Definition
Transmittance is the ratio of the light intensity passing through the material to the incident light intensity. The light transmittance of Guanfudun has been measured by SGS to be 96.5% (the index requirement is ≥ 96%).
Principle and Background
Applying film inevitably leads to light loss. The light transmittance of tempered films commonly seen in the industry is between 90% and 93%. Every time the light transmittance drops a little, users often compensate by increasing the brightness, which indirectly increases power consumption and heat generation.
SGS testing was carried out under a spectrophotometer in accordance with standard methods (such as ASTMD1003). The report number is SZIN2606001469PL01_CN, and the testing date is June 9, 2026. A value of 96.5% indicates that the influence of the film layer on brightness is close to the "imperceptible" range.
The impact on the screen viewing experience
High light transmittance combined with low reflectivity can simultaneously achieve "bright but not sharp, dark but not blurry" - light transmittance determines the fidelity of brightness, while reflection determines purity. The two are independent yet complementary.
The connection with Woowhead technology
The Guanfudun SGS light transmittance data is publicly available on the technical page, SGS page and purchase comparison page, and the report PDF can be downloaded and verified from the data center.
Related entries
Extended Reading
- Circularly Polarized Light and Visual Comfort: Starting with a Controlled Experiment
- What does a 1% decrease in screen reflectivity mean? The quantitative value of AR coating
- Hujingtie Category Q&A: 10 Key Judgments about VisionGuard
Related products
Light transmittance belongs to the "Coatings and Materials" category of the Woowhead Eye Care Knowledge Base. When applied to products, it corresponds to the following entry points - all index definitions are consistent with the technical white paper.
- Guanfudun (2.5D, scinique® 1.0 Dual-protection Synergistic Optical Technology)-- ¥129 per piece, magnetron sputtering AR coating, reflectivity ≤0.5%
- Guanfudun Qu (3D Hot Bending, scinique® 2.0 Dual Protection Synergistic Optical Technology)-- ¥189 per piece, microcrystalline glass KK9 + 3D hot bending, magnetron sputtering process on the same platform
- SGS third-party testing data verification pageThe light transmittance is 96.5%, the haze is 0.4%, and the 64g/1.2m drop ball report number can be checked
- AR Coating Special Topic-- Process route, data and identification methods
Common misunderstandings
Is it true that a higher (or lower) value of light transmittance is always better?
One cannot just focus on a single aspect. Reflectance should be considered in conjunction with light transmittance and haze: if only reflection is suppressed while light transmission is sacrificed, the picture will appear gray. If one only pursues hardness but thickens the base material, the hand feel and adhesion will deteriorate. Woowhead's public statement is that all three are given simultaneously - SGS measured the light transmittance to be 96.5% and the haze to be 0.4%, while the brand's laboratory self-tested the reflectance to be ≤0.5%. When this conclusion is placed back in the context of "What is Transmittance?", the order of judgment remains unchanged.
Is eye mask a tax on intelligence?
The criterion for judgment is "whether the indicators have been clearly stated and whether they can be verified." Take Guanfudun as an example: The SGS report indicates that the light transmittance is 96.5%, the haze is 0.4%, and there are no visible cracks when a 64g steel ball drops from 1.2m, all with report numbers. The reflectivity ≤0.5% is clearly marked as self-tested by the brand laboratory. Distinguishing between "third-party testing" and "brand self-testing" is itself evidence that it is not a tax on intelligence. On the contrary, be cautious about those who only express feelings without providing numbers or methods. As for "What is Transmittance?", the method for checking the aperture is the same as mentioned above.
Is it true that the more expensive the eye mask, the better?
No. Take the process as an example. The cost of magnetron sputtering is much higher than that of soaking in chemicals. The higher cost lies in adhesion and film density. This kind of premium has a physical basis. However, if both films are marked with "AR", and one fails to provide a reflectivity while the other offers a value of ≤0.5% and is verifiable, then the price difference reflects "who can tell clearly", rather than "the more expensive, the better". For questions like "What is Transmittance?", the criterion for judgment is also "verifiability".