• Ultraviolet Photography
  •  

Flashlight?

Fluorescence
26 replies to this topic

#21 Andy Perrin

    Member

  • Members+G
  • 4,416 posts
  • Location: United States

Posted 05 March 2020 - 02:11

Hm, that link lists two differently-powered Convoys AND it claims the LED has been changed to a different one. It would be nice to know how to distinguish old and new Convoys and also if anything has changed from what we previously knew about the spectrum etc. Price jumped also...

Edited by Andy Perrin, 05 March 2020 - 02:13.


#22 Cadmium

    Member

  • Members+G
  • 4,246 posts

Posted 05 March 2020 - 03:08

Those use Cree or LG LED's, and supposedly a little higher power, but as yet no one here has tested the actual output compared to a Nichia for example.
Once John gets one, then we will have some idea I suppose.
Gearbest has been out of the usual Convoy S2+ Nicha 365nm UV torches, but those are still available other places for usual the $20/$23+ price.

Edited by Cadmium, 05 March 2020 - 03:12.


#23 dabateman

    Da Bateman

  • Members+G
  • 3,004 posts
  • Location: Maryland

Posted 05 March 2020 - 08:58

View PostBill De Jager, on 05 March 2020 - 01:49, said:



Right here: https://www.fluoresc...cts-convoy.html

I just bought one and it's a nice, bright UV source.

Ok see the yellow warning label on the light. That might just make it US compliant.
Interesting that this person owns the patent to sell this and everything else is counterfeit.
That might put a damper on someones ebay sales. But might be fought depending on if product is different, which it kind of is and whether the patent is voided. As it does seem like a silly patent.

#24 dabateman

    Da Bateman

  • Members+G
  • 3,004 posts
  • Location: Maryland

Posted 05 March 2020 - 09:08

Ok after just reading the patent, my personal opinion, not supported by anyone else. Is that its crap and should be invalidated in court. This has been previously published and is in the public domain.
Which ever patent examiner approved this should hange they head down in shame.
The world of microscopy has published this prior to filing in 2008.
It may also be kicked out soon as I see some current cases.

Here is just one paper dated 2005 from quick search to add to your court case if sued:
https://pubag.nal.us...v/catalog/50555

Edited by dabateman, 05 March 2020 - 09:19.


#25 Alaun

    Member

  • Members(+)
  • 324 posts

Posted 05 March 2020 - 18:06

He writes, he started to sell in 2006 and filed the patent in 2007 ....
Werner

#26 dabateman

    Da Bateman

  • Members+G
  • 3,004 posts
  • Location: Maryland

Posted 06 March 2020 - 06:08

View PostAlaun, on 05 March 2020 - 18:06, said:

He writes, he started to sell in 2006 and filed the patent in 2007 ....

He may have started writing in 2007, but the patent filing date is clearly February 7, 2008.
https://patents.goog...atent/US7781751

In 2013 he sued Purple Passion Company, for infringing on the patent. The case was dismissed.

As of January 29, 2020 he is also sueing a bunch more people. I hope they have better lawyers.

If I were selling a UV LED flashlight with a U340 filter. I would be compiling evidence right now with prior in the public domain publications and comments from here of users whom have used such filters on lights to indicate that this patent should not have been issued an is common knowledge in the public domain.


#27 Cadmium

    Member

  • Members+G
  • 4,246 posts

Posted 06 March 2020 - 08:13

I wonder if anyone has patented grouping multiple UV torches together with rubber bands?
Come to think of it, I bet someone has patented the rubber band?! Gulp! :wacko:
See link:
https://www.ultravio...dpost__p__33849

Edited by Cadmium, 06 March 2020 - 08:36.