Search the Community

ORIGINAL DATE: 2021 August 29 UPDATE 1 Aug 2023. Removed UVR Optics NIR-Block because not strong enough at OD2 in some regions. Replaced with reccie for BG39. UPDATE: 22 May 2023. Added suggestion for finding Schott/Hoya UV dual bandpass glass now that UVIR*Optics has gone out of business. UPDATE: 22 May 2023. Added AndreaU MK II and UVBplus to Name Brand Filter list.\ UPDATE: 9 April 2024: Added warning about Tangsinuo not providing the filter thickness requested by the customer. This is a "Best" list for some basic gear. Be sure to see the 2nd post for the UV-pass filters. UVP and its Owner/Admins have no monetary affiliation with any vendor. UVP and its Owner/Admins are "gear neutral". Use what you love using! All links are for your information only and do not constitute a vendor recommendation. Search around for the best prices. The recommendations here are for basic beginner gear. Your needs might be more specific or more advanced. If so, please consult the Stickies and check recent forum discussions. Note that there are NO camera or lens recommendations!! Everybody including their 3rd cousin's brother-in-law's mother's best friend has an opinion about UV-capable lenses and cameras and those opinions are all different. Try this search tag to find recent forum discussions: Camera Search Tag. In reflected UV photography, just as in Visible photography, we can say that better sensors do give better files. However, artistry in UV photography can be accomplished with any UV gear. SHOPPING WARNING: If you find some name-brand gear online at a price which seems too good to be true, then it is probably some imitation being passed off as authentic. Please shop only at a reputable online store. As one example, Alibaba was recently selling fake Zeiss T* UV-blocking filters. SAFETY Best UV Protection Glasses or Goggles: Yes, UV light is dangerous! Ever gotten a sunburn? Ever had snow-blindness? And UV damage to eyes & skin is cumulative. Look for at least 99% blockage and wrap-around protection in the safety glasses you choose. Here are two options. McMaster-Carr 99.9% UV Protection Rating The linked page shows wraparounds, panoramics which fit around the temple, and ventilated goggles. Prices range from $9 to $30. Here is a specific link for yellow or orange tinted goggles: https://www.mcmaster.com/eye-protectors/lens-color~yellow/lens-color~orange/uv-protection-rating~99-0-/ Here is a specific link for ventilated goggles: https://www.mcmaster.com/eye-protectors/lens-color~yellow/lens-color~orange/uv-protection-rating~99-0-/lens-style~panoramic/lens-properties~ventilated/ UVEX also makes very good protective glasses/goggles. The link is to the manufacturer's website which has scads of info about sports & safety glasses. To buy UVEX goggles it's probably best to google around for the best deal on Amazon or other websites. LIGHTING Best UV Illumination: SUNLIGHT !! "-) There's more UV in Sunlight at high altitudes. There's more UV in Sunlight in the middle of the day. There's more UV in Sunlight in summer. So, mountain top at high noon in July and you're good to go! However, if Sunlight is missing at sea level in the early morning in December, then see the next entry. Next Best UV Illumination: UV-Flash The Xenon flash tube must be uncoated. The Canon 199A is a current UVP favorite for modding into a UV-flash. But there are other possibilities. Use the next link. Lighting TAG Search Click that lighting tag search for further info about UV lighting. There will be info about UV-flashes in there somewhere. Ordinary Xenon flashes can be modified (DIY) with filters to pass only UV light. **WARNING** Please remember that flash units have murderous capacitors, so do not fry yourself dead by wonking around in the wrong part of the flash unit while changing the filtration. Mod a flash unit at your own risk!! Best Basic 365-nm UV-Led Torch: Convoy S2+ UV with Nichia Chip A NOTE: Recently the no-name "Nemo" torch has been more popular with the UVP Membership. Nemo search on UVP. Nemo search on Google. A UV-Led torch is used to supply light for focus illumination on the subject while focusing through Live View, or inducing Visible or IR fluorescence in a dark room, or light-painting a reflected UV subject during a long exposure. In the past Nichia was considered the best 365nm UV-Led Chip maker. But I don't think you should worry too much about either the brand or the grade of UV-Led chip because we are looking mostly for enough output (wattage). You might need two torches depending on how you make use of them. If you can find info about the UV-Led torch chip you are considering buying, look for an A grade UV-Led for best results. TORCH NOTE 1: The Convoy S2+ Nichia A torches are well-made, well regarded and meet stated specifications. If you want something less expensive, then you can take your chances with the unbranded UV torches sold on Ebay. Many of these do not meet their stated specifications. Please check the recent forum discussions for advice on unbranded torches! TORCH NOTE 2: That third use of a UV torch there in the bullet list? Let me point out the following: it's not easy to make a reflected UV photograph using only a UV torch. Exposures are long and results are noisy. The best reflected UV photos are made in strong sunlight or using a Xenon flash with a UV-pass filter. Sunlight and UV-flash produce more false color due to the wider range of UV. Best UV Light for Beginners, Intermediates and Advanced: UVA and UVB ONLY!! As for UVC, we say NO, just NO. UVC is too dangerous. And it is very difficult to find the filters, lenses and cameras which can record below 300 nm. There's scarcely any UVC light in sunlight anyway. So where would you find illumination? You don't want to even go near those 254 nm sanitizing bulbs which will break your DNA. Frankly, IMHO, what I've seen so far in UVC photography is not particularly impressive anyway. UVC is not where the beauty of reflected UV photography lies. It just isn't. If you must play with UVC, please remember that you have been warned by UltravioletPhotography.com NOT to do this. UltravioletPhotography.com cannot and will not accept any liability for damages you may incur from UVC light. Best Filter for Basic 365-nm UV-Led Torch: Hoya U-340 x 2.0 mm LINK to Transmission Chart LEDs have a fairly narrow output, but using this filter on your torch will ensure there is no violet/blue visible contamination when the torch is being used for inducing visible fluorescence. You do not need to filter your torch for non-fluorescent work. FILTERS Best UV/IR-Blocker for making Visible Light photos with Full-Spectrum Camera There will be opportunities to use your full-spectrum conversion in visible light. So replacing the removed internal UV/IR blocking will be necessary. Kolari Hot Mirror Pro 2 Best, IMHO. Link to UV/IR-Blocker tests Kolari's newest UV/IR-Blocker has a transmission curve which matches the transmission curves of most cameras internal filtration. White balance in-camera should give you good color. Any small deviations are easily tweaked in an app or by using a color correction profile. OR Schott BG38 x 2.0mm OR B+W 038 + [Longpass UV-Blocker] Filter stacks like this are somewhat more prone to flare & ghosting in backlit scenarios. Your choices for the longpass UV-Blocking component are: Schott GG400 or Schott GG420 Most camera makers' internal UV-cut filtration begins somewhere between 400-420 nm. Filter stacks work better if one of the components has AR-coating. That costs more though. Zeiss T* UV Filter This filter is regarded by many as the best UV blocker. It is AR-coated and cuts UV very well starting between 400-410 nm. Best IR-Blocker for making Reflected-UV photos with Full-Spectrum Camera Stack one of these over your UV-pass filter for extra protection against IR contamination. Schott S8612 x 2.0 mm LINK to IR-Blocker Transmission Charts for 2.0 mm Depending on the thickness of your dual bandpass filter, you might find that a thinner S8612 will suffice. But a 2.0 is almost universally useful and is the best thickness for your first purchase. Try to get one with AR coating. Recently S8612 has been difficult to find. OR Schott BG39 x 2.0 mm OR B+W 039 S8612 has become difficult to find, so look for this next best IR-blocker for working in UV with a full-spectrum camera. Best Chinese ZWB and Other Filters: Tangsinuo Technology This currently reputable vendor recommendation is subject to change. UPDATE 9 April 2024: Recently a UVP member has reported that the thicknesses of filters received from Tangsinuo have not matched the requested thicknesses in the order. For example, one filter was .5 mm thinner than requested. Please INSIST when ordering that your requested thickness is supplied or else you will give Tangsinuo a bad review and file a complaint with Ebay. LINK to Review by JMC Please remember that Chinese manufacturing is not currently subject to the same standards which apply elsewhere. Striations, pits and visible leakage have been seen with some of the Ebay Chinese filter purchases. And some of the filters don't quite match the expected transmission in either peaks or rate. But these equivalents of UV dual bandpass filters and BG filters are very much less expensive than the high quality Schott or Hoya glass, so most beginners use Chinese filters to get started. FILTERS is continued in the next post.

