Laserevent
New Member
Did someone, in this forum, purchase the Jenoptik RGB laser sourse?
what do you think about it?
what do you think about it?
Jenoptik rgb laser
- Thread starter Laserevent
- Start date
Laserlover
New Member
Since Pangolin Laser controllers are geared towards using PCAOM's for color selection, intensity and blanking, how can one control (3) RGB DPSS lasers that have direct modulation ?
Laserlover
Laserlover
A question concerning what you said in your previous post:
Different colors of DPSS-Lasers sometimes have slightly different blanking response times (the time delay between a blanking signal and the laser's reaction to it). This can make it necessary to readjust the blanking delay setting for each DPSS laser individually.
Do you plan to implement idividual color/blanking delay sliders for the 6 color channels in LD2000 as an advanced option?
This would be very helpful as DPSS technology is increasingly being used.
Patrick
Different colors of DPSS-Lasers sometimes have slightly different blanking response times (the time delay between a blanking signal and the laser's reaction to it). This can make it necessary to readjust the blanking delay setting for each DPSS laser individually.
Do you plan to implement idividual color/blanking delay sliders for the 6 color channels in LD2000 as an advanced option?
This would be very helpful as DPSS technology is increasingly being used.
Patrick
Pangolin
Staff member
Although I think it is dangerous to ever say "never", I will firmly state that we have no immediate plans to compensate different response times of the lasers with our software.
This is a matter of philosophy more than anything else. Our philosophy is that if you have multiple lasers, and these lasers have different response times, you should employ external circuitry to make it so that all lasers respond in the same way. This circuitry is usually nothing more than simple analog op-amp filter circuits.
I would liken the response of each laser to the response of X and Y scanners. We have a standard which basically states that the X and Y scanners should respond in the same way, with the same phase and frequency response, and with the same step response. X and Y scanners most often have different size mirrors, but still, the servo is adjusted, or in extreme cases, analog filter circuits are employed to make the X and Y scanners have the same response. Nobody expects software to compensate for inadequacy of scanners, so by the same token, I think it is unreasonable to expect software to compensate for inadequacy of lasers. Inadequacy is inadequacy and software compensation would merely be a "band-aid" approach -- which would only partially cover up a problem that is still there, and will always be somewhat visible.
We tend to support standards here at Pangolin, and to help guide people into doing things "the right way". Making all lasers respond equally, just like the scanners are made to respond equally, is "the right way" -- this is the simple, total and complete solution. Any other solution is only partial and incomplete -- stated in other terms, "the wrong way".
I agree that RGB solid-state lasers are new, and there can be new challenges and problems to overcome. I think the main question here is, exactly
This is a matter of philosophy more than anything else. Our philosophy is that if you have multiple lasers, and these lasers have different response times, you should employ external circuitry to make it so that all lasers respond in the same way. This circuitry is usually nothing more than simple analog op-amp filter circuits.
I would liken the response of each laser to the response of X and Y scanners. We have a standard which basically states that the X and Y scanners should respond in the same way, with the same phase and frequency response, and with the same step response. X and Y scanners most often have different size mirrors, but still, the servo is adjusted, or in extreme cases, analog filter circuits are employed to make the X and Y scanners have the same response. Nobody expects software to compensate for inadequacy of scanners, so by the same token, I think it is unreasonable to expect software to compensate for inadequacy of lasers. Inadequacy is inadequacy and software compensation would merely be a "band-aid" approach -- which would only partially cover up a problem that is still there, and will always be somewhat visible.
We tend to support standards here at Pangolin, and to help guide people into doing things "the right way". Making all lasers respond equally, just like the scanners are made to respond equally, is "the right way" -- this is the simple, total and complete solution. Any other solution is only partial and incomplete -- stated in other terms, "the wrong way".
I agree that RGB solid-state lasers are new, and there can be new challenges and problems to overcome. I think the main question here is, exactly