Mario Possiwan | EssilorLuxottica: How is a European project making a PFAS-free, spin-coated holographic resin reach 80% diffraction efficiency?
09:59 - 11:46
Other snippets from this talk
Summary of the clip:
How is a European project making a PFAS-free, spin-coated holographic resin reach 80% diffraction efficiency?
Existing holographic materials include Covestro’s bayfill films, but with Covestro no longer exactly a European company, a European route is being handled by the University of Audasa. They are developing a new resin that will be spin-coated. It is complex: binder, additives, a monomer that polymerizes, and a photoinitiating system. These components work together or against each other and set the final diffraction efficiency.
That complexity is compounded by commercial IP. Companies like Covestro have worked on these materials for a while, so the IP space is already well covered; developers must avoid infringing anyone’s IP. PFAS adds another constraint: it is good chemistry but not good for people or other living things, so Audasa is also pursuing a PFAS-free solution. Their latest graph shows the PFAS material’s diffraction efficiency is already quite good.
The result is up to 80% diffraction efficiency for the PFAS material in a multiplex system, where red, green and blue holograms are recorded in one layer. That is very nice and something they will use soon. For now, bayfill films are still used because this development started. PFAS is good chemistry but not good for people and other living things, so a PFAS-free solution is also being pursued.
In this short video, you can learn:
* The new holographic resin is spin-coated and combines binder, additives, polymerizing monomer and photoinitiating system.
* Covestro’s bayfill films are the incumbent, but the IP space is well covered and PFAS-free chemistry is being pursued.
* Audasa’s latest PFAS material reaches up to 80% diffraction efficiency for R, G and B holograms multiplexed in one layer.
📋 **Clip Abstract** A European effort led by the University of Audasa is developing a spin-coated resin for holographic AR lenses, with binder, additives, monomer and photoinitiating system balanced for diffraction efficiency. The latest PFAS-free material reaches up to 80% diffraction efficiency in a multiplex R/G/B single-layer recording, while bayfill films remain in use.
About the speaker:
* Speaker: Mario Possiwan
* Company: EssilorLuxottica
* Event: Eindhoven 2026
* Location: High Tech Campus, Eindhoven
#PfasFreeResin, #SpinCoatedResin, #DiffractionEfficiency, #MultiplexHolograms, #AROptics, #HolographicLenses
This is a highlight of the presentation:
POPULAR - Prescription Optics Providing a Universal Lens for Augmented Reality Eyewear
More Highlights from the same talk.
03:14 - 04:46
Why choose a holographic combiner over a waveguide for prescription augmented reality eyewear?
Why choose a holographic combiner over a waveguide for prescription augmented reality eyewear?
Waveguides carry well-known advantages, but the drawbacks matter for prescription eyewear: they are relatively thick and relatively heavy, especially once prescription is added. Push and pull lenses are required, and that adds further thickness and weight. Lens shape is also constrained — any shape must be considered during the waveguide design phase rather than chosen freely afterwards. That rigid coupling of optics and frame geometry is the core problem.
The holographic approach is not going to be as good in terms of the image as waveguides: field of view and eye box are limited. Because the holographic approach uses prescription lenses, the decades of progress made with prescription lenses are inherited, and prescription is already provided automatically. That trade of image performance for optical simplicity and wearability is the design choice.
Polymer lenses are relatively thin and low weight, and the polymer film adds only a few tens of micrometers, so it does not really hurt the weight budget. Lens shape is free: the variety of frame shapes in any room shows what can be accommodated. The software partner, Tech2heal, routes the image information towards the user's eye.
In this short video, you can learn:
* Waveguides are relatively thick and relatively heavy once prescription is added, because push and pull lenses increase both thickness and weight.
* Lens shape must be considered during the waveguide design phase, while the holographic approach allows any shape.
* The holographic approach loses image quality, field of view and eye box but gains automatic prescription and a polymer film of a few tens of micrometers that barely adds mass.
📋 **Clip Abstract** The talk compares waveguides with a holographic approach for prescription augmented reality eyewear, weighing waveguide thickness, weight and lens-shape constraints against a limited field of view and eye box. It concludes that thin, low-weight polymer lenses and a polymer film of a few tens of micrometers deliver prescription automatically and leave lens shape entirely free.