I've been playing around with building a UV microscope over the last year or so in between paid work (thanks Covid), which has been a fun build but very challenging. Most of my work with it is on sunscreens for a client and I cannot share those images yet, but I thought I would share a couple of of quick images of a diatom, from a Diatom Lab 2.0 test slide (see here - http://www.diatomlab.com/diatom-test-slide-version-2.0.html) The microscope is based on an Olympus BHB, and I've swapped all the glass in it for fused silica. In theory it can image down to about 250nm, but I'd need different camera/filters/light etc to get that low. With my setup I can image down to 313nm. I used a 100x NA0.85 Zeiss Ultrafluar objective, with glycerine immersion, and imaged using a monochrome converted Nikon d800. The images are stacks for 5 individual photos. The images were 'cleaned' (although looking at them now, not very well I hasten to add) and sharpened, but treated equally. The test slide mounting media lets some UV through, but is only good for 365nm (it is pretty much opaque below that). So I did visible (filtered 546nm light) and 365nm from a mercury xenon lamp. I thought I'd image Diatom 3 from the slide, which is Gyrosigma reimeri, and has about 18-22 longitudinal striae per 10um, or in other words about 500nm per striae. This is a severe test even for a high magnification, high NA objective, so should give my home built microscope with a 100x NA0.85 a real challenge. UV transmission microscopy was first developed in the pursuit of resolution, as resolution is directly related to wavelength. As such I expected the UV image to be higher resolution. Firstly, the visible image (546nm). This is the whole frame of the image. In visible light the striae are barely visible, but can just about be seen in the middle of the diatom. Secondly at 365nm, again as a full frame image. At 365nm the difference is pretty striking and the striae become visible. Cropping the 365nm image gives the following. Counting the striae gives 9 over the 5 micron distance or about 18 per 10 micron which is in keeping with the quoted number from the maker of the slide. It's a shame the mounting media in the test slide blocks the shorter wavelength UV, otherwise I'd try it at 313nm as well.

