h a l f b a k e r yStill more entertaining than cricket.
add, search, annotate, link, view, overview, recent, by name, random
news, help, about, links, report a problem
browse anonymously,
or get an account
and write.
register,
|
|
|
Standard flash would ruin the black light effect. How can this not be baked? Couldn’t find references on a Google search. I’m not a photographer, so if this has been baked for ages, let me know and I will delete.
GE #22R Infrared
http://www.dhios.de...lbs/Bulbs/GE22r.htm
Black flash bulb. Wrong side of the spectrum, though. [jutta, Sep 08 2001]
This guy probably knows what to do by now.
http://www.greenspu...g.tcl?msg_id=000VxH
Asking in Phillip Greenspun's photography forum: "Presently we use a large UV flash with our film cameras. [...] I don't want any visible light on the subject." (I deduce that there are professional grade UV flashes.) [jutta, Sep 08 2001]
Mentions a UV fill-in flash
http://www.foto.no/nikon/uvir00.html
Done with a traditional flash and a UV bandpass filter placed over the flash head. [jutta, Sep 08 2001]
UV flash head
http://www.bhphotov...lash_Head_with.html
Several UV flash/strobe systems are available. This is one of them. [gen1000, Jun 02 2009]
Please log in.
If you're not logged in,
you can see what this page
looks like, but you will
not be able to add anything.
Annotation:
|
| |
Why would you want to photograph interiors lit by a black light using a flash? If you want to keep the cool lighting effects of clubs, just use a *really* expensive camera with sensitive film OR not so sensitive film but at a slower shutter speed. (right?) |
|
| |
Anyway, some form of this would have to have been baked for forensic scientists, a scientist friend informs me. They use black lights all the time, apparently. |
|
| |
Remember that in this scenario the interior is lit by black light only. I was supposing that slow shutter speed (the only way I know to capture an image in photography in low light) would not work if there was any motion in the field of view. Or rather, it would work, but any bodies in motion would be blurred. |
|
| |
Nice to see someone else is up at this hour, too. |
|
| |
...[stretching and yawning] it's 3pm on a sunny Saturday afternoon here. |
|
| |
jutta: The photo at the other end of that link doesn't seem to show a flashbulb, but a light bulb, or rather a darkbulb I suppose. Optics isn't my specialty, but this seems to be something other than my suggestion. |
|
| |
There exist UV LEDs, and LEDs can be flashed, so this shouldn't be too hard. Might need a lot of them to get a decent amount of light, but it'd be cool as anything to suddenly have everything white in the room GLARE at you... |
|
| |
[snarfyguy], it's in a collection of flash bulbs, it's called a flash bulb in the text, the package that you see when you click on the photograph has "Photoflash" written on it, and the underground photographer who collects them even mentions their guide number. Work with me here... |
|
| |
(However, it's not quite what you requested because it's an _infrared_ bulb, not the ultraviolet bulb you'd need. I couldn't find any sign of UV bulbs, although there is plenty of UV flashing going on otherwise.) |
|
| |
UV is not the best for eyes, and as flashes get a surprise attack before the blink reflex / iris contraction set in this would be a sure way to eternal darkness. |
|
| |
Yes, but the duration is very short and the total amount of
energy delivered is probably (I'm guessing) less than you'd
get by standing outside on bright day for a minute. |
|
| |
(Irrelevant side note: we recently got a microsecond-flash
for freeze-framing very fast things; a colleague wanted me
to fit all kinds of warning signs and make everyone wear
safety goggles because this thing was SO bright, delivering
so much light in one microsecond. In fact, you could
watch it flash until the cows come home - the eye
averages over too long a time period for it to do any
harm.) |
|
| |
A flash is rather harmless, that is why it hurts to look into a welding arc with UV100% sunglasses, but your eyes recover. Without the UV shielding there's lasting damage. But you are right, [MaxwellBuchanan], a short flash would probably not deliver enough energy. |
|
| |
Don't standard xenon flashes produce a lot of UV, which is typically filtered
out by the glass? Just take a xenon flashbulb (quartz envelope to transmit
UV) and put it behind a Wood's glass window instead of a normal glass one.
(The tube and the Wood's glass will probably wear out at different rates,
so it'll be convenient to be able to replace them separately, if you use your
UV flash so much over your lifetime that either wears out.) |
|
| |
// UV is not the best for eyes, and as flashes get a surprise attack before
the blink reflex / iris contraction set in this would be a sure way to eternal
darkness. // |
|
| |
Why not a visible preflash to contract people's irises? |
|
| |