Fb3 worth it?

[sugeek]

sugeek, it's not really pulse width modulation, it has to do with the tracks. If you look at the 1st pic, my guess is that it shows the frame that had 300 points and the 2nd pic shows the frame with 1 point. Basically, it's displaying the 1 point, then going off to handle other tracks and returning to display the one point again. It could be that the house keeping that it does takes about the same time as it would to display 20 points. Be right back, going to do some figuring.

Thank you for the explanation, I don't mind being wrong. Actually If I learn something it is a good thing, and why a discussion helps people. I am here to learn, correct away!

[buffo]

it seems to be about whether regular frames achieve all they could be

With the underlying assumption that the laser should never be blanked except when moving through un-lit points in the pattern. This is an incorrect assumption.

This is why I have suggested that people contact Bill to explain why the QM-2000 (and, apparently, the FB3) blanks the lasers while it takes time out between successive frames to perform housekeeping tasks.

they are simply enquiring why this car appears slower than some of the competitors

Fair enough. Again though, the answer is best delivered by Pangolin.

Some people would argue that a brighter show would look better.

If the frame had more points, this would not be an issue. The issue is specifically with frames that have a low point count, and as I mentioned, there are reasons behind this. The trade-off is more consistent output when you have changing point counts between frames. There is a solution (add more points) that works. But that message has been lost...

it would seem that there does seem to be a legitimate question about why the voltage seems down

A 'scope trace will show that the voltage is correct. But with a low point count frame, the laser spends more time "off". This, coupled with DPSS lasers' natural tendency to be slow to turn on, will give a low point count frame a dimmer overall appearance. It has nothing to do with the FB3's voltage output level.

Whilst I'm a big advocate of contacting Pangolin about things like this, it's very difficult to do what you might do on a communal thread in an email, and this may well end up drawing on the experiences of a few people.

It also runs the risk of spreading bad information far and wide. Like a newspaper... The fact that someone was charged with something makes the front page and everyone reads it. The fact that they were acquitted of all charges is buried on page 6 and no one reads it.

By going straight to the source (Pangolin), you get a straight answer. Then you can come back here and post the correct information, instead of several pages of speculation...

if people will instantly stop jumping on the defense, we may actually find out something useful.

Fair enough. I'll admit that I jumped on the defensive pretty fast. But only because this has been brought up before with the QM-2000, and the answer was the same back then too.

I think you might be reading too much into my resopnse.

Well, after you said "Give me a fully functional device from the factory, not one with it's balls cut off...", it sounded as if you had already made up your mind. If you are indeed only investigating the issue, then I submit that you have a rather forceful way of initiating that investigation.

I'm not saying there's a problem with Pangolin as a company or that they make second rate products

Again, your initial statement seems to contradict this.

to me it's not impossible that there could be a problem with one of their products

I agree. In fact, I did mention that I thought there was a reported issue a long time ago with the FB3. And yes, anyone can make mistakes. But in this case, before we accuse them of making a mistake, don't you think we should ASK them about it?

Adam

[ElektroFreak]

I may have a forceful way of speaking from time to time.. but I did say "so to speak". Apologies if my wording was uncomfortable..

Asking the company that made the product is rarely a good way to gain unbiased feedback.. better to watch the forums and make the call yourself. (I know Bill's a good guy.. just to say it before people jump on me for insinuating that Pangolin would mislead me) I learned who is who regarding lasers by watching the forums.. You have to weigh all feedback, not just the positive or the negative. No offense meant to Pangolin or Bill Benner, I'm just saying that's how I think.

I'm excited to see where the investigation leads.. maybe there's nothing at all wrong with the FB3. Back to the scopes!

[buffo]

I agree that for feedback from users / owners, the forums are great. (Though attending a Laser Enthusiast's Meeting is even better!)

But forums can also be very, very wrong. I've read some howlers posted on LPF, for example. In fact, if you dig deep enough into my own posting history, you'll find some information I've posted that turned out to be incorrect.

Finally, when there is a perceived problem with a product, it's only fair to question the manufacturer about it before trashing it in a public forum. (Not saying that you did, just making the point in general.)

Adam

[Pangolin]

There's a problem with forums. The problem is that everyone can tend to look "equal". Think about it. Everyone has a nickname. Everyone makes posts. There are words. In the end, it can tend to look at though everyone has the same thing to contribute, and no particular opinion is any better than any other opinion. To me, that's a problem...

