first time doing UV portraiture

[Fandyus]

Here are some portraits in UV that I've done rather recently. We went into a park and took some pictures, and later we went into an interior where I used my Alonefire 12 core UV flashlight to illuminate her face.

It was my first time doing this sort of thing for someone, I'm glad at least somebody appreciates it, since most "normal" folks I've shown UV portraiture to frowned and asked why on earth would someone want a picture where they look "this ugly".

One thing that intrigued me is her purple dress. Somehow, out of all the clothes she could've picked, she picked one that uses some sort of dye which is quite UV reflective and appears almost completely white. I have never seen an object behave this way.

In the first few pictures, she left a bit of some sort of cream on her nose on accident, hence the purple smidge.

 

Equipment [Sony a600 full spectrum, Industar 50-2, ZWB2+QB39 stack]

 

[colinbm]

Very interesting

[dabateman]

The dress isn't reflecting,  but partially see through.  You can see the under garment,  especially in the second UV image, the third photo. So most likely a polyester dress.

But these are nice portraits,  if it wasn't for the undergarments being visible,  the second UV photo is my favorite. 

[Andy Perrin]

Glad you found a model with some curiosity! I agree that the dress is probably polyester, we have seen that result before, and the transparency is why it makes a poor choice of fabric for shielding from UV. If you repeat the experiment, maybe suggest cotton-based cloth for the next round. It would be interesting to know if you can get a sunburn right through polyester shirts. 

[Fandyus]

35 minutes ago, colinbm said:

Very interesting

Thanks!

[Fandyus]

26 minutes ago, dabateman said:

The dress isn't reflecting,  but partially see through.  You can see the under garment,  especially in the second UV image, the third photo. So most likely a polyester dress.

But these are nice portraits,  if it wasn't for the undergarments being visible,  the second UV photo is my favorite. 

You think so? I thought those were just bumps. If you look at the visible photo, the bumps are already there, it's just that on the UV they are accentuated by how bright the dress is. I can ask her for what material the dress is though.

12 minutes ago, Andy Perrin said:

Glad you found a model with some curiosity! I agree that the dress is probably polyester, we have seen that result before, and the transparency is why it makes a poor choice of fabric for shielding from UV. If you repeat the experiment, maybe suggest cotton-based cloth for the next round. It would be interesting to know if you can get a sunburn right through polyester shirts. 

Thanks for the info, we might shoot again soon so I'll ask her.

[dabateman]

2 hours ago, Fandyus said:

You think so? I thought those were just bumps. If you look at the visible photo, the bumps are already there, it's just that on the UV they are accentuated by how bright the dress is. I can ask her for what material the dress is though.

Thanks for the info, we might shoot again soon so I'll ask her.

Zoom in on the left arm biceps area of the second UV photo,  the 3rd image in your series.  You can clearly see the under garment.

[Fandyus]

9 hours ago, dabateman said:

Zoom in on the left arm biceps area of the second UV photo,  the 3rd image in your series.  You can clearly see the under garment.

 

12 hours ago, Andy Perrin said:

Glad you found a model with some curiosity! I agree that the dress is probably polyester, we have seen that result before, and the transparency is why it makes a poor choice of fabric for shielding from UV. If you repeat the experiment, maybe suggest cotton-based cloth for the next round. It would be interesting to know if you can get a sunburn right through polyester shirts. 

Alrighty, I checked in with my model co confirm your hypothesis and she sent me this back.

Turns out it's 97% cotton! That's really surprising and probably means the dress isn't transparent after all. It leads me to believe it's actually due to the dye used.

[lukaszgryglicki]

I love UV portraits, will be doing some when I get my UV-Nikkor (should arrive in 8 days from now - this is what FedEx says).

 

[ulf]

I do not think it is transparent at all.

It is just that the strong colour in the vis image makes you overlook the contours of the undergarment, that is visible there too as the fabric seams to be a stretchy lycra type.

Interesting that the hair dye variation do not show at all in the UV. That dye might be transparent in UV.

[Andy Perrin]

Yeah okay, we were wrong. Just the blue dye is transparent. Ulf, the hair dyes show UV variation in the top two photos

[Andrea B.]