My Sony A7S does not appear to have any internal LEDs. I tried wrapping the entire camera in aluminum foil, putting the cap on the camera with no lens, and exposing for 2 minutes (121 sec) at ISO51200, which is the highest ISO I ever use in practice. Result: It did have a light leak though. ISO51200 at 62 sec, without foil:

In another topic I lately tried to improve an UV-torch marketed to have a 120W input, and failed due to the original electronics design. https://www.ultravioletphotography.com/content/index.php?/topic/5122-alonefire-h45-45w-dissection-and-analysis/page/2/ At the end I mentioned that I might do a major redesign adding proper constant current driver-circuits. I have now decided it is not at all worth the efforts and costs. I searched for suitable ICs to use and the only type I found also need a complete redesign of the metal board holding the LEDs. To make it work the LEDs the would have to be de-soldered and re-transplanted onto the new LED board. There would be a need for three DC-DC converter circuits that just might be fitted inside the torch too. The risks and total cost of such an adventure are way too high for a short period of almost constant intensity, before it would have to be automatically switched off to save the LEDs form dying. The drive power could never be much more than 20-30W, giving maximum 7 - 10 W optical power. I have to accept that the torch I bought is a real dud! I have another UV-illumination project that is more interesting to restart. It has been dormant a few years. It is based on a Copper based LED array that I already have. The array has 15 pcs of 10W 365nm LEDs mounted on a proper copper-based PCB. With proper cooling and constant current drivers it will be able to push out ca 50W OPTICAL power for a 150W input! I have already assembled the array, heatsink, fan and UV-pass filter holder: The heatsink and fan combination is suitable for cooling off the heat from the LEDs. There will be around 100W to take care of. The filter will be quite hot as the transmission of 2mm ZWB2 at 360-370nm is less than 100%. Just now I do not remember the exact numbers, but it is low enough to heat up the glass. I will do this project in two main steps. First the driving would come from a Lab power supply and I will focus on the mechanical and thermal design. That will be a nice flexible light source for indoors UVIVF. Later I might make this lamp portable, for outdoor usage, with some belt or shoulder-bag based battery + drive circuit. The weight of a driver circuit and batteries will be way too high to be comfortable being integrated together by the LED head with heatsink and fan. The driver will instead be connected to the LED Head with a flexible cable. The LED-head will be handled like an old fashioned search light. I think the battery packs and connection mechanics will be salvaged from some 18V hand tool system. There will be at least two battery packs driving the CC-conversion modules that will feed the LED-head cable.

