I completely agree with you, it’s a bunch of BS.
However, if it helps you feel better you can look up diffuse reflection eye danger (such as with wood) and you will find that even unprotected (no enclosure) diffuse reflections will only cause eye damage if you stare at the spot for extended time.
Look at the class IV eye hazard for diffuse reflection.
https://www.lasersafetyfacts.com/laserclasses.html
i found that using wide electrical tape over the cracks works well and makes it light and fume tight…
not that im happy i had to macgyver my $600 enclosure…
That may be true about limited risks. BUT for $600 I expect the enclosure to live up to its touted features. “Laser filtering” does not imply PARTIAL filtering IMO. But I guess the $64,000 questions is: WHY HASN’T SNAPMAKER RESPONDED TO THIS CONCERN IN THEIR OWN FORUM???
Ha, we all know the answer to that. here’s the only ‘response’ I’m aware of:
Paints a picture, eh?
My own unscientific guesstimate: since the laser is in the visible spectrum I compared it to the OD1.19 goggles and OD6 goggles I have, and I’d gander it’s just over OD1.19 worth of light reduction, it seems darker but nowhere near the complete blocking of the OD6 goggles. Decent protection for short term, inadequate for long term without additional goggles, especially if you (like all people) are wont to stare at the bright blue dot.
Or on the FB groups no matter how many times it’s been called into question.
-S
Are you completely sure about that phrase “such a talented team”? I wouldn’t use that phrase. They’ve proven barely adequate over and over again, and occasionally grossly incompetent. There are a very few cases of above-average design on these machines, to be sure, but largely it’s tiny disappointments piling up on top of each other.