There are other problems. For example, one person makes an assumption, and then they go blabbing that assumption all over message boards as though it is a matter of fact. Of course, everyone on this forum has had to do their share of debunking...

In the case of Pangolin products, what we WISH would happen is the following:

1. Anyone doing posting should realize their own knowledge limitations within this field. For example, if someone has only been working with lasers for one week, or for one year, that’s their limitation. There should be some understanding on the part of people doing the posting that there is always more to learn, and that assumptions will get you nowhere.

2. Moreover, anyone should realize that Pangolin is the market and technology leader in this field. That Pangolin has 14 full time people working all around the clock and around the world, and working on nothing but laser display hardware and software. That Pangolin has received more ILDA Awards for technical achievement than all other laser software companies combined. That Pangolin has helped more companies win ILDA Artistic awards than all others combined. And that Pangolin has more patents -- including patents on laser scanners -- than most companies, including most companies making laser scanners...

3. People should also realize that, in addition to being the market and technology leader, when it comes to laser display software and control hardware, Pangolin is also the safety leader. We have written more papers, and given more invited presentations to International Laser Safety conferences than all other laser software companies combined. Not to mention developing the hardware in the only laser projector to ever be granted a CDRH variance for audience scanning.

With points 1, 2 and 3 in mind, people should make the assumption that if Pangolin does something, it must be for a very good reason. The reason could be because of the benefit to scanners (see our scanner-related patents). The reason could be because of safety (see some of our safety articles). Or the reason could be because of usability or other factors (remember, market and technology leader). People should not forget step 1, and think they are smarter than the people at Pangolin. (If you really are, we'll hire you.) And people should not forget step 2, and understand that no matter what time of the day, the month, or the year, there are people at Pangolin working on laser software and control hardware.

I guess there is a point number 4, which is that the human eye is highly logarithmic and that you'd have to reduce the laser power by a factor of somewhere between 4 and 5 before you perceive a beam as being "half as bright". This means that if -- for some reason -- software calls upon a laser to "only" put out 80% of its nominal power, this drop in power would barely be perceptible to humans.

Really what we wish would happen is that people would review points 1, 2, 3, and sometimes 4, and that these facts would tend to moderate the tone on the part of posters. But there doesn't seem to be that realization on the part of some people. Certain people come at posts from the standpoint that Pangolin products must be inferior because (fill in the blank here).

All I can say is -- when in doubt, consider my first point above. If there is still doubt, consider my second, third, and fourth points above.

Questions are always welcome. Non-qualified assumptions made in flame posts are not...

With that having been written, let me point out that something’s been missing from this discussion, and that something relates to the software being used along with the FB3. For example:

Exactly in what application are you seeing lower beam power? The FB3 currently works with three different classes of software programs -- LiveQUICK, LivePRO, and LAStudio (and soon to be a fourth software program QuickShow).

To simply make the statement that "the beam power is low" doesn't provide enough information. The beam power is too low in what application?

If the answer is “LiveQUICK”, then the solution is easy. Most people click down just a single point in the LiveQUICK editor and say "hey, it's not bright enough", but in LiveQUICK we have a special way to create "beams". You must hold the CTRL key down while clicking a point. When you do so, you will see a special kind of "icon" in the drawing window which represents a beam. This gives higher power.

If the answer is "LivePRO", then there is another easy solution. The newest version of LivePRO has been changed such that more power is afforded to single beams (lots of power was already seen if more than one beam was output -- it was only in the case of a single beam where power was supposedly lower).

If the answer is "LAStudio", then there are settings that can be changed to increase the beam power.

And soon there will be another answer -- QuickShow. Frankly, QuickShow was designed for "the rest of us" -- basically for people who haven't been in the business forever, and who specifically aren't true laser professionals. QuickShow removes (not adds) adjustments and it "just works". And QuickShow has a targeted beam system similar to LivePRO, but easier to use. I think if more people were using QuickShow, there would be less of these kind of non-qualified posts going on...

Unlike software from "the other guys", QuickShow will be absolutely free -- even though it is a completely new development for Pangolin (and thus, not just an update).

In any event, again, before commenting on a Pangolin product, please review points number 1, 2, 3 and 4 above. Realize the limitations of your own knowledge, and realize the repeated technological contributions Pangolin has brought to this industry over the past 23 years.

Again, questions are always welcome. Non-qualified assumptions made in flame posts are not...

Best regards,

William Benner

[Pangolin]

Ok, so on the QM2K, I figure 12.24% of the time displaying a frame is used for handling other tracks and housekeeping.

