right research/tools.

Anyway, if anything I think that it makes sense to look into it as a possible future improvement later, but I you'd probably agree that the cost and the hassle probably aren't worth it. Who knows, though? Not very long ago I would have told you that messing with the lcd layers probably wasn't worth the effort !

I also just wanted to say thanks to you Mark, for both keeping this thread on track (even when ppl tried very hard to derail/distract you !) and for keeping the rest of us honest when it comes to scientific fact checking!

Thanks,
Jason

The glue on this thing is no joke >.<. I cant wipe it off

Hmmm... now where to the point where we are considering sending the panel off to be reworked for 100 bucks? plus shipping = what?

Why not just order the stuff from the lab I talked to for 150 dollars take enough for 1 panel and sale the rest so 5 others can do their panels?

I will call tomorrow and see if they are willing to send a sample.

I'd be interested in the polar sav8or, but I'm shopping too. So 150 split amongst 6 is it? thats 25 clams, shipping to Washington state? And most importantly brand, type, and size....oh, and iffeciency too.

oh man, i got a dime sized clean spot on a spare polarizer glue free, i wish i could figure out how to clean the entire thing :-)

Like I said before.... I'm the least qualified to be talking to them. Some of you understand this stuff much more than I do. This guy said this film will do exactly what we are trying to accomplish. I uderstand the fears that he might be trying to sell something we could all just go to the store and buy.... But I know I'm not the only one here to notice we are having a little trouble finding a 3 dollar cure all solution.... and for my money if the film cost me 45 or 50 bucks to get my fingers on, it's still way better than having to buy a new monitor after trying to remove the film.

Mark... I'm trying to remember... Did you elude to the point that we may need to have an analyzer that matched to the other polarizer? Is it a possibility that we would have to strip both sides and use a matched set to get the best image?

Thanks for the Mac link. That's a nice machine... I've been debating whether I should wait for the (supposedly cooler running) intel chips before I get a new computer. I've read that some folks have had trouble with the new IMacs and the Mac mini running too hot.

really hot water, gums up glue, am erasing it now.

oh man, ill post pictures in a second

Try soaking it in S-L-X Denatured Alcohol, gets loosen but still have to wipe off w/a little effort. Or just go acetone, try a corner.

sorry been busy here,, work also keeping up here at same time.. whewww


acetone brushed on,, softens the glue,, or just use tissues wetted in aceton...

the mylar does not scratch easily at all you can use a hmmmm plastic edge to scrape excess glue off when you have brushed acetone on,,,,,

cleans it perfectly,,,

BUT DO A TEST Corner,,, all of mine did not react badly at all

but however if you soak it in ACETONE it will disolve... or turn it brittle

I will get back to how I removed ANTIGLARE surface from my BENQ orig "polar"

I made a comment on matched polarizers last night after I cleaned orig BENQ 'polar bear',,

yes mark Photo polarisers are purple ,,blacks,, only showed up with my unsplit optics setup,, every setup reacts slightly differently

Phase shift anti-reflection = may not be real terminology . I can't find the actual term used in the optical world, but as far as I'm concerned if it describes what it does in short terms, it must be a good name . Similarly, I've been referring to Dichroic Polarizers as Absorption polarizers for simplicity.

As for why more light gets through: conservation of energy. The energy from a reflection can't just be made to disappear. If it doesn't warm something up, or get released as some other form of energy somewhere else, then it just must have merged with the energy of the original wave. I wish there was a reason that could be easy to visualize, but it seems the full answer is from the same place as relativity and such.Really the film emulsions, Panel filters, and optical coatings all have some leeway. Each of them works with a fairly large cross section of the spectrum. For instance, if the color filters in our panels didn't allow through a fairly large cross section of the spectrum, then they would be very dark.Thanks . This thread has been funny, for sure.

Mark.

Click to view attachment

Click to view attachment

Click to view attachment

Click to view attachment

ok, somebody kick mikelish out of here, I only serve budlight in this thread.

(edit) oh,...and welcome to the whacked up club, as Elken put it.
sim

As long as the orientation of the new one is 90 degrees to the original and of equal or better quality then everything should be cool. As far as I know there are only 45 degree and 90 degree polarizers. Unfortunately that means there are 45 degree polarizer panels and 90 degree ones. If you removed both polarizer and analyzer then you could choose any orientation you want, as long as they remain at 90 degrees to each other (This has not been completely confirmed, yet).I mean the Front Row application. It just seems like the ultimate combo with a projector (Especially given the remote). Hopefully it will be released to more than just the new iMac.

Mark.