Talk:Red-eye effect

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This page is within the scope of WikiProject History of photography, a project to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to articles on the history of photography on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
B This article has been rated as B-Class on the quality scale.
WikiProject Medicine This article is within the scope of WikiProject Medicine. Please visit the project page for details or ask questions at the doctor's mess.
B This page has been rated as B-Class on the quality assessment scale
Mid This article has been rated as mid-importance on the importance assessment scale

Contents

[edit] ALWAYS

—Preceding unsigned comment added by 194.110.67.128 (talk) 08:16, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

I changed the part of this article that mentioned the lens of the eye focusing light from the flash onto the retina. In fact, most of the focusing done by the eye is not done by the lens. Instead, the change in index of refraction from air (N=1) to liquid (N=1.3) does most of the focusing. The index of refraction for the lens is about 1.45 and thus it does focus light, but due to its thickness compared to that of the entire thickness of the eye it is not the primary focusing agent.

I'd need to ask the person I took the picture of for her permission (although I don't *need* it) before I'd put it on the wikipedia, but I got a textbook example. [1] Ich 08:45, 19 July 2005 (UTC)

When I take flash-pictures of horses, the eyes are always green not red. It would be nice if the article would specify why the colours are different with different species. -- Ernst Mulder

Yeah, my dog gets "blue-eye." ...would be interesting to know why... -- b3n —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.154.29.25 (talk) 10:48, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

—Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.93.202.163 (talk) 12:13, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

As I recall, different species have different colours of "red eye". Does anyone know about this?

Well, the picture I uploaded for this page is a bit more yellow-eye than red. I have a better, non-animal, example - but need to persuade the subject to allow a very bad picture of him to be used on-line ;) I also have a picture of a cat with bright-green-eye that might be useful. -- sannse 20:12 Mar 30, 2003 (UTC)

This is a brilliant (no pun intended) page. Is it possible to add info on HOW to avoid it by flashgun angle? That would be v useful to duff photographers e.g. me. OK sure you don't get it with a bounce flash head, but how can you judge what separation is needed if you are pointing the flash at the subject? Is it distance related?? etc etc etc. Thanks in anticiaption, Nevilley 18:18 Mar 31, 2003 (UTC)

The image of the dog shows more vividly the red eye effect than the image of the man. Why not use the dog picture? Or, if you're married to the idea of a human image, find one that shows the effect as vividly as the dog image. IMHO, Kingturtle 09:31 Apr 20, 2003 (UTC)

The dog picture was better. Ericd 09:37 Apr 20, 2003 (UTC)

The problem with the dog image is that it doesn't show red eyes, they are more yellow and I feared that that the colour was from a slightly different effect (reflection from the tapetum lucidum rather than the blood in the retina). I am intending to replace the image with a better example as I find one (unless someone else finds one first of course), but I thought it better to have the more appropriate image for now. If you both disagree I'll put the dog back until I find a better human example. -- sannse 09:43 Apr 20, 2003 (UTC)
Well I see your point. The dog picture is probably more effected by the dog's inner eye reflection. But surely we can find a photo that better shows the red-eye effect. Kingturtle 09:48 Apr 20, 2003 (UTC)

I'm sure we can. This was the best I had, I tend to throw out or edit any that have red eye. Next time I'm in a dark room with a flash and a suitable subject I'll try and get a better one. Or perhaps someone else has a good example? I've reverted to the dog for now. -- sannse 09:57 Apr 20, 2003 (UTC)

There's one I took with my digital (the cheap kind; ironically it's supposed to suppress redeye). It's not very clear though. Hephaestos 10:04 Apr 20, 2003 (UTC)
Excellent! Kingturtle 10:07 Apr 20, 2003 (UTC)
Good example, thanks -- sannse 10:11 Apr 20, 2003 (UTC)

Waooohhh wonderful example. The "best" red eye effect is achieved with children and animals adults often look elswhere to avoid the flash. Ericd 11:25 Apr 20, 2003 (UTC)

[edit] Dead men show no Red Eye

Anyone know why dead People don't have a red eye effect? THis could be a nice addition to the article...


....mostly because their eyes are closed. Also because dead people don't often feature in holiday photos (except in Rhyl), but mostly because there is no blood in the blood vessels behind the retina so you ought to get a grey-eye effect. Any examples out there ? Mrs Trellis 09:46, 19 July 2005 (UTC)

[edit] glowing eyes

So, red eye is noticable in photographs because the pupil has not had time to shrink in response to the light? Does this mean that lower levels of light also reflect back out of the eye from the retina, but we just don't notice it? (Infrared is also brilliantly reflected by the eye, but we can't usually see infrared.) I wonder, do other animals ever notice human eyes glowing under natural light; and do cats, for example, notice other cats' eyes glowing? Can people use the light reflecting from their eyes like a flashlight? Does the light reflected by the eye contribute to ambient surroundings?

Yes, red reflection is normal but usually not perceptible. Infrared usually is absorbed or radiated, but not reflected. Human eyes do not have eyeshine, and other animals lack red-sensitive cones so do not see red well, so other animals probably do not see our eyes shining in this sense. In some natural light conditions, even humans can see eyeshine in cats; I am sure cats notice it. --Una Smith (talk) 17:14, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] statement under inset cat image is wrong

The inset image of the cat incorrectly states that the red-eye effect in cats is not red. Blue-eyed cats glow red and other eye colors glow green. Odd-eyed whites, for example, glow red in one eye and green in the other. Greg [[User_talk:Evilgreg3000|(Talk)]] 02:40, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

There is one small error which should be corrected: The text 'In many species the tapetum lucidum,...' needs qualification as it appears to imply from the preceeding paragraph that the species are different types of people rather than animals or perhaps other creatures.

[edit] Graphic would be nice

It would be good if someone draws a graphic showing how the light is reflected back in the direction it came from. --Apoc2400 04:16, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Speaking of Red and Green Eyes

    I have been trying to determine the cause of my eye color in this photo:

http://photos-c.ak.facebook.com/photos-ak-sctm/v10/128/84/3210900/n3210900_30359310_8829.jpg

    Is this type of reflection common, am I some freak with a tapetum lucidium, or some other disease?

Why the green eye reflection? —Preceding unsigned comment added by FlyingApe (talk • contribs) 17:14, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

If it was just one photo, it is probably a fluke. If it happens in multiple photos, you may have a retinoblastoma, a kind of cancer. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.118.216.61 (talk) 23:13, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Ringlight?

Why does a ringlight never seem to produce redeye? —Ben FrantzDale (talk) 12:30, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Eyeshine

Re eyeshine, the article currently states that red-eye effect "contributes to variation in the color of the reflected light from species to species." Someone please cite a ref that shows red-eye effect contributes to the color of eyeshine. Note that if such a contribution exists, then it can only exist in photographs, not in nature, because the red-eye effect is not perceptible in nature. --Una Smith (talk) 21:24, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Y Done --Una Smith (talk) 17:29, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Applications

The red-eye effect is used in several computer-human interface applications. A new section about this is needed in this article. --Una Smith (talk) 17:29, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Specialized red-eye removal software

Don't you think it'll be useful for readers to add some specialized software for red eye removal?

[edit] Specialized red-eye removal software

Don't you think it's useful for readers to add references to some specialized software for red eye removal?

Vista photo gallery, Gimp etc are general photo editors, but it's really convenient to use a software that targeted at the very red eye removal task. If it's not appropriate to set direct links to such products (that would be really convenient for users who are looking for a red eye solution) it is a good idea to add information about names of these products.

--ThePPK (talk) 11:52, 10 June 2008 (UTC)

What Wikipedia is not is a link farm to commercial sites. There are already many search engines that will offer to sell hundreds of applications for removing red-eye from digital photographs. We don't need to use Wikipedia for promoting commercial products. If we did there would be endless disputes about the merits and de-merits of particular software solution. So no links and no products references. Velela (talk) 13:54, 10 June 2008 (UTC)
"Really convenient" is a matter of opinion, and does not belong in an encyclopedia. Open Directory is a good place to list products and links; and a link to Open Directory would be okay. --Una Smith (talk) 13:59, 10 June 2008 (UTC)