Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 21

Thread: Justin Timberlake Eye Safety SNL??

  1. #11
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    5,704

    Default

    Ok I misunderstood, I presume Dan means how can PASS protect the performer if its set up to protect the audience and that's a valid point as its only as good as the operator that sets it up and if its set up to be audience safe not performer safe, then yes the performer will not be protected. Of course, here we don't know how it was set up.

    There was a discussion a while ago about inherent safety in laser design for audience scanning as in producing a laser that can be used for that purpose safely out of the box, but as I can't remember if this was something discussed on here publicly or a conversation I had in private, I don't want to regurgitate the details. Suffice to say, no design has ever appeared.
    Last edited by White-Light; 12-23-2013 at 02:56. Reason: Better explanation

  2. #12
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Charleston, SC
    Posts
    2,147,489,446

    Thumbs down Really Al?

    Quote Originally Posted by White-Light View Post
    I presume Dan means how can PASS protect the performer if its set up to protect the audience
    You definitely misunderstood him.

    What's worse it that it's pretty damned cheeky of you to be questioning Dan's knowledge to begin with, given that he's an ILDA board member, and president of X-Laser corp, and one of only a handful of US laser projector manufacturers who currently have CDRH approval to sell certified audience-scanning projectors here in the US.

    Not to mention the fact that Dan is also the chairman of the ILDA regulatory reform committee, and he has taught a projector certification class at SELEM for the last two years running.

    As James mentioned above, Dan probably understands how PASS works better than just about anyone else here on the forum (with the exception of Bill Benner and Greg Makhov), as he has been integrating the system into his company's Polaris projectors for over a year now.

    Instead of saying "I don't think you know how this works", maybe next time you'll ASK how it works first. Then everyone might learn something.

    Adam

  3. #13
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Grand Rapids, Mi
    Posts
    2,538

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by JStewart View Post
    Hi Al,

    I think Dan’s point is that no projector emissions monitoring device, even a sophisticated one such as PASS, would make what is an inherently unsafe thing to do, safe.

    Dan should know a thing or two about how PASS works as I was assessing some of his projectors on another show last week, and he is one of the few that have a US variance to sell audience scanning projectors, and these rely heavily on PASS.

    Maybe someone could post the video or grab a few stills so we can see what is being spoken about. At the moment, the links only allow US based ip addresses to access it.

    Over the summer I’ve seen an increasing number of questionable performer laser exposures. There is only so long that good fortune can be relied upon though…

    James
    Quick stills easy to get not even 5 sec of viewing and hitting pause a couple times.

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	image.jpg 
Views:	56 
Size:	68.4 KB 
ID:	41429 Click image for larger version. 

Name:	image.jpg 
Views:	43 
Size:	66.0 KB 
ID:	41430
    leading in trailing technology

  4. #14
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    5,704

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by buffo View Post
    You definitely misunderstood him.

    What's worse it that it's pretty damned cheeky of you to be questioning Dan's knowledge to begin with, given that he's an ILDA board member, and president of X-Laser corp, and one of only a handful of US laser projector manufacturers who currently have CDRH approval to sell certified audience-scanning projectors here in the US.

    Not to mention the fact that Dan is also the chairman of the ILDA regulatory reform committee, and he has taught a projector certification class at SELEM for the last two years running.

    As James mentioned above, Dan probably understands how PASS works better than just about anyone else here on the forum (with the exception of Bill Benner and Greg Makhov), as he has been integrating the system into his company's Polaris projectors for over a year now.

    Instead of saying "I don't think you know how this works", maybe next time you'll ASK how it works first. Then everyone might learn something.

    Adam
    Hey Adam,

    I wasn't questioning his knowledge, I simply didn't know his background beyond that he's the boss of X Laser and they sell projectors with variances. I didn't know, or remember, if I did have past knowledge, that they fitted PASS, and know nothing of ILDA membership / committees as not everyone concerns themselves with the inner works of the regulatory system.

    I do apologise if in the light of my ignorance of his status, what I said came across as disrespectful, that wasn't my intention and it wouldn't have been my intention to someone that didn't have that status as that's not what I'm about.