About the speaker:
* Speaker: Mario Possiwan
* Company: EssilorLuxottica
* Event: Eindhoven 2026
* Location: High Tech Campus, Eindhoven
#HolographicCombiner, #PrescriptionLensStack, #PolymerLensFilm, #EyeBoxAndFieldOfView, #AugmentedRealityEyewear, #SmartGlassesOptics
14:23 - 16:39
What physical and optical specs define the latest hand-assembled holographic prescription AR prototype?
What physical and optical specs define the latest hand-assembled holographic prescription AR prototype?
The latest prototype is hand-assembled rather than an industrial process: the frame is designed, 3D printed, a hologram is recorded, and the parts are put together. These monochromatic frames already went to user testing with prescriptions from minus two to plus two diopters. That range can be increased; there is no reason it cannot go further. It is not an industrial process for this project.
The optical field of view is only 10 degrees, which is good enough for the three use cases: you will not watch a TikTok video while rowing, and a doctor is hopefully not doing that during a procedure. The eyebox is four by eight millimetres. About 40 people tried them in the last user test, and all could see the image. Increasing field of view would impact build volume and/or eyebox.
The display uses only two milliwatts, and this is for a fully green display. The whole system is quite lightweight: frames, lenses, nose pad, display, the rest of the light engine, PCB, and battery total 40 to 45 grams. This depends on the prescription because different lenses for the prescriptions are involved in the assembly.
In this short video, you can learn:
* The latest prototype is hand-assembled and monochromatic, using a designed 3D-printed frame and a recorded hologram, not an industrial process.
* It was tested with prescriptions from minus two to plus two diopters, with no reason the range cannot be increased further.
* The 10-degree field of view, four-by-eight-millimetre eyebox, two-milliwatt green display, and 40-to-45-gram total were sufficient for about 40 users who all saw the image.
📋 **Clip Abstract** The prototype is hand-assembled from a 3D-printed frame, recorded hologram, and light engine. It supports minus two to plus two diopters, delivers a 10-degree field of view through a four-by-eight-millimetre eyebox, uses a two-milliwatt green display, and weighs 40 to 45 grams, with about 40 users all seeing the image.
About the speaker:
* Speaker: Mario Possiwan
* Company: EssilorLuxottica
* Event: Eindhoven 2026
* Location: High Tech Campus, Eindhoven
#HologramRecording, #3DPrintedFrame, #GreenDisplay, #Eyebox4x8mm, #AugmentedReality, #AROptics
08:34 - 10:00
What are the power consumption and development trade-offs of using micro-OLED displays in AR eyewear?
What are the power consumption and development trade-offs of using micro-OLED displays in AR eyewear?
The work started with green micro-OLED displays used by Micro-OLED and EnGo in the Active Look platform. Green fell out of favour after the 1990s, so the push is now toward colour. With Micro-OLED and the Fraunhofer Institute, the team can start from the design phase, build displays in the lab, and then test them. That lets them move from design to lab fabrication to testing.
For green, the highlighted result is very low power: two milliwatts, which fits quite well into the one-watt demand heard yesterday. For color, the images are real captures from displays built so far. Power consumption is, of course, a bit higher, as expected. That covers the display itself. The color route raises the power budget beyond the green baseline.
All prototypes built so far and delivered for testing are green, because RGB development was more complex. As is sometimes the case with wave patterns, things do not work all the time, so you wait for the next one. After the display, the light must reach the hologram, and a hologram needs photopolymer. That material step follows the display.
In this short video, you can learn:
* Green micro-OLED displays consume two milliwatts, fitting the one-watt system demand cited at the event.
* All delivered prototypes are green because RGB development is more complex, and wave-pattern issues mean waiting for the next build.
* The light path moves from the display to the hologram, which requires photopolymer.
📋 **Clip Abstract** Green micro-OLED displays in the Active Look platform draw two milliwatts, within a one-watt demand, while color versions show higher power in real captured images. Prototypes delivered for testing remain green because RGB development is more complex, and the next optical step needs photopolymer for the hologram.
About the speaker:
* Speaker: Mario Possiwan
* Company: EssilorLuxottica
* Event: Eindhoven 2026
* Location: High Tech Campus, Eindhoven
#MicroOLED, #ActiveLook, #FraunhoferInstitute, #PhotopolymerHologram, #AugmentedRealityOptics, #WearableDisplayOptics