Are Computer Glasses a Scam? - Light Spectrum Analysis 

alright

No shit Sherlock. I don't think this needed a video.

aight

...........i am disappointed and hurt, i thought thiojoe recognized my quirkyness and thirst for knowledge but instead it was just a lewd image site joking, this scam has been going around all of the big channels, does your spectrum analizer handle anything outside of visible??

Windows 11 has the flux feature built-in now.

gaget

There is cheaper brands by apogee and migro, cheers

@@Kat21 gajett

Would you recommend LG 27 GP850 in 2022 as a Main monitor for Entertainment?

Your videos are always worth a Like. Thanks for the time and effort for the videos

I would be interested to know how well this works compared to f.flux

I don’t use the “Night Light” feature on my computer, but I do use “Night Shift” on my phone. Regarding f.lux, don’t they do the same thing?

@@StolenJoker84 f.lux can go much lower than Night Shift when it comes to color temperatures. I know that I prefer to use f.lux instead of Night Shift on my Mac at night because it's easier on the eyes. Unfortunately f.lux is not available on iOS.

FYI, this feature is also available on Linux desktop environnements

@@Jellykrop It's not very flexible as compared to f.lux. I've used Windows night light for a couple of years, and am considering going back. The Windows one doesn't go particularly warm on the colors and you don't have much control over when and how quickly the color shifts.

Or indeed, the artist had cataracts. :)

Yea I just made the same observation and comment. Because we don't know the light source when painting we can't really appreciate the correct color as perceived by the artist. We can put it in an ideal light source, but he may have painted it under florescent so the colors to him would be different then the colors displayed. It's an interesting issue to think about.

@@newmonengineering and this is assuming that the color/pigments do not age, which they do. This is one of the reason why flash light photography is disliked by museums.

*they

Like anti-glare?

@@653j521 i do have anti-glare as well but they also transition to sunglasses in the sun. Part of the new transition coating gives them a very slight blue light blocker that gives the world around me a very slight yellow tinge. Like whites are slightly off white through them.

I have the same thing on my glasses, and, if they’re sitting on a table or counter and you look at them in the right light, you can actually see that the lenses are slightly yellow.

If you look through them at a white surface you can notice it too. It mainly keeps my eyes from bugging me when in in a brightly lit room or stare at a bright screen. I work at a computer all day which keeping the blue light filter on my computer and these glasses, while not much, help immensely by the end of a day.

Hm interesting idea

@@ThioJoe I second this idea.

@@ThioJoe would make a great informational video!

I'm betting they were polarized glasses, my dad always used them to see fish in the water. Maybe it blocked the flashes from the police car in the same way it does with water reflections?

@@cakobjoker8134 . They were polarised, blue blocker with a dark red brown lens and cost more than Bole glasses. They were extremely good but unfortunately too good for driving.

I don't agree that one is more important than the other, though I'd say blue light is more important if anything.

@@Acetyl53 That's a pretty weak stance, but ok

​@@yahm0n Yes, it's basically hollow and amounts to "No". I wrote another comment on this video but since youtube hides and deletes comments with links, I can't link it here. I suppose I can just copy it instead. " Color spectrum and the character of the field (flicker/square wave modulated, point source or diffuse, coherence, intensity, etc) are strongly biologically active. The "blue light hazard" usually brings to mind arc welding, bright stage lights, lightning, etc, but modern data shows blue light even at domestic levels (especially at night) destroys the photoreceptors in our eyes and their associated ganglion downstream of oxidative stress (eg retinal turned into ROS). The observation that light and color affect mood and brain activity is ancient, specific findings go back to Ptolemy who found flashing colors from minerals thrown in a fire would alter mood, and Apuleis who found that flickering lights eg from a spinning spoked potter's wheel could trigger seizures and other mental changes. Cold war research (see Controlled Offensive Behavior: USSR) found that red light disturbed alpha rhythm and caused irritability. Green was stablizing and modulatory. Blue had an exhaustive and suppressive effect on the mind, it was draining. Yellow improved work and sense of wellbeing. Plant growth can be modulated by magnetic fields and visible light spectrum. Lastly, being exposed to intense blue light outside the window of time when it would naturally come from the sun, disrupts circadian rhythm, causes neurodegeneration, and promotes cancer. I strongly recommend wearing yellow shades for night driving. Those bright white LED headlights are not only obnoxious and blind you, they actually cause retinal damage. Flickering LEDs (square wave modulation essentially) cause shockwaves to propagate through the eye. See eg the 1960's FDA symposium on phototherapy for a paper on that, though probably a lot of work has been done since then. LED monitors may also cause retinal damage. LED backlit LCD panels aren't good if they're bright and you're looking at a lot of blue, but overall they're nowhere near as bad. So far only France has issued warnings last I knew, and recognized these risks, even they've been well established in the literature for a long time. "

@@Acetyl53 I like your long statement much better. On the subject of computer glasses though, the computer can reduce the blue light for you before it even leaves your monitor, so wearing glasses for that purpose is an unnecessary discomfort. The computer can't refocus the image, however, so you actually need glasses for that purpose.