Some time ago I bought an Alonefire H45 UV torch that turned out to be defect. I filed a Dispute at Aliexpress and got a rather substantial refund while allowed to keep the torch. I wanted to open it up to learn more how it was designed and why it failed and had a small hope of a possible repair. This is topic is about the trouble it have and what I found out taking it appart. The problem: My H45 overheats and fades very quickly when turned on. A proper intensity fading comparison between the H45, the Nemo and the Convoy S2+ give this result: All three torches had fully charged batteries and a measurement from the integrating sphere was taken every 3s. during 3min. After ca 1 1/2 min the H45 stabilises at the low intensity level without fading anymore. As the light pattern of the H45 is much wider than the pattern from Nemo the actual intensity appears much weaker from the H45 after a while. The rate of the fading is also slow enough to make the eyes adapt to the fluorescence light making a visual judgement very difficult. I measured the chip temperature at the end and it was over 160°C. This has led to a partial fail of one of the LEDs and a slight beginning of failing of another. The light from the three LEDs now differ with the failing one emitting less UV and a bit longer wavelengths. Overheating a LED way beyond its Maximum Rated Temperature is not a good idea. The problem with my H45 is not due to a lower selection grade of LEDs, but due to bad thermal design and assembly. Exactly as aphalo wrote "I think it is impossible that a torch this size can dissipate even 15W without quickly getting hot." The dissection: The Lamp head is opened by unscrewing the ring, holding the main PCB: It has oddly placed tool holes, but was not very tightly locked. The PCB can then be wiggled out by angling it to get the USB-C connector free from it's opening. After removing the front ring, UV-Pass filter and a silicone O-ring the LED cooling block can be unscrewed forward. Observe the threads on the block and inside the housing. Here was the main problem with my torch. The block was not tightened at all. Due to a very loose fit there was almost no direct thermal connection to the outer housing. Even when tightened the thermal contact area in such a thread is rather small. This is a design flaw. The thickness of the block together with the LED's copper based PCB are reasonably thick, more than 6mm and reasonably OK. There were sufficiently with thermal paste between the PCB and the Aluminum block. The PCB was secured against the block by the reflector that was held in place with the central screw. The three LEDs are connected in parallell and also have their four chips in parallell. They should be driven with constant current getting a forward voltage around 3.7V The Electronics: The main PCB have three functional blocks beside the switch and indicating LEDs. I have not seen any sign of a constant current control for the LEDs. The only thing that limits the current is the row of resistors by the red cable where two has been removed. The current is defined by the voltage of the batteries and the voltage over the LEDs and serial resistances in resistors, cables and contact points to the batteries. This is extremely primitive! The function of the board is controlled by a small 8-pin processor at bottom right, above the six resistor positions in a row. The battery charging is reasonably advanced with a switch mode charger circuit. The processor controls two 13A Mos-FETs to turn the UV on and off and likely by pulsing for the lower light position. Interestingly there is plenty of room between the cooling block and the main PCB. There would be enough room for a constant current controlled driver,. Then ideally the UV-LEDs should be connecter in series to get a bigger difference between the LED driving voltage and the battery voltage. Such a design would be more costly.

Maybe I have to put a UVC warning here, I'm not sure. Powerful (and expensive) UVB and UVC flashlights, LED-based. I have no affiliation with the seller. https://www.engeniousdesigns.com/shop

I have found a worthy challenger to the Convoy S2+ based on a 15W 4-chip LED. https://www.ebay.co....ch/233620900023 The torch is wisely powered with a thicker 26650 cell instead of the 18650-cell used in the Convoy. That makes it easier to get a battery with high capacity and a low internal serial resistance. That is important as the torch use more current. I will buy more quality batteries for these torches as the included ones had a rather high internal serial resistance. Here is a link to the test of how different battery voltage affect the input power: https://www.ultravio...dpost__p__38385 It is important to realize that after the current curve becomes flat above 3.8V input voltage there is no increase in optical power. Above 3.8V the additional power is only heating the drivers. The torch's mechanical design and build is good. It has ring-shaped cooling finns around the front part to improve the cooling of the LED. There is a 2mm thick Ø40.9mm UV-pass filter that likely is a ZWB2 glass. In front of the filter there is a fluorescing rubber ring that helps to show when the torch is on. For UVIF photography that can be placed behind the filter glass, to not be visible. replaced with an o-ring of suitable dimensions. The connecting parts in the front and rear modules appear to be well designed and assembled. The front part has a metallic reflector that easily can be removed. The entire set of parts in front of the LED can be accessed and rearranged by unscrewing the front ring by hand. The LED chip is mounted on a 20mm star-shaped copper based PCB that is thermally coupled to glued with thermal glue the anodised aluminium-structure with thermal paste of some kind. The PCB is pushed against the aluminium structure and kept in place by the reflector, green rubber ring and front ring. Be careful, if the reflector is removed, to not lose the thermal connection between LED and aluminium body. Surface tension and capillary forces will normally keep the LED in place, but it can be pushed sideways and eventually get some air in between. The LED seams to be of good quality with nice wavelength distribution. The wavelength-peak (blue) is more narrow than the one in the comparison Convoy (red) and with the peak almost 1nm closer to the nominal 365nm. Without the filters the remaining light at 400nm is ca 1/1000 of the peak at 365nm. I made an intensity comparison with both flashes on side by side at ca 45cm from a sheet of paper containing fluorescent whitener. This image shows the two different hotspots created by the reflectors and it is quite clear that the Convoy is less powerful: With the reflector removed a very nice and even illumination can be obtained spreading cone-like as it is shielded by the front walls of the torch. When I tested the torch for adjusting the focus with a U-360 stack, illuminating the motif was much easier than with the small spot of the Convoy, No careful aiming was needed.

