Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

allonym

macrumors 6502
Jun 12, 2009
307
512
All this ‘proves’ is that the iPhone emits light at wavelengths that a camera can detect. It in no way proves that this poses any danger to human health.
Sorry for replying to my own post. This is just to note that the original title of this thread was:

'FaceID is dangerous for your eyes (in dark environments)'

and the first sentence of the original post was:

'Proof in the youtube video below'

My comment above quoted that sentence and was a direct response to it. I though I'd post this for clarity as the OP has now changed both the thread title and the content of the first post.
 

stafil

macrumors 6502
Original poster
Sep 15, 2017
425
297
Sorry for replying to my own post. This is just to note that the original title of this thread was:

'FaceID is dangerous for your eyes (in dark environments)'

and the first sentence of the original post was:

'Proof in the youtube video below'

My comment above quoted that sentence and was a direct response to it. I though I'd post this for clarity as the OP has now changed both the thread title and the content of the first post.

Yes. I apologize for changing it. I was accused of putting a click bait title, that’s why I changed. Then I had to change the wording in the post as well and went down that rabbit hole. In retrospect I realize I shouldn’t have changed anything. My bad.
[doublepost=1540798393][/doublepost]
Samsung sell significantly less phones than Apple, so you would hear significantly fewer complaints. Samsung also provide OLED displays for Apple, so there shouldn't be a problem there.

Whether Apple were to publish technical information is irrelevant, if you aren't capable of understanding them. You have jumped to a negative conclusion - not a hypothesis. As the other user pointed out, you could have asked a question, instead you've formed a conclusion based on a misunderstanding of technology.

It's not about defending or attacking, these are well established principles. Whether company A or X is employing them doesn't matter. Apple would be unlikely to ever provide technical information, as they don't make the part, they just need to prove it's safe.

If you want to be a kitchen-table scientist then go ahead, science is important and learning about the methodology is equally important. Just don't think what you are doing is correct, and has many flaws. And no you can't write a scientific paper, unless you are a qualified scientist in a particular field - you can't just write something and submit it for peer-review and expect any meaningful response.

Can I ask you a couple of straight questions and get straight and direct answers?

If the light you see in the video was visible and was flashing in your eyes every 5 seconds for 8 hours a day, would you say it was bad for your eyes?

If yes, why do you think the IR light of same intensity is not?
 
  • Like
Reactions: matthijst

New_Mac_Smell

macrumors 68000
Oct 17, 2016
1,931
1,552
Shanghai
You cannot perceive it....
Tell that to millions of people that get skin cancer from UV.

Okay, you cannot perceive it...

UV is much stronger than IR, hence you can perceive it. Normally has other effects such as burning your skin etc. IR light from a tiny LED is imperceivable. Meaning you cannot see it, but also cannot feel it, hear it, touch it, smell it, or any other senses, it is imperceivable. There are also no biological implications from using an LED as per current general knowledge of the last 60 years of using them.
 
  • Like
Reactions: MyMacintosh

Absrnd

macrumors 6502a
Apr 15, 2010
915
1,671
Flatland
Yes. I apologize for changing it. I was accused of putting a click bait title, that’s why I changed. Then I had to change the wording in the post as well and went down that rabbit hole. In retrospect I realize I shouldn’t have changed anything. My bad.

Did you even try to use search ?
There are multiple threads on this, and they all came to the real conclusion it is not harmful !

Please stop this nonsense, using words like "shocking"and "striking every 5 seconds"
do your research before posting to scare users, every time a new iPhone is released jeez :mad:
 

stafil

macrumors 6502
Original poster
Sep 15, 2017
425
297
People. Hasn’t anyone of you ever been told that it is harmful to look at the sun even during total eclipse because of the IR?
Did you even try to use search ?
There are multiple threads on this, and they all came to the real conclusion it is not harmful !

Please stop this nonsense, using words like "shocking"and "striking every 5 seconds"
do your research before posting to scare users, every time a new iPhone is released jeez :mad:


“Real conclusion”? How come no one has posted the real conclusion here?

All I read in the other thread was, it’s like the remote control. That’s the “real conclusion”?
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: matthijst

C DM

macrumors Sandy Bridge
Oct 17, 2011
51,392
19,461
People. Hasn’t anyone of you ever been told that it is harmful to look at the sun even during total eclipse because of the IR?
Because of IR? And how does the light intensity from a star that outputs light and heat across a whole range of spectrum compare to a small IR LED?
 
