• Ultraviolet Photography

Paper: Conventional sunscreen application does not lead to sufficient body coverage

4 replies to this topic

#1 JMC


  • Members(+)
  • 337 posts
  • Location: London, UK

Posted 05 October 2017 - 07:54

Here's a recent paper from the International Journal of Cosmetic science which uses UVA reflectance photography to look at how people miss areas of their bodies when applying sunscreens.

Attached File  Conventional sunscreen application does not lead to sufficient body coverage 2017.pdf   505.6K   53 downloads

Link to the article in the journal;

To be honest there are a few interesting points in the paper which I would have questioned if I'd been sent it to reviewed - why they chose and used a Canon 50mm macro lens when the photos are full body, what was the spectral output from the flashes, how did they determine whether the light areas were just specular reflection or were actually low in sunscreen, who did the camera conversion etc etc? However, good to see they used a Baader U, and not a B+W 403....

#2 JCDowdy


  • Members
  • 1,113 posts
  • Location: Arlington, TN

Posted 05 October 2017 - 14:44

An interesting paper, thanks!

Agree with your review points and would add that I would like to have seen better detail on the method for determining body surface area.

The flash unit, like some other studio strobes, is available with uncoated flash tubes and according to the manual it also has a Pyrex dome. At a minimum, the authors should have indicated if uncoated tubes were used and, while relatively UV-A transparent, whether or not the Pyrex was removed.

#3 Andrea B.

    Desert Dancer

  • Owner-Administrator
  • 6,216 posts
  • Location: USA

Posted 05 October 2017 - 20:47

Happy to see that our members have a good critical eye. Is it too late to ask questions of the authors?

You two should get together and write a Protocol for Photographing Sunscreened People. :D :D :D :D :D
Andrea G. Blum
Often found hanging out with flowers & bees.

#4 JMC


  • Members(+)
  • 337 posts
  • Location: London, UK

Posted 07 October 2017 - 14:33

It's not too late to ask questions, Andrea, but it is too late for changes to the paper. The cosmetic world can be very protective of its secrets though, so don't be surprised if answers aren't forthcoming.

I'd love to get more into Invivo UV imaging, but there is the ethics of deliberately irradiating people with UV for scientific research to keep in mind.

#5 Andy Perrin


  • Members(+)
  • 1,333 posts
  • Location: United States

Posted 07 October 2017 - 20:50

One interesting thought: UVA and UVB are currently used for treatment of certain scalp conditions. If the patient is ALREADY being exposed to UV, one might be able to ask permission to take photos. Of course the photos would have to be of the scalp!

Edited by Andy Perrin, 07 October 2017 - 20:51.