UV highlights often record non-linearly. I can take a shot and, upon review, the histogram might show exposure peaking near the middle. Add perhaps 1/3 to 2/3 steps more exposure and the histogram is close to or crashing into the right side. This is all done with EL-Nikkor closed down to the same aperture and camera on manual. Light appears the same. Is there something about UV light that causes this? Thanks, Doug A

I have no affiliation with any sellers or companies mentioned in this topic. I recently did some searches on LEDs, since technology improves as time passes, and there could be new LEDs that were unavailable before. About 365 nm LEDs, I posted a topic some years ago (time flies!), and I haven't done new searches on this. Maybe some LEDs with improved efficiency or radiant power are available. If you search for LEDs online, especially if you search for a wide variety of wavelengths and power LEDs, you will notice that LEDs with wavelengths ranging from 365 nm to about 1050 nm are easily available with input powers between 1 W and 100 W (sometimes even more). They all look the same, with 1 W LEDs commonly available as a single chip (sometimes on hexagonal star PCBs), 10 W ones being made of 9 chips, usually connected in a 3S3P configuration, and 100 W ones being made of 100 1 W chips connected in 10S10P. The fact they all look the same makes me wonder if there's some kind of standard manufacturers are following. LEDs in this wavelength range are the easiest to find, they are efficient, and they are available in a lot of wavelengths. Between about 365 nm and 425 nm (UV to violet), you can find them in 5 nm increments (365 nm, 370 nm, 375 nm, ect.). The hardest ones to find are in the cyan (~480 nm) and yellow-green (~560 nm) regions, but if you search long enough you will find them. I have them in 10 W power, I still need to mount them on a heatsink (remember, it's important for power LEDs to mount them on a heatsink, they will overheat otherwise). I have recently discovered this company, which seems to make LEDs with a very dense selection of wavelengths (every 10 nm in the UV and visible range): https://www.bing.com/ck/a?!&&p=fa0e995133e1d8fbJmltdHM9MTY5OTA1NjAwMCZpZ3VpZD0yZjFkYzQ3My0zZDI0LTZlMzUtMjJkNi1kNmEyM2M1MzZmOGUmaW5zaWQ9NTIyMQ&ptn=3&hsh=3&fclid=2f1dc473-3d24-6e35-22d6-d6a23c536f8e&psq=Lumixtar&u=a1aHR0cHM6Ly93d3cubHVtaXh0YXIuY29tL3Byb2R1Y3QtY2VudGVy&ntb=1 I don't know how one can buy those LEDs. They would be useful if one wants to make a righ resolution LED monochromator. LEDs outside the 365-1050 nm portion of the spectrum are available, but noticeably harder to find. They are typically more expensive, avaliable with input powers of at most a few watts, and they are much less efficient. You can find them on eBay, but you should look for specialised companies, such as Thorlabs, for a wider selection. In particular, the next LED wavelength you will easily find below 365 nm is 340 nm. Thorlabs sells one (link), and you can find them on eBay (link). The LEDs look similar, but have different specifications. Both have changed around the same time to a newer model, and they looked identical previously. The eBay one should be model CUN4GF1B, produced by Seoul Viosys. What I find very weird is that there's no mention I could find on this LED on Seoul Viosys' site. I don't know if Thorlabs' LED is produced by Seoul Viosys too, but there's no mention about this company I could find. Can someone explain this? Thorlabs' LED claims a typical power output of 69.2 mW, and a power input of 3940 mW, with an efficiency of 1.75%. From the datasheet of CUN4GF1B we have a typical input power of 1025 mW (4.1 V and 0.25 A), and a typical power output of 40 mW, for an efficiency of 3.9%. Also, CUN4GF1B's datasheet specifies a minimum, typical and maximum current rating. What does that mean? There's another notable 340 nm LED I found, this one: https://shop.boselec.com/products/340nm-uva-led-smd-packages-medium-power It has an input power of 1575 mW (4.5 V, 0.35 A), and an output power of 160 mW, which means a very high efficiency of 10.16%.

We all know about the oldest brute force technique for getting somewhat pure UV output, an incandescent bulb made of woods glass. What baffles me is that no matter where I look, all the bulbs made this way are regular incandescent bulbs, I never see a bulb made this way that would have the smaller quartz bulb inside. This is sort of frustrating because I have a halogen spotlight which is very good for mimicking sunlight in my multispectral photos, even being good enough for UVA without significant leaks. While I do know that having such a bulb would not be good for any practical purposes, I'd still love to have one for collection reasons, they don't seem to exist though.

I've been enjoying occasional shooting of UV induced visible fluorescence (UVIVF) but have found difficulty in holding my Tank007 TK-566 UV torch in the effective angle. Also, I have wanted a bit more powerful torch. Luckily a net shop based in Akihabara, Tokyo, has started to handle UV LEDs. So, I got a 5W 365nm LED and the holder/reflector kit designed to fit the LED. The forward voltage of the LED is 4V (typ.) and I wanted to drive it using a 5V AC/DC adapter, and a 1 ohm resistor connected with the LED in series was necessary to drive it at 4W. Here are the parts I collected. Front row, left to right: 5W 365nm LED, retainer, reflector, thermal grease, 1 ohm resistor, a set of screws to fix the LED and the retainer. Second row, left to right: back plate for the case, aluminium die-cast case which is also expected to function as heat sink, SmallRig cold foot, DC adapter input jack. I bought the 1 ohm resistor that was rated at 5W which was overkill. A 3W one should be enough. I was thinking that a 5W one was necessary because the LED was rated 5W (stupid me!).