    I simply read "I don't think PASS cuts it for this situation" and wondered why that had been questioned as its supposed to be pretty much the be all and end of safety systems. Obviously looked at in context of calibrated for audience protection and how performers are then affected, there's a different light thrown on the debate.

    Al

  5. #15
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Charleston, SC
    Posts
    2,147,489,446

    Default

    Fair enough. Maybe I should have another cup of coffee before I log on to PL in the morning! (Didn't sleep for shit last night, and I think it's starting to show.)

    Regarding PASS not cutting it, Dan's point was that even though PASS will shut down the lasers if the scanners fail, that isn't enough to ensure the beam is eye-safe for the performers on stage. (Which was essentially your point as well.)

    Given how bright the beams appear from the audience, it's clear that they're running serious power. Class IV certainly. Since the stage performers are easily within 30 feet of the projectors, it's hard to imagine the beam being eye-safe at that distance.

    My assumption is that they used the "special training for performers" rule to exempt them from the 2.5 mw/cm^2 MPE. Unfortunately, from the video it appears that despite the training and any safety zones that were programmed, Justin took at least a couple shots to the face. That's technically a no-no. But I doubt anything will be done about it.

    Adam

  6. #16
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Maryland
    Posts
    320

    Default

    Al - Yes, you misunderstood my point (which James restated nicely) but no worries and certainly no offense taken. It could have been written much better and I should know better than to write things while dog tired. =)

    All good!

  7. #17
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    2

    Default

    What about ND contact lenses?

  8. #18
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    New Hampshire
    Posts
    3,513

    Default

    The problem with scanning (speed) to reduce exposure intensity is that firstly it depends on a complex interrelationship of some mechanical systems such as the scanners, amps and software as well as the feed back loop to assure operation. Defocus, achieved with a fixed lens avoids some of the dynamic risks ( I suppose the lens could break or shift). Secondly, defocus is two dimensional and reduces intensity as the square of beam diameter while a faster scan can only spread the intensity in one dimension at any given time.

  9. #19
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Churchill(hour S from Houston)
    Posts
    1,354

    Default

    I watched that-- very well done-
    it just a guess, but I bet he was told to never look upwards during the song and had a place marked that is was supposed to stay inside of- I saw mostly beams hitting his shoulders and back and not much near his face. so if he did not look up he was FAIRLY safe especially if he had stayed out the the places he was advised to avoid. It looked like laser going up and coming down only--so how could that become direct shot to the eyes? and I do not think anyone would risk a valuable 'asset' like JT.

    Anyone know who did this display? It was quite a departure from all else JT has done this year - he took a risk as these lasers nearly 'stole his thunder' -- I agree I bet it was more awesome in person.


    hk

  10. #20
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Orlando, FL
    Posts
    30

    Default

    Due to the intense interest in the JT performance expressed here and elsewhere, I have researched the safety of this performance. Based on my research, I can tell you that the show was completely safe and legal under both New York State and FDA/CDRH regulations.

    I can personally vouch for the following:

    "The laser effects were very carefully designed by professionals experienced with laser safety and performer protection. Sophisticated laser metering equipment was extensively used. Three certified and trained Laser Safety Officers were present at numerous rehearsals and the final performance. The performer was well aware of all effects. Any seemingly hazardous facial or eye exposures were in fact completely safe."

    For various reasons, I cannot discuss topics such as the exact devices, techniques, projectors, power levels, etc. involved. I will say that I understand these topics and that I am completely satisfied that, as I said: "any seemingly hazardous facial or eye exposures were in fact completely safe."

    Finally, I would like to note that this show was done by top-level professional performers, producers, crew, LSOs, and laser experts working together to safely create a complex-looking effect. Do NOT try to reproduce this without a similar team of world-class experts.

    As most PLer's know, a person trying to duplicate this without the experts, meters, safety equipment and procedures, etc. would risk hazardous exposures which could result in injury in literally the “blink of an eye.”

    -- Patrick Murphy

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •