Iris Scan
- Thread starter mod343
- Start date
- Status
I'd do it in post. Any actual light shot into the eye is probably going to be dangerous to your actor. I'm sure there are quite a few ways to do a scan line, depending on exactly what type of look you want. Extremely easy if it's a straight shot of the eye, just draw a cool computer scan and move a masking element over it.
clang
Veteran
I'm not convinced that a plain straight line added in post will look realistic, given how liquid an eye is.
I'd try a bright torch with red cellophane over the bulb and black card with a narrow slit over that - so long as the resulting bright red line is bright enough for the camera to pick up, that's all you need, and you know it's not going to blind your actor.
I'd try a bright torch with red cellophane over the bulb and black card with a narrow slit over that - so long as the resulting bright red line is bright enough for the camera to pick up, that's all you need, and you know it's not going to blind your actor.
You could use a real laser level, just do it sorta quick. Before everyone jumps on the lasers damage eyes, when you look at a laser you are actually looking at its reflection when you look at it on anything.
Only long exposure could have the smallest chance of damage, especially with the cheap commercial products that aren’t strong.
Otherwise just do it by hand and make adjustments for the curve of the eye, and the depth differnece between the eye and the eye lid
Only long exposure could have the smallest chance of damage, especially with the cheap commercial products that aren’t strong.
Otherwise just do it by hand and make adjustments for the curve of the eye, and the depth differnece between the eye and the eye lid
Matt Grunau
Adobe Demigod
Don't use a laser of any sort. It's harmful and unnecessary. Doing something like that in post is most certainly possible. and depending on what you are wanting, downright easy.
http://creativemac.digitalmedianet.com/articles/viewarticle.jsp?id=26374
This guy's approach works very well, though his results are somewhat lacking. That's ok because with very minor tweaking, mostly blending modes, the result would be considerably better.
http://creativemac.digitalmedianet.com/articles/viewarticle.jsp?id=26374
This guy's approach works very well, though his results are somewhat lacking. That's ok because with very minor tweaking, mostly blending modes, the result would be considerably better.
Yea don't be a WHIMP just be "tough" and risk blinding your douchebag friend... it's just a "cheapo" lazer those are safe, I bet... probably.. most likely.... at least XX% sure...
Ted Ramasola
Veteran
Id take a sphere in 3D max, shine light to it and render the scene with the sphere having traslucent properties. Id render sequencial targas with alpha channel and composite the effects in AE.
And depending on time and budget I'd probable include a low polygon wireframe of the socket and eyelids as well for a more realistic effect of the scan light spill over.
And depending on time and budget I'd probable include a low polygon wireframe of the socket and eyelids as well for a more realistic effect of the scan light spill over.
Matt Grunau
Adobe Demigod
Any laser or any kind is harmful to the eyes. Period, end of story. If you don 't know that, look it up. In the meantime, quit giving people potentially harmful advice based on your ignorance.
Do it in post. Tedybear's idea is particularly good.
Why don't you look it up for me if you are calling me ignorant to show me what information I do not know.
A quick google will tell you that
a.) Prolonged exposure is bad
b.) When you look at a laser dot/line on an object, you are looking at the reflection of the laser which is about he same as looking at it.
So don't stare at it for 10 seconds and dont use a stong green one.
A quick google will tell you that
a.) Prolonged exposure is bad
b.) When you look at a laser dot/line on an object, you are looking at the reflection of the laser which is about he same as looking at it.
So don't stare at it for 10 seconds and dont use a stong green one.
Ok, I am sorry. That obviously came off harsh. However:
a) then any kind of exposure can be seen as an unnecessary danger!
b) if the dot can be seen from multiple directions then this is obviously not true.
One thing is to get the laser bounced off a mirror but still focused and an other is to see some of the scattered light of the bean reflecting off a wall.
And, how would you know that your unit isn't slightly weaker, or stronger... what if a few less seconds were enough for the particular brand and sample of class IIIa laser you had in your hands? Are you actually planning on measuring the mW? And what if repeated exposure of much shorter periods had damaging effects?
You are not ignorant, and I didn't mean to convey that. What should have said was that I find it very dangerous to be giving advise without definite info before you post saying you would go ahead and do it. And if that is not what you meant to say, like me with the ignorant thing, then I would be a little more clear when you are discussing something that has the potential for permanent damage to someone's eyes.
a) then any kind of exposure can be seen as an unnecessary danger!
b) if the dot can be seen from multiple directions then this is obviously not true.
One thing is to get the laser bounced off a mirror but still focused and an other is to see some of the scattered light of the bean reflecting off a wall.
And, how would you know that your unit isn't slightly weaker, or stronger... what if a few less seconds were enough for the particular brand and sample of class IIIa laser you had in your hands? Are you actually planning on measuring the mW? And what if repeated exposure of much shorter periods had damaging effects?
You are not ignorant, and I didn't mean to convey that. What should have said was that I find it very dangerous to be giving advise without definite info before you post saying you would go ahead and do it. And if that is not what you meant to say, like me with the ignorant thing, then I would be a little more clear when you are discussing something that has the potential for permanent damage to someone's eyes.
Why don't you test the shot out on yourself then and post the results when you are done. Although please just one eye so you can still see to type the response to us. I look forward to seeing your results.
(Note: I do not really advocate this because it is stupid)
Doc Bernard
Indie Arms Member
Oh well, I'll just keep in mind not to work on drk3p's set anytime soon. That was extremely unwise and unsound judgment and advice. Good Lord, the things people come up with. Read your own quote, it doesn't say "no risk", "risk-free", "it's perfectly safe", does it? There IS risk there. Link us to this reputable site that led you to believe it was safe to do so.
But that is the way of youth, "Hey, it's on the Internet, therefore, it must be true."
Mod343, if you use a post program to do it, be sure to lay in a slight back tint of the eyeball to sell the laser illuminating the globe of the eye.
But that is the way of youth, "Hey, it's on the Internet, therefore, it must be true."
Mod343, if you use a post program to do it, be sure to lay in a slight back tint of the eyeball to sell the laser illuminating the globe of the eye.
Last edited:
Doc Bernard
Indie Arms Member
USLatin, you are a gentleman for apologizing. But, I don't think it was necessary. This guy is going to hurt someone, and then blame the Internet for blinding his buddy, or worse, some actor looking to build up their reel and believing this guy knows what he is talking about.
Harsh words are in order on this, if only to get this guy to get his head straight and think things through a bit more.
Health and Human Services/FDA
Laser Article
Scientific American Read the entire article.
So for a pointer to be useful, the power must be high enough that the government classifies it as a 3A and requires a DANGER label.
Harsh words are in order on this, if only to get this guy to get his head straight and think things through a bit more.
Health and Human Services/FDA
Laser Article
Scientific American Read the entire article.
So for a pointer to be useful, the power must be high enough that the government classifies it as a 3A and requires a DANGER label.
Last edited:
I am really just trying to make my words sneak in through the ego's preservation wall (that we all have to some extent). While I guess the facepalm was my way to place a warning label for others reading this in close proximity to his post.
Thank the heavens for facepalm.. it is such a useful image.
The other problem is that anger creates more anger, and leads to more negatives, less growth, so on so forth... so while the facepalm helps as a warning to others, if I didn't stand by my apology (which I do) then I am not helping as much as I can.
(I am doing a little soul searching of my own right now) :thumbsup:
Doc Bernard
Indie Arms Member
I hear you. For me, sometimes I get a bit worked up when I hear people giving advice that has a real potential for injury. There are some really naive people out there, and the impression may be that "hey, this site (DVX) talks about it, and he is a member there, so maybe it will work and it's safe." This is very similar to the joker that suggested using an airsoft gun to initiate a blood hit, without safety gear for the actors.
I would be just as vocal, if he was telling people about any other dangerous stunt/effect when he shouldn't be.