What I keep saying is -- all of this is adjustable. For example -- if you send a frame to the Targeted Beam Zone, most of what you guys called "housekeeping" (your words, not mine) are avoided, because you will be telling the QM2000 that it is your intention to get maximum power from the projector.

But even beyond simply telling the QM2000 what zone you want the imagery projected on, there are other adjustments that can be made to get supposedly "more power" out of the projector (remember my point 4 above -- more power isn't really more "light to the brain", and there are sacrifices to "more power" -- those sacrifices of course completely escaping everyone posting in this thread so far).

We don't "advertise" the adjustments because with our 23-year history in this business, studying how people work, what people do, and knowing better than almost anyone else how scanners work, and how to do things safety, we generally think our settings are the best settings. But in private discussions we will tell people how to make adjustments if beam power is their only priority.

As for us, our settings are made to maximize the lifetime of scanners, maximize the safety of patrons, and maximize the usability of software while maintaining the *appearance* of bright beams (read point 4 over and over).

Best regards,

William Benner

[LaserGuy216]

Bill's point still stands. In the absence of signal, a laser should *NOT* come on at full power. This is in the ILDA standard. The fact that the laser does come on at full power is NOT Pangolin's fault. It's the fault of the laser manufacturer who was too lazy to implement the ILDA standard correctly.
Adam

I think thats funny, as 5v analog modulation is a simple circuit that just about ALL laser MFG's use. So to blame the laser MFG's on no adhering to iLDA standards sounds like BS to me. Stop sticking up for your buddy bill there really just might be a problem with the FB3 that they havent seen before....


also " What about when you get on a commercial airliner? Do you demand to see the maintenance logs of the aircraft, or the logbook of the pilot? We trust people who know better than we do EVERY SINGLE DAY. Why should this situation be any different? "

you should demand to see this information and no be cattle and move with the herd becouse your told to. the problem with BIG business is at some point they all lie, jack in the box e coli out break? 14 days to recall tanted meat? (how many died?) or boeings cover up? or how about the meat industries use of imergent works?
We Have ShiT in the meat!! and its safe as stated by the FDA to have up to 1 petri dish of crap per 1 pound of hamburger.(does this sound right?)

So my point with all this is all of the superior companies try to cover up things and LIE to the pulic from time to time. I mean look at bills response, it said it all. " Sure it isn't, but we don't believe this kind of condition is possible with the FB3. If you could prove that it is, please write to me and we'll check it out..... Sounds like a reputable company to me NOT! Dont try and to cover this up.... FIX IT... This is a REAL problem with your companies product....

When you give up your right to question you loose all rights and are better off dead just like the rest of the cattle... MOOOOOOO

So Please Dont ever stop thinking for your self as some of us have demonstrated

mooo.....

[LaserGuy216]

POWER TO THE PEOPLE!!!! Fight back and take back your rights.... Don't be afarid of the system, make the system FEAR you. afterall without YOU they are nothing..... isnt that right biil .....


Prove it..... WTF ..... Nice One Bill that really looks good to all the others that might ever have a problem with your companies HW/SW.... Can everyone come to expect this kind of treatment or are you just havin a bad day

[DZ]

laserguy, maybe there is a problem with YOUR FB3 in particular. Why not send to someone else to have it looked at, or maybe send it back to Pangolin? So far, I have not seen anything that shows a true problem with the FB3 or the software.

[Pangolin]

Again, more non-qualified statements made...

5v analog modulation is a simple circuit that just about ALL laser MFG's use.

Huh? Where do you get your data? How many Chinese manufacturer's offices have you visited lately? Justin, Alex and I visited 10 last week and only a single one had analog modulation...

In the case of many of the other companies, each time we'd disconnect the FB3 there would be a static beam... And each time we'd see this (and also see sideways or inverted images) we'd give them a copy of my Projector Connections article.

It was worst when we made the trip one year ago (none out of ten had analog modulation, and more projectors with sideways and inverted imagery). Progress is being made. The article is helping...

More often than not, corporations are very proactive at solving problems -- your bit about Jack in the box notwithstanding.

As for Pangolin, we're very interested in solving any legitimate problem that can be brought before us. We're not interested in participating in flames...

maybe there is a problem with YOUR FB3 in particular

Yes, good point Dave! But -- to the best of my ability to tell, Laserguy has made no effort to contact us and try to resolve his problem. (Don't you just love those?)


Best regards,

William Benner