Andy writes: : Interesting but mixing up infrared, visible and uv is bound to lead to unpredictable and : uncorrectable color anomalies in certain if not all subjects. In my opinion. But this may : not matter to society at large. And if taking a photogrpah truly in darkness lit up by the : flash how is the camera going to record a visible record?? Mystery to me! But people call : me a naysayer quite often. I'm with you on that. I noted they say: "..created the camera in an attempt to do away with blinding regular flashes and the "red eye" effect that usually accompanies them." and presume this is their goal - and the included image of the camera in use shows an off-camera flash. As the off camera flash alone does a pretty good job of eliminating red-eye, so I can't see the point. Not sure about this 'blinding flash' part either. Where did the idea that photo flashes are blinding come from? I mean really, one specular reflection from ordinary sunlight has GOT to be heaps more powerful than anything a photographer is ever likely to point at a person. (I'm also thinking of how pitifully low powered are flashes are for 'fill' on bright sunny days) IR flashes are old news.. so we've got that covered. it's a cute idea to use both ends of the spectrum, but glass eats a fair bit of UV, and that end also tends to be the noisy end, so I'd guess the UV component wouldn't actually contribute a lot to the image. For novelty value this is kind of a cute idea, but with UV and IR photography both well established, i see no benefits karl