I would be just as vocal, if he was telling people about any other dangerous stunt/effect when he shouldn't be.
So to sum up your counter argument, "Don't trust what you read on the internet, take a look at what I found on the internet"
And a label is a label, they have to put one on because it MAY be dangerous just like a plastic bag or a toy. If you read what I posted, staring at a laser for 10 seconds will cause some damage, but a split, therefore weaker, beam for 1 second at most would most likely not be harmful.
Also, you missed the part where I offered my input on what should be done for it to be done in post, as well as another method that wouldn’t use a laser but a cheap light bulb and a slit cut in cardboard, maybe even a flashlight with a red filter on it with some cardboard now that I think about this dead topic more.
Last edited:
a) Yes its true, just like any kind of knife can cut your finger off, yet you still use them every day and treat them no different from a spoon. If you would pre cut your food in the kitchen before it got to your plate it would reduce the "unnecessary danger" and reduce your exposure to them.
[FONT="]b) What would you be looking at then if it wasn’t beams of light reflected/refracted back at you originating from the original source?[/FONT]
Sometimes you just have to wake up and live your life even with all those what ifs out there in the world.
Doc Bernard
Indie Arms Member
Brother, I backed my statements up with actual sites (More than just the one you alluded to), two of which are well respected informational sources The HHS and Scientific American. Where is this site you purport says it's okay to flash a laser into peoples eyes?
"1 second at most would most likely not be harmful." Based on what info? You know something every eye doctor doesn't? There are reasons the label on lasers says Danger, not Notice or "Not Really Bad, This Warning is Only on the Slight Chance You Could Have a Little Discomfort". I guess the warnings on bottles of poison are just there "just in case" it might be bad for you. Silly me and everyone else, we felt there was enough anecdotal evidence there to not need to try it for ourselves before we believed that is was actually poison.
Even a millisecond flash could cause "flash blindness", yet you want to subject someone to a full second? You should not be talking about or recommending things you have no real knowledge about. Especially when it could very well jeopardize another person's safety and well being.
That last statement you made makes me worry the most. "Sometimes you just have to wake up and live your life even with all those what ifs out there in the world." At whose expense?
You want to put others at risk, so post your full name and own up to the dangerous info you posted. This way you can assume some of the risk, if anybody is foolish enough to try your idea can sue you personally.
"1 second at most would most likely not be harmful." Based on what info? You know something every eye doctor doesn't? There are reasons the label on lasers says Danger, not Notice or "Not Really Bad, This Warning is Only on the Slight Chance You Could Have a Little Discomfort". I guess the warnings on bottles of poison are just there "just in case" it might be bad for you. Silly me and everyone else, we felt there was enough anecdotal evidence there to not need to try it for ourselves before we believed that is was actually poison.
Even a millisecond flash could cause "flash blindness", yet you want to subject someone to a full second? You should not be talking about or recommending things you have no real knowledge about. Especially when it could very well jeopardize another person's safety and well being.
That last statement you made makes me worry the most. "Sometimes you just have to wake up and live your life even with all those what ifs out there in the world." At whose expense?
You want to put others at risk, so post your full name and own up to the dangerous info you posted. This way you can assume some of the risk, if anybody is foolish enough to try your idea can sue you personally.
Last edited:
In a article that was titled .... wait for it.......
"The laser pointer: no demonstrated danger to the eyes"
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9856195
Also the common conclusion is that it takes at least 10 seconds for non long term damage that heals in weeks/ months. And less time is relatively safe.
You mean those same eye doctors that use a "high-intensity light source that can be focused to shine a thin sheet of light into the eye" for exams?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slit_lamp
Lasers arnt magical, damage comes from HEAT, so the longer the exposure the more heat, and the cheapo ones would take longer then a few miliseconds.
Also flash blindness, lasts a few seconds to a few minutes depending on how severe.... nothing long term. Its not like your setting off a flash bang to do your laser scan, and if you were, you would still recover in a short period of time.
- Status