On Thu, 14 Nov 2002 16:07:29 GMT, Mark Roberts wrote:
>Robert Feinman wrote:

>>ken@usenet.ca wrote:
>>> I know that we have infra-red film, but is there a film for the low
>>> end of the light spectrum, the ultraviolet at less than 400
>>> nanometres? Is such a thing feasable? Would it be useful in any way?

>>One cheap way to try this out is to use a pinhole instead of a lens.
>>Combine this with a visible light blocking uv filter (probably gelatine
>>or similar).
>>Regular film is sensitive to uv.

>Don't most lenses block UV though? This has been mentioned many times in
>threads debating the use of UV filters.

Yes - this is the point of using a glassless
pinhole instead of a lens, "for cheaps"...;-)

>A friend of mine has a special 100mm
>Nikon macro lens with quartz glass, specifically for photographing under UV
>light.

Yes - see my post, above...

>For those who wonder why he might want to do this: He says it shows bite
>marks really well. (He's a forensic pathologist.)

It shows plant-patterning, too, more as bugs see
them...