Hi all. I am trying to figure out the best lighting solution for UVIVF photography involving small reptiles. In my testing, I managed to capture some neat fluorescence in a chameleon illuminated using a Lightfe UV301D torch. This torch has a "black filter lens" but I have no idea what material it is and as you can see in the attached image there is plenty of blue so it probably isn't a very good filter. The picture was taken at ISO400, F20, and a 1 second shutter speed. Now 1 second is fine for a slow moving and relatively calm lizard like a chameleon but for other critters I am gonna have a tough time trying to make them sit still for a long exposure. I was thinking that a modified UV flash might be better because it might be able to "freeze" motion like a regular flash would? But I have no idea about the differences in exposure times between using a flash and using a torch. Secondly, would one fire of from a UV flash produce enough UV light? I am assuming a flash is more powerful than a torch. Would it be better to go for a modified flash, either premade like the Kolari Vision multispectral flash or DIY with a yongnuo or godox and some filters, or would it be better to get a powerful torch like a Convoy or Nemo with filters. There's also things like the Adaptalux UV but I don't know if those are powerful enough for animals bigger than insects. Any advice and recommendations would be appreciated. On an unrelated note, does anyone know if Uviroptics is still available as a source of filters? Their page is empty on ebay.

[UV SAFETY] UV-C Light Is Dangerous NEVER look at a UV-C light. NEVER let UV-C light hit your skin or eyes directly or by reflection. UV-C light can cause: severe burns of the eyes and the skin, and DNA damage from broken chromosomes. When working with UV-C illumination, you MUST: cover up completely, wear head & eye protection, and have strong ventilation. UVIVF, UltraViolet Induced Visible Fluorescence, with many UVA, UVB, UVC, LED lights & Far UVC Excimer lights. I now have a collection of UV LED lights, 365nm, 340nm, 310nm, 395nm, 375nm, 365nm, 255nm & 222nm Excimer Far UVC lights. I have been developing my Macro set-up & light stands. These are taken with an unconverted Sigma fp camera with a Sigma 70mm macro lens. The rock/mineral sample is one in my collection from the Puttapa Zinc Mine, South Australia, & contains willemite, calcite & smithsonite, plus others. I have tried to process these all in a simple & similar way. I have adjusted the shutter speed & aperture to maximise the dynamic range in the histogram to fill it from left to right. Processing has been minimal to white balance on the black cap the rock is sitting on & sharpened in Topaz Sharpen AI. First in Visible Light 400nm - 700nm. Far UVC 222nm Excimer Light, Induced Visible Fluorescence, safer to use. Protect eyes, face & all skin. UVC 255nm LED, Induced Visible Fluorescence, knowledge of the safe handling this light is needed. Protect eyes, face & all skin. UVC 265nm LED, Induced Visible Fluorescence, knowledge of the safe handling this light is needed. Protect eyes, face & all skin. UVC 275nm LED, Induced Visible Fluorescence, knowledge of the safe handling this light is needed. Protect eyes, face & all skin. UVB 295nm LED, Induced Visible Fluorescence, knowledge of the safe handling this light is needed. Protect eyes, face & all skin. UVB 310nm LED, Induced Visible Fluorescence, knowledge of the safe handling this light is needed. Protect eyes, face & all skin. UVA 340nm LED, Induced Visible Fluorescence, knowledge of the safe handling this light is needed. UVA 365nm LED, Induced Visible Fluorescence, knowledge of the safe handling this light is needed.

[UV SAFETY] UV-C Light Is Dangerous NEVER look at a UV-C light. NEVER let UV-C light hit your skin or eyes directly or by reflection. UV-C light can cause: severe burns of the eyes and the skin, and DNA damage from broken chromosomes. When working with UV-C illumination, you MUST: cover up completely, wear head & eye protection, and have strong ventilation. Hello there. It's been a long time since I posted. Life got in the way. But this video just came in and it is honestly a little bit concerning. Brainiac75 tests the output of halogen lamps and finds out they emit a small amount of UVC. I have an unfiltered 125w spotlight that I have used a few times as a lightsource and I am wondering what the implications of this are.

What is the Good, the Bad & the Ugly of this light please ? After making my rig very sturdy & with 1.25um steps & getting suitable photos with a 60x objective, I have started getting deeper into Microscope Objective Macro Photography, now with a 100x magnification. All went OK, except the lighting for the 60x objective wasn't enough for the 100x objective. The problem is the working distance is now only 2mm, & it is hard to get a strong light in that gap. I found this LED down light to be suitable with some modifications. The LED COB in this one is 7mm square & rated at 50w equivalent. Many other specs are useful, like 12v AC/DC & either polarity in 12v DC. The Data Sheet.... https://www.ledvance.com.au/en/product-datasheet/6864/31735 The plastic lens pops out with a thin lever, revealing the 7mm Cob LED. I then added an aluminium heatsink with a 16mm tube 150mm long. I will make four of these to place close to the 100x objective.

