[nullc]

865nm too, presumably it only passes as class 1 eye-safe due to an time x power x aperture exposure calculation...

I wonder how much we have to blame ITAR restrictions on >1555nm lasers for things like this not being more eye-safe on a by-wavelength basis.

[Reelin]

> I wonder how much we have to blame ITAR restrictions on >1555nm lasers ...

I tried looking up information about this (restriction details, otherwise feasible uses beyond that wavelength, etc) but it's hard for an outsider to quickly make sense of. Any chance you could elaborate?

[nullc]

https://www.bis.doc.gov/index.php/documents/regulations-docs...

The main section on lasers starts on page 47. The rules are very complicated. See 6A995 d and f.

Lasers are also covered in other sections like 6A205. (I'm amused by Raman shifters being covered-- they're literally just pressurized tubes with hydrogen and mirrors at the end-- I can't imagine anyone qualified to use one couldn't have one fabricated pretty much anywhere).

[dmix]

Reading law is always full of weird stuff like that, in between thousands of lines of monotany.