UV light

[petrochemist]

The only Scorpions I have available are safely encased in plastic which unfortunately blocks most of the UV so they don't fluoresce. I've never tried it on other arachnids, might be worth a try as my 'Full spectrum' camera has very little UV response.

Fluorescence from man made materials can be fun to shoot as well

 

[petrochemist]

Use UV sensitive film

I don't know of any film that's not UV sensitive. Film is very awkward to get the metering right for UV. Normal light meters whether in the camera or stand alone do not respond well to UV, and Lenses don't have UV focusing marks.
With film there's no ready feedback. Shooting a whole film with 1 stop bracketing should get your exposure right and possibly work out the focus shift....
If the UV light source isn't well controlled even well documented notes from a trial film may not be relevant on the next shooting. UV from daylight certainly varies hugely.

 

[Designer]

..if I have a built in UV filter why would another one help?

Who said install another one? Nobody. At least two people wrote that you should REMOVE ALL UV FILTERS if you're expecting to photograph UV light or the effects thereof.

This modification is one that some photographers have ordered done to their camera for the express purpose of making UV photographs. As far as I know, that procedure is non-reversable, so you should think very carefully about having it done.

 

[BananaRepublic]

Did you remember to remove your UV Filter?

I wanted the UV effect, so no I didn't.

Um....... if you left your UV filter on, you didn't take a UV image. You took an image with mostly 'visible' light. Your UV filter (as well as the UV properties of the filter in front of your camera's sensor) prevented most of the UV light from reaching the sensor.

UV filters don't allow UV light to pass......... it blocks it.

To take a truly UV image, you'll need to remove the UV filter built into the camera. This is definitely not a DIY project.

Thats a double burn

 

[davholla]

..if I have a built in UV filter why would another one help?

Who said install another one? .

I thought that post 12 had done so.

 

[480sparky]

Did you remember to remove your UV Filter?

I wanted the UV effect, so no I didn't.

How did I do that? I didn't have a UV filter.

So........... did you, or did you not, remove a UV filter?

Thanks that make senses, but if it is built in how can you remove it?

You send it to a specialist like These People who will be more than happy to do it for you.

Use UV sensitive film

Err...... I'd like to see you load it into a DSLR..........

 

[Designer]

I thought that post 12 had done so.

The whole point of the exercise would seem to be about capturing the florescence produced by the UV light rather than capturing the actual UV light so a UV filter would improve the effect.

I'm unsure if this is accurate, so maybe a test is in order.

It does seem to me however that you would have to use the same light that created the fluorescence in the first place, which is UV, regardless whether the UV light was directly entering the lens or if it was simply being reflected by your subject.

Go ahead and run a quick test of Alexr25's hypothesis and report back.

 

[Alexr25]

REMOVE ALL UV FILTERS if you're expecting to photograph UV light or the effects thereof.

Your eyes don't respond to UV but can still see the fluorescence produced by UV light in many materials so how is a camera any different? Blocking UV from the sensor will prevent the "effects", fluorescence, from being swamped by the actual UV light. In any case even without any UV filters present most modern camera lenses do a good job of blocking UV light.

 

[davholla]

Did you remember to remove your UV Filter?

I wanted the UV effect, so no I didn't.

How did I do that? I didn't have a UV filter.

So........... did you, or did you not, remove a UV filter?

Thanks that make senses, but if it is built in how can you remove it?

You send it to a specialist like These People who will be more than happy to do it for you.

Use UV sensitive film

Err...... I'd like to see you load it into a DSLR..........

No I didn't and perhaps I was not clear, I talking about the fluoresence created not UV light. I hope this is clear now.

 

[Designer]

No I didn't and perhaps I was not clear, I talking about the fluoresence created not UV light. I hope this is clear now.

I think I understand it. What did you think of the website that was linked? Are the examples they have helpful?

 

[petrochemist]

I thought that post 12 had done so.

The whole point of the exercise would seem to be about capturing the florescence produced by the UV light rather than capturing the actual UV light so a UV filter would improve the effect.

I'm unsure if this is accurate, so maybe a test is in order.

It does seem to me however that you would have to use the same light that created the fluorescence in the first place, which is UV, regardless whether the UV light was directly entering the lens or if it was simply being reflected by your subject.

Go ahead and run a quick test of Alexr25's hypothesis and report back.

I have several older books with sections on UV fluorescence photography. Most of them INSIST that a UV filter is fitted.
I suspect most are from film days as film is far more sensitive to UV than digital, but if you have a UV filter it certainly won't do any harm to fit it. In everyday photography without a powerful UV source available I certainly wouldn't bother with a UV filter but that's a different story!

I suggest you read up a little on fluorescence.
Fluorescence is a chemical process where an energetic form of radiation is used to excite a material, which then relaxes after a very short delay (no more than a few milliseconds).
This relaxation is usually via multiple transitions all of lower energy than the excitation. Lower energy means longer wavelengths.
There are some rare cases of fluorescence that emit at the same wavelength as their excitation. To view these a very rapidly pulsed light is needed, with the fluorescence only visible immediately after the light source has gone off.