@@yahm0n Yeah, I use f.lux and others, but sometimes just putting on yellow glasses is more effective because there is a general trend of putting blue lights on literally everything. The num caps scroll lock lights on my keyboard, until I taped over them with a few layers of masking tape, were an intense blinding blue. They're still a bit too bright, but better. Speakers, same deal, intense blue ring around the volume knob to show they're on, have to cover it with something. And so on. In urban environments you'll also have LED streetlights and various other sources. So it really is everywhere, not just the screens.

I’ll have to try it out

@@ThioJoe can you recommend a spectrometer?

@@Iam2lazy2register A really cheap one would be your phone's camera on raw mode. You can use a spectrometer to calibrate it one time and then you'll have a LUT.

​@@HAWXLEADER i don't think this would help. The camera sensor can only read distinct primary colors. for example if the red and blue pixels are triggert it has no idea if it sees red and blue light at the same time or perhaps a single violet light

@@cookednick I appreciate your answer, however I have to respectfully disagree. I think you are aware that "violet" light is not the same as simply adding "red" and "blue" light in terms of physics. Only our eyes (and cameras) can not tell the difference between those two scenarios. A spectrometer does exactly that: I measures the intensity of rays of each frequency separately of a given electromagnetic spectrum (typically a bit more then the visible light).

The lots of talk about it is simply companies taking advantage of people who don't know better, in order to sell them a product they don't need

It's this sort of myth that is used to scare customers into buying products. All research done on blue light is either inconclusive or cannot prove any correlation of "blue" light affecting sleep patterns and/or being bad in general. The presence of artificial lights CAN affect the circadian rhythm, but that's all light in general, independent of the hue. The only good use of the blue filters we have in our devices is that by making screens appear more red we reduce their apparent brightness, which is good if you don't want to be blinded every time you look at your phone in the evening.

That and they don't bother with a proper value of resistor, so they're not just blue lights, they're brighter than the sun itself. I had to tape over the back of my PC's wifi card because it just constantly strobes a blinding blue light for some reason.

Regular clear eyeglasses (plastic lenses) filter UV too (don't know about IR).

Is it??

Could you share which brand you have please?

I never could have imagined such a thing lol

there are even chicken glasses with red lens for this exact reason haha I've seen it on a show. just search "storage wars chicken glasses"

@@trei2unu I had seen that in a science book from the 70's Seems the lighting was more workable in the end. I suppose you could GMO a color-blind fowl these days.

I know a few people who don’t like the look of “Daylight” bulbs. I prefer them. IMO, everything looks better with them. I don’t like the look of yellowish bulbs.

A good incandescent alternative are the *filament* LED bulbs that are around 2700-3000k. Just make sure they're high CRI, preferably 90+

Try looking up 'barium sulphate latex paint' for an idea of how to make your rooms *MUCH* brighter.

I can't comment for the incandescent under spectroscopy, but a traditional incandescent bulb (and Halogen bulbs, if I'm not mistaken) have a CRI of 1. This is because both sources are black-body radiators, and emit full-spectrum light. Imitating daylight with these sources is just a matter of applying a gel, which essentially acts as a modifier for the base XY chromacity coordinates. To emulate daylight, the traditional way to do it is using a type of light called an HMI. These have a CRI of approx 90+, so are generally regarded as having good colour reproduction. However, it's worth noting that more modern professional-grade (real professional grade, not just whatever the packaging says!) LEDs can achieve a CRI of 95, and have been getting more popular as they have much lower power requirements and weight than a comparable HMI for the same level of output. Another bonus for LEDs, is that for large panels may not need any additional diffusion as their "source" is larger. Not 100% sure about the fire stuff, but I'd assume they would also have a CRI of 1 as they are again, black-body radiators.

He showed RGB lights at one point in the video; it basically has 3 peaks for R, G, and B. RGBW means that there's an additional broad-spectrum (white) emitter. The exact shape of the spectrum emitted by the white channel depends on how it's generated, but overall you would see R, G, and B peaks overlaid on the W channel's spread-out curve.

But but but - that would be too easy to use and for free - can't use that for marketing scam-articles.

Or. he could just adjust the monitor's own settings.

Damn!!! Price is insane