• Take 30 seconds to register your free account to access deals, post topics, and view exclusive content!

    Register Today

    Join the largest Oakley Forum on the web!

Can the iridium coating affect the base tint appearance?

But here's one that seriously needed some testing - Violet, donated by @Rusty M. We've already shown with the Ruby test the the base tint color can be significantly altered by the iridium. But can it be altered so much that a neutral base becomes contrast? That's been the argument around Violet...

1.jpg


Now that tint is indisputably contrast...

2.jpg


3.jpg


On to the test...

With a little bit of the iridium removed...

4.jpg


And by the time I got this far...

5.jpg


It was looking like this...

6.jpg


And here's the final result...

7.jpg


8.jpg


9.jpg


And there you go. Violet actually has a neutral grey base tint, and it appears contrast because of the iridium.

Frankly, I did not expect this. I thought the base tint would be contrast. I'm shocked. Flabbergasted. Gobstoppered. I'm very glad I performed this test; the truth is revealed.

But it does beg the question - should Violet be considered neutral or contrast? Despite the base tint being neutral, with the iridium it still looks and functions as a contrast lens. Does the base tint have to be contrast to be considered a contrast lens, or is the end result what's important, regardless of which component provides the contrast effect?

Personally I believe it should still be classified as a contrast tint. But now we know with certainty that the base tint is actually neutral, and the contrast is an effect of the iridium...
 
Last edited:
But here's one that seriously needed some testing - Violet, donated by @Rusty M. We've already shown with the Ruby test the the base tint color can be significantly altered by the iridium. But can it be altered so much that a neutral base becomes contrast? That's been the argument around Violet...

View attachment 182186

Now that tint is indisputably contrast...

View attachment 182178

View attachment 182179

On to the test...

With a little bit of the iridium removed...

View attachment 182180

And by the time I got this far...

View attachment 182181

It was looking like this...

View attachment 182182

And here's the final results...

View attachment 182187

View attachment 182184

View attachment 182185

And there you go. Violet actually has a neutral grey base tint, and it appears contrast because of the iridium.

Frankly, I did not expect this. I thought the base tint would be contrast. I'm shocked. Flabbergasted. Gobstoppered. I'm very glad I performed this test; the truth is revealed.

But it does beg the question - should Violet be considered neutral or contrast? Despite the base tint being neutral, with the iridium it still looks and functions as a contrast lens. Does the base tint have to be contrast to be considered a contrast lens, or is the end result what's important, regardless of which component provides the contrast effect?

Personally I believe it should still be classified as a contrast tint. But now we know with certainty that the base tint is actually neutral, and the contrast is an effect of the iridium...

how were you removing the iridium?
 
But here's one that seriously needed some testing - Violet, donated by @Rusty M. We've already shown with the Ruby test the the base tint color can be significantly altered by the iridium. But can it be altered so much that a neutral base becomes contrast? That's been the argument around Violet...

View attachment 182186

Now that tint is indisputably contrast...

View attachment 182178

View attachment 182179

On to the test...

With a little bit of the iridium removed...

View attachment 182180

And by the time I got this far...

View attachment 182181

It was looking like this...

View attachment 182182

And here's the final results...

View attachment 182187

View attachment 182184

View attachment 182185

And there you go. Violet actually has a neutral grey base tint, and it appears contrast because of the iridium.

Frankly, I did not expect this. I thought the base tint would be contrast. I'm shocked. Flabbergasted. Gobstoppered. I'm very glad I performed this test; the truth is revealed.

But it does beg the question - should Violet be considered neutral or contrast? Despite the base tint being neutral, with the iridium it still looks and functions as a contrast lens. Does the base tint have to be contrast to be considered a contrast lens, or is the end result what's important, regardless of which component provides the contrast effect?

Personally I believe it should still be classified as a contrast tint. But now we know with certainty that the base tint is actually neutral, and the contrast is an effect of the iridium...
By my personal definition, it's a contrast. If the tint mutes natural color without alteration, it's neutral. If it mutes color and also alters the perceived color, it's contrast.

Thanks to @Walleva LLC for making lenses that are specially tuned to contrast the colors of my garbage can.
 
i personally think the end result of the tint+iridium effect = if you can call it neutral or contrast. the end result when your looking through it is what you use with your eyes so i don't see a reason to just go by base tint alone.

interesting results for Violet though, because i am not a fan of contrast but i like how violet looks on the outside. i am "putting up with the tint" to wear them. lol.

i love the blue hue of Ruby though. my favorite to look through and my favorite to look at all rolled into one lens.
 
Last edited:
Well, eff me. It looks so like fire to look through, I swore it was the same lens base. Well, that's my position well and truly changed then.

As an encore, don't go on to prove black is white. It makes zebra crossings tricky and dangerous...
 
Back
Top