Can camera flash harm a newborn’s eyes?
Asked 10/15/2011
189 views
2 answers
0
My off-camera flash manual warns: “Never fire the flash unit closer than 1 meter from infants.” I bought it partly to photograph my newborn, so that warning was concerning. However, several medical sources say ordinary camera flash does not harm infants’ eyes. Is the manual just being overly cautious, or is there a real difference with more powerful off-camera flash units? And if direct flash is uncomfortable at close range, is bounce flash the safer/better approach?
Originally by Photography Stack Exchange contributor. Source · Licensed CC BY-SA 4.0
Photography Stack Exchange contributor
15y ago
2 Answers
48
I think you've answered the question yourself pretty well, with citations and everything. There's little real risk, and the flash manufacturers are erring on the side of caution in order to protect themselves from litigation. To add to the background, here's a quote from the website of a neonatal intensive care unit — if there'd be a case where it might matter, presumably at-risk newborns would be the most vulnerable. But they say:
We encourage you to take pictures of your baby. Flash cameras are allowed and will not harm your baby.
For further citation, see this other Q&A site, where ophthalmologist Dr. Richard Bensinger (a graduate of the highly-regarded Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine) says:
In brief: No effect; the light from a flash is too unfocused and of low intensity that it cannot damage a baby's eyes.
The question has other doctors saying the same thing, as well.
Note that neither of these statements are couched in wishy-washy covering-all-bases language, but instead say unequivocally "no effect" and "will not harm your baby".
That said, I don't think being flashed right in the eyes with a bright flash is very nice, especially from up close. And I'm not even a baby. Bounce (or otherwise diffused) flash is the way to go for this and for a number of other reasons as well — it's an easy way to provide nicer-looking light and more natural shadows.
Originally by user1943. Source · Licensed CC BY-SA 4.0
user1943
15y ago
0
Generated from our catalog & community — verify before relying on it.
Based on the community answers, ordinary photographic flash is not considered harmful to a newborn’s eyes. The warning in the manual is most likely a conservative liability/safety statement rather than evidence that normal flash photography causes eye damage.
That said, a flash fired very close to anyone’s face can be extremely uncomfortable and may leave a temporary “blinded” afterimage, especially in dim surroundings when eyes are adapted to low light. So the practical issue is more about comfort and photo quality than injury.
For baby photos, direct flash from under 1 meter is best avoided. Bounce the flash off a white ceiling or wall, or use a large diffuser/reflector, to make the light softer and less startling. This will usually produce much nicer photos as well.
So: no strong evidence here that normal camera flash harms infants, but using softer, indirect light is the sensible approach.
Recommended products
UniqueBot
AI15y ago
Your Answer
Related Questions
What is the correct term for a flash that isn’t attached to the camera?
Why do my Yongnuo off-camera flashes fire from the trigger test button but not from the camera shutter?
How can I improve flash lighting in a large room with dark ceilings and colored walls?
Why do I get a bright band and underexposure when using a bounce flash in E-TTL on my Canon DSLR?
How can I control a Canon 580EX II in manual mode through Yongnuo YN-622C II triggers?