  • Like
Reactions: MEJHarrison

SteelHeart

macrumors newbie
Oct 8, 2018
29
7
So if we turn of the face id option then we don’t get the IR emitting from True Tone camera right ?
 

New_Mac_Smell

macrumors 68000
Oct 17, 2016
1,931
1,552
Shanghai
Yes. I apologize for changing it. I was accused of putting a click bait title, that’s why I changed. Then I had to change the wording in the post as well and went down that rabbit hole. In retrospect I realize I shouldn’t have changed anything. My bad.
[doublepost=1540798393][/doublepost]

Can I ask you a couple of straight questions and get straight and direct answers?

If the light you see in the video was visible and was flashing in your eyes every 5 seconds for 8 hours a day, would you say it was bad for your eyes?

If yes, why do you think the IR light of same intensity is not?

Sure.

No, it would not be bad for your eyes as the intensity is too low. It would be uncomfortable, and possibly cause an epileptic fit if it was very fast, but it would not cause any damage.

The cells in your eye are constantly regrowing as they are constantly damaged by a variety of things. The most obvious example of this is burn in, if you stare at a bright light source then close your eyes, and you can still 'see' the light. This is because the nerves have been temporarily damaged - or shocked, and need a moment to recover. But this effect is only observable with visible light, not IR or UV, or anything else on the spectrum. This is because your eyes have evolved only to detect visible light - so they are only sensitive to visible light. These cells evolved from simple nerves found all over your body, if you shine a light onto your arm you cannot perceive it, however you can feel the heat if it is strong enough. Again, if you were to hold a hot source over your skin for too long this would cause temporary damage (Burning), which you know will heal as these cells are repaired. The same thing occurs with your eyes, it is possible to permanently damage them but this requires intense light + heat (Often these come together), staring at the sun is not enough to do this, but being close to a nuclear blast would (And obviously have other side-effects).

Essentially, the light coming from an LED - perceivable or not - is simply not strong enough to have any effect on you.

You have mentioned pupils and other elements of the eye before, however these are only there for focusing light onto these nerves, and react to visible light incredibly quickly. Using a camera you can detect other light sources, for example IR, this is because a camera and the human eye work very differently, your eye cannot detect 'invisible' light and so cannot be effected by it. Note this is just 'light' we are talking about, IR light is used for a lot of heating elements because it carries a much stronger level of heat than visible light. However, even if you were to sit in-front of an IR heater for several hours staring directly at it - it's the heat that would cause discomfort, not the light.

For what it's worth I spent 18 months of a Psychology degree studying vision.
 
  • Like
Reactions: digitalexplr

maerz001

macrumors 68030
Nov 2, 2010
2,533
2,444
People. Hasn’t anyone of you ever been told that it is harmful to look at the sun even during total eclipse because of the IR?



“Real conclusion”? How come no one has posted the real conclusion here?
No its UV
https://www.businessinsider.com/solar-eclipse-retinopathy-eye-damage-sun-2017-8

I posted in other threads that there are IR heaters with kW of power sold for decades. So why should a LED with mW harm you?
It all comes to the power which enters your eye and be transformed to heat which destroys your retina. No matter what wavelength it is.

For lasers there is a limit of 1mW what is allowed to sell to private people. Here all power is focused in a single spot.

Apples IR projector emits 30000 points. So the limit would be a 30W emitting LED they could use. That translates to about 60W of input power due to electro-optical efficiency. But apparently they don’t cos this would be as big as big as a match box, suck out your battery in no time and transforms your mobile in an oven.
 

stafil

macrumors 6502
Original poster
Sep 15, 2017
425
297
Yes, please stop, and read all the other threads carefully o_O
You still haven’t told me what the proof of the other threads is.

By the way nobody is forcing you to participate in this thread.
 

Absrnd

macrumors 6502a
Apr 15, 2010
915
1,671
Flatland
You still haven’t told me what the proof of the other threads is.

By the way nobody is forcing you to participate in this thread.


Instead of you doing the research for the evidence you want, you expect somebody to hand you the information on a platter, and complaint that it is not clear enough.
please stop responding and do your own research, and post it here, when you are done...please :rolleyes:
 

Absrnd

macrumors 6502a
Apr 15, 2010
915
1,671
Flatland
  • Like
Reactions: barbu and artfossil

stafil

macrumors 6502
Original poster
Sep 15, 2017
425
297
I stand corrected, this ...is ...real ...scientific ...evidence,
I never knew macRumors had a science part of the forum, thank you very much, I will disable Face-Id and know for sure I made the right choice, and not loos my eye sight :confused:

I did also loose some brain cells reading this posting, but that was my own choice :)
Where are your scientific data? Or you just trolling?
 

SBruv

macrumors 6502a
Sep 25, 2008
647
321
With all the options off, the flood illuminator doesn't trigger anymore.
[doublepost=1540790864][/doublepost]

So are you saying that with Attention Awareness turned off, the flood illuminator only activates when you actually use Face ID, rather than constantly every few seconds?

Does Require Attention also have to be turned off?

(I went through what you're going through right here last year when the X came out, btw. People just don't wanna hear it. Apparently Apple's word is enough, and perfectly credible emerging scientific data is all just paranoia.)
 
  • Like
Reactions: stafil

matthijst

macrumors 6502
Jun 8, 2009
266
242
Okay, you cannot perceive it...

UV is much stronger than IR, hence you can perceive it. Normally has other effects such as burning your skin etc. IR light from a tiny LED is imperceivable. Meaning you cannot see it, but also cannot feel it, hear it, touch it, smell it, or any other senses, it is imperceivable. There are also no biological implications from using an LED as per current general knowledge of the last 60 years of using them.
Because people have been shining led lights directly in their eyes the last 60 years?
What a joke.
 

5105973

Cancelled
Sep 11, 2014
12,132
19,733
Your eyes adjust to the light when you are outside and in bright environments.

What the video show is the equivalent of being in a dark room and having your iPhone's camera flash go on in your face every 5 seconds?

Sure your eyes get exposed to light more than that of the iPhone's camera every day. But would you like it to blink in your face every 5 seconds?
[doublepost=1540789087][/doublepost]


Will do another video just for you. Hold tight.
I can’t watch ANY video with any kind of visual flashing of light, nor anything showing the screen flicker from pwm. I’m prone to seizures from that sort of thing. Just please tell me verbally if the flood illuminator is still flashing into your eyes with attention aware toggled off.

Edit: it looks like later in the conversation you’re telling someone with attention awareness turned off it does NOT flood our face with dots anymore. Okay, so what’s the big deal? Then it’s working like Apple say it does.
 
Last edited:

timeconsumer

macrumors 68020
Aug 1, 2008
2,135
2,173
Portland
Getting Apple to publish at least their technical specifications would be a good start for sure.

All I have heard from them so far is “It’s not harmful, trust us”
Off topic: kind of like their stance on privacy. They just want us to “trust them” and since it’s a closed system that’s all we can do.

On topic: This topic is one reason why I am not interested in Face ID. I’m waiting until there’s more research available. I’m also affected by PWM so it looks like sticking with my iPhone 7+ or moving to an 8+ is the way to go.
 
  • Like
Reactions: stafil

Jimmy James

macrumors 603
Oct 26, 2008
5,489
4,067
Magicland
I don’t have a position yet on the effects of IR on eyes. However, the number of people grossly misunderstanding the OP’s reasoning is hilarious. Also, this mindset of “I can’t see it, therefor it can’t hurt me” is deeply concerning beyond this specific issue.
 

jeremiah256

macrumors 65816
Aug 2, 2008
1,444
1,169
Southern California
I am not going to spend all day doing random tests just so you guys can change your story later. Check out the test with the stove requested by another user who later changed his story.
You’re, again, leaping to conclusions. I didn’t change my story. I told you to do an experiment. It showed that the IR from the phone held in your hand (close to your recording device) was brighter than the stove burner which was further away. That is all it showed. It didn’t prove harm or safety, just relative brightness.
 

Jensend

macrumors 65816
Dec 19, 2008
1,449
1,662
People. Hasn’t anyone of you ever been told that it is harmful to look at the sun even during total eclipse because of the IR?



“Real conclusion”? How come no one has posted the real conclusion here?

All I read in the other thread was, it’s like the remote control. That’s the “real conclusion”?
You can look towards the sun during a total eclipse without damaging your eyes. You just can’t stare at it during a partial eclipse.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.