SAFETY WARNING: UV-C is dangerous to your eyes and your skin. UVP DOES NOT SUPPORT USING UV-C ILLUMINATION. [UV SAFETY] UV-C Light Dangers We have about 30000 cicada's around just one of our maple trees. We also have had a couple of hard rain storms. So I was able to find a cicada wing (many actually) in the grass. No animals or bugs were harmed by me to take these images. I have been playing with the idea of 255nm transmission imaging. Here I have my Raspberry pi HQ converted to Monochrome by MaxMax connected to my 25mm Bicx fused silica lens. This is roughly 135mm 135 format equivalent and I have fixed f8 aperture disc on the back of lens. This is one 255nm bulb shinning up through the wing with 254bp filter on the camera. This wing is sitting on 3mm thick ZWB3 glass plate. That was the full view of the wing and it does transmit some UVC. So I added some extension to the lens, as I was having a hard time with my objectives. This is just transmission through the wing using a single 255nm bulb: Now I configured a 255nm bulb on the side for directed point reflection light to look at the wing, no transmission only reflected 254nm light. This was hard as the lens is very close to the subject. But these looked fun:

Are there any Epi-Illumination systems that work with M42 x1mm pitch extension tubes please ?

Adaptalux is offering a new unit on Kickstarter. It uses the same lighting arms as their studio unit. One of the packages has 365nm UV arms for UVIVF. I love my Nemo lights, but the Adaptalux would be so much easier to position. I'll probably pledge for a set. Thanks, Doug A

[UV SAFETY] UV-C Light Is Dangerous NEVER look at a UV-C light. NEVER let UV-C light hit your skin or eyes directly or by reflection. UV-C light can cause: severe burns of the eyes and the skin, and DNA damage from broken chromosomes. When working with UV-C illumination, you MUST: cover up completely, wear head & eye protection, and have strong ventilation. Hi, I want to buy a powerful low pressure mercury lamp that I can use from wall socket (220V) - ideally E26/E27 but can be something else if I can adapt it to wall socket. I already have 3 bulbs E27 rated 25W. I've found some more powerful but delivery time is 40+ days and source is China. Does anybody know any particular model name/brand name so I can look directly for it? I want it tyo produce as much as possible 253.7nm and 184.45nm (I want lamps that do not block this ozone genrating frequency). Ideally they should be up to 1 kW. Would be really if anybody can provide any search hints... I DONiT want LEDs - they are only 1% efficient, this must be mercury low pressure lamps, I can consider high pressure lamps but then filtering out other frequencies becoming extremely difficult while most of them also block UV-C which is the opposite of what I want... [UV-C is dangerous]

In my efforts to get to the first base of UV photography, I brought a few Vivitar 285's and started converting them according to guidance here etc - including precautions for risk from the dangerous high voltage circuitry. So far I'm not too unhappy - two successfully 'converted'; one more dead (seems to have been a late model with incredible fragile soldering; now charges but won't discharge). I noticed, however, that the UV output of when using one flash is quite low and the unit has to be very close to the subject at full power to get half-decent exposure. This is limiting my aperture and sensor ISO choices. Ideally, I'd like to use the same flash position for visible and UV with the same camera setting (just changing the filters) but I can't reduce the output enough (min 1/16) for visible light so I'm having to use a second unconverted flash further back for visible comparison. For the conversion, I've used a replacement window over the flash tube and reflector made from CD case plastic. I think this is likely to be a polystyrene-type material. It does appear to transmit a good amount of UV at 365nm based on a crude torch test (with and without subject material, UV torch and visible fluorescence of 'white' items with optical brighteners). So, is the low output due to a coated flash tube, inherently low UV output, absorption by the CD material, or absorption by the zoom head fresnel (OK with UV torch) Would using UV transmitting acrylic, UV glass, or fused silica (quartz) likely work better? I'm guessing no window is not recommended? In addition, is there any info on how far into UV I can expect these units go? It seems to depend on the grade of quartz used to form the tube but I don't seem anything specific to these. For fluorescence work, I presume that windows made from ZWB2 would suffice? Seems like a lot of questions; any advice gratefully received!

Hi, simple quick question: Is it possible to convert Nikon SB800 flash to full-spectrum If so has anybody ever tried and can provide a spectrum of such converted flash? Or maybe just an approx range of wavelengts like from about 300nm to 1100nm? Does it reach UV-B - like down to 300nm? (not even speaking about UV-C)

Some time in the future I would like to try UVIVF with my Godox AD200 flashes. The Speedlite-head H200 that comes with the flash is very fast and easy to modify. You just need a PH1 screwdriver to loosen two screws to reach and replace the thick inner glass filter while at the same time remove the fresnel lens. Retightening the screws need some finesse as they are screws cutting their thread into a hole in the plastic structure. The H200 heads can be bought separately if needed. I discussed with my optician, the possibility to shape a filter glass after the shape of the original glass filter. He wanted to try doing it with his advanced grinding machine. Last summer I bought a few ZWB1, 3mm with a diameter slightly bigger than the original filter. At the same time I also got a few FS windows, 2mm with the same diameter. Yesterday I finally got the filters reshaped. They fit perfectly into the gasket and slot in the flash head. The modification took less that a minute per flash head. From left to right, bottom row, shaped ZWB1, fused silica window and original yellow-tined glass filter. Top row, two flash heads modified with the filters. The rightmost head, unmodified and with the fresnel lens in place. The flash tubes in these flash heads are uncoated and emit a nice amount of UV. Here is a link to a post with pictures showing the flash head separated and also some emission graphs: https://www.ultravioletphotography.com/content/index.php?/topic/3206-is-the-godox-ad200-ttl-pocket-flash-kit-uv-convertable/#elControls_26649_menu

I see that it is impossible to find something that I want to buy (excluding aliexpress but they always have exactly what you need and cheap, the problem is that I don't believe them at all). I'm also not a tech guy so I cannot do this myself, but I;m wondering if there is any company or individual that can create a flashlight for me. I would like to install array of 16 UV-C diodes (4x4) in some already existing flashlight just to have an shortwave UV flashlight (this includes all additional details like aluminium reflector, quartz lens/glass and power supply). Any ideas where can I start searching for somebody who can custom make such a thing? Or maybe somebody from this forum can do this and want to earn money? I'm considering 255/265/275 up to 310 nm LEDs - I would just pickup ones that have most UV output power (not input power) and ieally below 280 nm (310 is probably a separate story), for anything above 320-330 nm I already have my greatest firend - sun - I need nothing more.

I am considering getting a Godox AD600BM to modify for UV as I feel the output from my Godox AD200 is a bit to weak. Something like this set would be nice and portable: https://www.ebay.com...ng/283082472135 The flash tube must be replaced as the original tube is likely to be UV-filtered. I am playing with the idea of get a customised flash-tube from https://www.xenonfla...-lamps-design_9 They can make as few as one single tube, but the price will most probably be lower if more than one will be made. I have not asked them for a cost indication yet and wonder if someone else at the forum might be interested to join this adventure.

Hi I have a question (maybe somebody is familiar with those) - https://www.ebay.com/itm/323610114425?mkevt=1&mkpid=0&emsid=e11051.m43.l1123&mkcid=7&ch=osgood&euid=e51af7b736b44a8c8bcf0a1966edd8d7&bu=44153275185&osub=-1~1&crd=20220812234110&segname=11051 - https://www.ebay.com/itm/224709443275?_trkparms=amclksrc%3DITM%26aid%3D1110002%26algo%3DSPLICE.SOI%26ao%3D1%26asc%3D20201210111451%26meid%3D8b1b5fee888448faaf56e2d951e2cf00%26pid%3D101196%26rk%3D1%26rkt%3D12%26sd%3D323610114425%26itm%3D224709443275%26pmt%3D1%26noa%3D0%26pg%3D2047675%26algv%3DPromotedSellersOtherItemsV2WithMLRv3&_trksid=p2047675.c101196.m2219&amdata=cksum%3A2247094432758b1b5fee888448faaf56e2d951e2cf00|enc%3AAQAHAAABALB59iZaq6L1SxCGLGoiBqHdpPz8nqKyKuGL1QIa0H%2B4RjlnzY44V7F4peTZsE%2B8I8pVRzfWAREG5qYey5oz%2BjhItNBwxlQNCek29dPHBA1eVYkPVjmL%2FMxxtG98Rt3pIVNGTV4DRD7X28R1jDYbW83runSFuBG58JMnrtHKq802wyB%2BZEkWcW6X7RhVZOuLXXbyskFHWGkkxZXoCzV7S6gRbUE1mQkc87NRmSmH2dMYCm7ZgdFyBV%2BbMt%2BE2tKo%2BDg1Z96EU3ORMSBgsNkSjnnmHd%2FknfuG52CfW1y69NGerRuXwNtScNVIYQ4n%2BE1dHv3X0DycQs1ZC%2F3MUoUvTNQ%3D|ampid%3APL_CLK|clp%3A2047675 Are those watts 1.7W, 7.2W values for UV-B output? I've asked the seller and he answered that yes, but I wonder if this is true or not... 7.2W of UV-B seems quite interesting for $60, will it be usable for iluminating targets for photos? Does it make any sense to consider them as UV-B lighting?