Nevermind the UV, I want to have rainbow hair!

 

Stretchy fabrics cause that effect. They are letting the light thru stretched parts to reflect on whatever is (or is not) underneath. 

 

I'm really curious about what UV-reflective purple dye was used. 

[Andy Perrin]

9 hours ago, Andrea B. said:

Nevermind the UV, I want to have rainbow hair!

Real false colors, hm, Andrea…? 

[Fandyus]

On 7/5/2022 at 4:16 PM, lukaszgryglicki said:

I love UV portraits, will be doing some when I get my UV-Nikkor (should arrive in 8 days from now - this is what FedEx says).

 

Can't wait for your results. I'm sure it'll be a great experience with your top of the line gear.

On 7/5/2022 at 4:17 PM, ulf said:

I do not think it is transparent at all.

It is just that the strong colour in the vis image makes you overlook the contours of the undergarment, that is visible there too as the fabric seams to be a stretchy lycra type.

Interesting that the hair dye variation do not show at all in the UV. That dye might be transparent in UV.

My thoughts exactly, the bumps are just more visible on the bright object which lets more contrast between shadows and bright lit areas show.

[Fandyus]

16 hours ago, Andrea B. said:

Nevermind the UV, I want to have rainbow hair!

 

Stretchy fabrics cause that effect. They are letting the light thru stretched parts to reflect on whatever is (or is not) underneath. 

 

I'm really curious about what UV-reflective purple dye was used. 

Ah yes, her hair sure is lovely.

Interesting theory about the stretchy fabric, unfortunately, I can't promise I'll be able to find out what dye was used, but I'll see if perhaps she bought the dress from a specific vendor, maybe they could be contacted for what dye they use.

[Fandyus]

On 7/6/2022 at 9:44 AM, Andrea B. said:

Nevermind the UV, I want to have rainbow hair!

 

Stretchy fabrics cause that effect. They are letting the light thru stretched parts to reflect on whatever is (or is not) underneath. 

 

I'm really curious about what UV-reflective purple dye was used. 

Andrea, I asked my model and she gave me an exact category on the store she bought the dress from.

https://www.ladyvlondon.com/vintage-dresses/audrey-hepburn-dresses

Maybe the store could be asked what dye they used?

[Andy Perrin]

I doubt they know directly. You have to track it backwards to the manufacturer. And they might not be willing to tell. 

[photoni]

As some of you know I also do PORTRAITS

with the Wet Plate on glass or aluminum ... Tin Type with collodion emulsion

It has an Orthochromatic sensitivity only ~ 325-510nm
I opened some post to figure out how to emulate this with my A7 F.S.

Thanks

A

[Nate]

23 minutes ago, photoni said:

As some of you know I also

Looks really cool Toni

[Andy Perrin]

[ignore this]

[Wayne Harridge]

On 7/5/2022 at 10:26 AM, Andy Perrin said:

Glad you found a model with some curiosity! I agree that the dress is probably polyester, we have seen that result before, and the transparency is why it makes a poor choice of fabric for shielding from UV. If you repeat the experiment, maybe suggest cotton-based cloth for the next round. It would be interesting to know if you can get a sunburn right through polyester shirts. 

 

Think "tan through bikinis"!

 

[Andy Perrin]

Is that a thing, Wayne?

[dabateman]

4 hours ago, Andy Perrin said:

Is that a thing, Wayne?

Wow I missed a great patent idea again!

Yes they seem to exist and the fabric is called Transol.

I should have done this.

The fabric seems to be at least 81% polyester. 

 

Ok I missed it by 10 years. I feel better:

https://patents.google.com/patent/WO2011020984A1/en

 

Now I wonder if you can do a fully clothed (visible light) UV reflectance nude shot? 

It does seem to block some UVB with their colors. 

[Andy Perrin]

That sounds like a dermatologist's nightmare.

[Wayne Harridge]

19 hours ago, Andy Perrin said:

Is that a thing, Wayne?

I think they were popular back in the mid 1970's when I was a university student, I recall a fellow student said she had tried one, I never saw the result!  I presume these days they would not be considered appropriate due to exposing skin to UV.  I have no idea what the UV transmission of these materials might be.