[argyllcms] Re: fwa compensation unexpected results

Wolf Faust wrote:

I am also building a spectrometer based on standard components. It should be flexible and fill the quality gap between current devices like Spectro 100xy/SpectroEye/Minolta and lab grade and still stay "affordable" (1500 - 5000 Euro). The "DIY reflective spectro" discussion is interesting here, but not the type of device I am looking for. 

Ocean Optics now have a low cost "educational"
module for US$999.

If others are willing to join, I would like to make this an open source project. As said, my biggest problem currently is getting a good 45/0 probe. I am not an expert in all fields and thus help is welcomed (straylight-, wavelength-, bandpass-correction,...). I thought about using the optics of existing devices like Graeme mentioned, but I basicly want others to rebuild the device quickly without being an optics expert. So it should be plug-and-play. I am currently thinking about hiring an optics company making a small batch of probes, but I really would like to avoid it. 

I was thinking that turning it out of metal with a small lathe
might be the go. You can get such things for something like $500.
For any sort of volume, then plastic would be the go.

The 0/45 geometry is generally a bit bulky to implement, unless
you use a mirror (which is what the Spectrolino seems to do),
and calibrating each instrument means buying more gear.

What about splitting the fibre and working with different filters so that one might be able to compute the influence of optical whiteners? Might also help in getting rid of 2nd order problems. I wonder about how big 2nd order and straylight problem get in practice with UV/VIS instead of VIS devices in Lab space. Filters surely do not replace monochromators, but I guess they are better than nothing at a fraction of the cost. 

My suggestion in my paper on FWA compensation was that it might be best
to supplement the normal light source with a UV LED of known characteristic.

Graeme Gill.


Other related posts: