Page 5 of 5 FirstFirst 12345
Results 41 to 48 of 48

Thread: Lightwave International and their questionable Phenom claims

  1. #41
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    My momentum is too precisely determined :S
    Posts
    1,777

    Default

    IMO, when somebody calls out a company or product because they think the claims made are simply impossible, but it turns out the product meets the claims after all, then it's not libel, it's advertisement!

  2. #42
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Norway
    Posts
    132

  3. #43
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    5,704

    Default

    TBH I feel sorry for PJ as I think this thread became a bit of a witch hunt. There are ways of defending the company and / or pointing out incorrect assumptions politely without lynching the guy, which is what it felt like in places....

    With regard to that video Aage, interesting but I think also having seen it that maybe Norty was right that maybe LW might have not had the lenses in place when they filmed the video on their web page as that one looks to me at lot more fuzzy than the other one, well either that or the fog was just too heavy in the 2nd video, because it certainly was well fogged.

  4. #44
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    East Sussex, England
    Posts
    5,248

    Default

    maybe Norty was right

    When has maybe ever applied...?
    Frikkin Lasers
    http://www.frikkinlasers.co.uk

    You are using Bonetti's defense against me, ah?

    I thought it fitting, considering the rocky terrain.

  5. #45
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Fort Mill, SC USA
    Posts
    1,507

    Default

    ^^^^ 1:29 "Lasers used to take 5 long days to set up before any performance."

    Whaaaa??? I truly respect LWI and see the value in this product, but this wasn't the only comment in this video that I thought was misleading, overstated or lacking proper caveats. It just goes to show that you shouldn't let your marketing folks have too much rope . .

    -David
    Last edited by dkumpula; 01-19-2015 at 09:15. Reason: Clarification
    "Help, help, I'm being repressed!"

  6. #46
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    5,704

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by norty303 View Post
    When has maybe ever applied...?
    I'm just avoiding a mistake made earlier in this thread by another poster, never make a statement of fact. It's far better to keep it to opinion.

    ..and yep Norty speaking generally, you're usually right.

  7. #47
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Sydney, Australia
    Posts
    602

    Default

    I find it interesting that at 1:43 he states "without any special training" but then from 2:50 they show them using a scope for "calibration" of the presumed scanfail

    So, two things
    Would a scopes not require special training to use on the device and
    How many lighting guys carry a scope with them?
    RTI Piko RGB 4 Projector
    CT6215 Scanners & CT 671 Amps; CT6210 & Medialas Microamps.
    RGBLaser Systems 6000mW RGB Module - 638nm/445nm/532
    LD2000 Pro + QM2000.net + Beyond
    Etherdream + LSX

    Old Projector Build


  8. #48
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Bedfordshire, UK
    Posts
    603

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by loopee View Post
    ...and how many lighting guys carry a scope with them?
    Well... I tend to on bigger jobs. Part of my full touring electronics repair kit.
    If in doubt... Give it a clout?

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •