What is the purpose of UV flashlights?

Ha ha ha ha ha! I just tried that. So cool! Now i'm waiting for them to change back. I'm seeing spots!
Oh! That's not good! I don't mess around with UV lights. I think I have three out of my massive collection of hundreds (thousands?) of lights over the decades. Just recently bought a pair of Amber UV-safety lens in case I ever actually need to use one of those three lights.
 
I know I am super late to this thread. So sorry about that. And I hope I am not duplicating an answer already given. But I use my 3 UV lights for 2 things mainly.

1). Quickly checking paper currency for the anti-counterfeit features. I sometimes sell high dollar items on Facebook etc. Nothing nefarious. Just expensive car parts etc. If I feel a little sketchy about the person paying I may break out a uv light and scan the bills really quickly to see any of the watermarks. I also have the counterfeit pens too which I sometimes use.

2). Second thing is along the same lines. I use them to look at cigar boxes. I smoke cigars from Cub@. Traveled there with my son a few years ago when it was 'legal'. Counterfeit cigars from that country are a HUGE deal. I would say 80-90% of the cigars normal tourists see when on a cruise etc are fakes. There are literally 'fakes' in cub@. The fakes inside that country are usually made with scrap tobacco from the rolling factories, farm grown lower quality tobacco, etc. But at least they are made from tobacco from that country which isn't AS bad. But the fakes most tourists see in various ports in other parts of the world etc are usually made with tobacco from another country altogether. Tobacco from cub@ has a distinct flavor because it is mostly volcanic soil. So if thats the flavor profile you want, you want to make sure you get real ones. One way, among many, to help weed out the fakes are to look for the fluorescence on the boxes and bands of the cigars. Same thing as with dollars....... There are water marks of one kind or another.
 
I hear you about the lower quality tobacco used. But hard to refer to a Cuban cigar as a fake if it's actually made in Cuba. Technically, that makes it the real thing. Doubt the folks making them consider themselves con-artists. Made in Cuba by a Cuban, just with lower quality tobacco. I'm sure some of them sell it for a lower cost than the higher quality versions. Especially to tourists.... Why not? Some of those farmers are struggling to keep their families fed. It's a good source of income for them.
 
I hear you about the lower quality tobacco used. But hard to refer to a Cuban cigar as a fake if it's actually made in Cuba. Technically, that makes it the real thing. Doubt the folks making them consider themselves con-artists. Made in Cuba by a Cuban, just with lower quality tobacco. I'm sure some of them sell it for a lower cost than the higher quality versions. Especially to tourists.... Why not? Some of those farmers are struggling to keep their families fed. It's a good source of income for them.
The problem is that they are often advertised to be the exact same thing as the genuine, high quality versions. They're being intentionally deceitful and scammy.

If they're not advertised as something they're not, than I think it is a good thing.
 
For me, it's to light my glow stuff.
Also to spot scorpions when i camp. Its all desert here.
 
Supposedly if a person's skin has Blaschko lines due to cutaneous chimerism, the lines may be visible with UV light. However, I've yet to see a single UV photograph showing the lines, nor have I read any article making that claim which specifies the UV wavelength that makes the lines visible.
Several years ago I was working an outdoor festival where one of our local hospital's dermatology departments set up a booth to show people what UV damage to skin looks like. They asked me if I wanted to have my skin checked. I asked them what wavelength they were using on their UV inspection lamp and they didn't know, so I declined. I was also astonished that they didn't know what wavelength they were exposing people to. In retrospect I'm pretty sure it was UVA.
 
Several years ago I was working an outdoor festival where one of our local hospital's dermatology departments set up a booth to show people what UV damage to skin looks like. They asked me if I wanted to have my skin checked. I asked them what wavelength they were using on their UV inspection lamp and they didn't know, so I declined. I was also astonished that they didn't know what wavelength they were exposing people to. In retrospect I'm pretty sure it was UVA.
I did one of those once. Similar scenario at the local hospital. But I remember they knew the nm. I didn't ask, but they told me when they saw I was very hesitant. All I knew about UV at the time was that prolonged exposure was dangerous, hence my reluctance (terms like UVA, -B and -C meant nothing to me back then), but they assured me it was safe, so I agreed. And yes, it is UVA.

And I really threw them off, because I had just gotten from work. Worked as an interiour carpenter at the time, and had been in a building with flying wood dust all day. So my whole body lit up like a rainbow under the UV.

But I have a question. Google doesn't give me anything conclusive. I have a Sofirn SF15 (395 nm) and SF16 (365 nm), and yellow UV-safety glasses for both protection and extra effect with the SF15 (clear ones for the SF16).
I mostly find blue glowing things at home, which is dust from what I can tell. Green / lime glowing things fortunately not so much, and that is the one thing we don't want to see (bacteria - very common to find under UV in a bathroom...).

But what is glowing bright orange under 365 nm UV?
Best I can find is it being some sort of mineral or mineral based, but whenever I find something glowing orange, it is always shaped the same as small strain of hair or dust. It's never the small, round speck or flake I would expect minteral dust to be shaped like.
 
Last edited:
I did one of those once. Similar scenario at the local hospital. But I remember they knew the nm. I didn't ask, but they told me when they saw I was very hesitant. All I knew about UV at the time was that prolonged exposure was dangerous, hence my reluctance (terms like UVA, -B and -C meant nothing to me back then), but they assured me it was safe, so I agreed. And yes, it is UVA.

And I really threw them off, because I had just gotten from work. Worked as an interiour carpenter at the time, and had been in a building with flying wood dust all day. So my whole body lit up like a rainbow under the UV.

But I have a question. Google doesn't give me anything conclusive. I have a Sofirn SF15 (395 nm) and SF16 (365 nm), and yellow UV-safety glasses for both protection and extra effect with the SF15 (clear ones for the SF16).
I mostly find blue glowing things at home, which is dust from what I can tell. Green / lime glowing things fortunately not so much, and that is the one thing we don't want to see (bacteria - very common to find under UV in a bathroom...).

But what is glowing bright orange under 365 nm UV?
Best I can find is it being some sort of mineral or mineral based, but whenever I find something glowing orange, it is always shaped the same as small strain of hair or dust. It's never the small, round speck or flake I would expect minteral dust to be shaped like.
My first suspicion for a sample that glows orange would be lint from a fabric that was dyed fluorescent orange. Do you see a lot of it in the dryer lint trap?
 
My first suspicion for a sample that glows orange would be lint from a fabric that was dyed fluorescent orange. Do you see a lot of it in the dryer lint trap?
We don't have a dryer, but I checked the lint filter in the washing machine. But other than being thoroughly nasty in there (it will get a proper clean ASAP™), there was not a single speck of orange in there.

We had a go around the house, and we think we have nailed it down to an orange night gown. Though the gown itself (if it was the right piece of clothing, I am not sure) didn't emit anything under UV. Nor the quite orange microfiber cleaning cloth that I first suspected - that didn't emit anything under UV either.

I got a macro lens on the way. Should arrive on Friday this week. Perhaps it's able to get a close-up shot of what it looks like.
Whatever it is, I cannot see it as orange with just my eyes. Even with my best hCRI flashlight.
 
Last edited:
We don't have a dryer, but I checked the lint filter in the washing machine. But other than being thoroughly nasty in there (it will get a proper clean ASAP™), there was not a single speck of orange in there.

We had a go around the house, and we think we have nailed it down to an orange night gown. Though the gown itself (if it was the right piece of clothing, I am not sure) didn't emit anything under UV. Nor the quite orange microfiber cleaning cloth that I first suspected - that didn't emit anything under UV either.

I got a macro lens on the way. Should arrive on Friday this week. Perhaps it's able to get a close-up shot of what it looks like.
Whatever it is, I cannot see it as orange with just my eyes. Even with my best hCRI flashlight.
This is an interesting mystery. I'm looking forward to seeing the results from your macro lens.
 
This is an interesting mystery. I'm looking forward to seeing the results from your macro lens.
Okay, I tried my second best (best would be to spend 10 minutes just to tie everything down tight).

This macro lens is so much different to use than my Sigma zoomie! Just a millimeter of movement, and it's completely out of focus. I tried like 15 times just to get something reasonably legible. I can sometimes feel the camera shift enough on my mini-tripod when I depress the trigger to know whether the shot was good even before it shows it to me. Honestly, this was one of the most difficult shots I've done. ^^

Okay, so the image is showing...the individual fibres of a cloth, in a completely dark room except for the UV.
...Even considering to take a shot like this with my Sigma 18-250 mm is WAY beyond "Fuhgettaboutit"-territory, and well into the "Hell no!"-lands. To me, who has ever shot with a zoom lens (or default, crappy 18-55 mm), it is incredible that a lens can even do this!

I at least know now it must be from a piece of cloth, though I don't know from which one. And that it is nothing to worry about.
...And why the fibre is shaped like a racing bike siluette, I have no idea.
 

Attachments

  • IMG_5458_.jpg
    IMG_5458_.jpg
    686.6 KB · Views: 21
Okay, I tried my second best (best would be to spend 10 minutes just to tie everything down tight).

This macro lens is so much different to use than my Sigma zoomie! Just a millimeter of movement, and it's completely out of focus. I tried like 15 times just to get something reasonably legible. I can sometimes feel the camera shift enough on my mini-tripod when I depress the trigger to know whether the shot was good even before it shows it to me. Honestly, this was one of the most difficult shots I've done. ^^

Okay, so the image is showing...the individual fibres of a cloth, in a completely dark room except for the UV.
...Even considering to take a shot like this with my Sigma 18-250 mm is WAY beyond "Fuhgettaboutit"-territory, and well into the "Hell no!"-lands. To me, who has ever shot with a zoom lens (or default, crappy 18-55 mm), it is incredible that a lens can even do this!

I at least know now it must be from a piece of cloth, though I don't know from which one. And that it is nothing to worry about.
...And why the fibre is shaped like a racing bike siluette, I have no idea.
I agree, that looks like a strand of fabric to me. That could've been picked up from anywhere.

That's a cool photograph - thanks for sharing it.
 
Last edited:
Top