UVing???

jcoote

any folks in ireland do UV tattoos does anyone know???

amazingemmet

Personally i wouldn't put the ink into my body, afaik there's no one who's doing the ink but i'm sure you could order it and get someone to do the tat for you with it.

jcoote

cheers emmet must talk to someone sbout it

Blub2k4

Is it the chamele0n blacklight ink that you are looking at? It is the only stuff I would consider and even then.....have a look at the reports on bmezine and check the web a bit......the jury is still majorly out on the whole UV tattoo thing with some of the earlier inks causing major problems for people, this new one could be the answer but I'd still be wary. If you are gonna order inks and bring them to an artist you may as well buy a portable blacklight while you are at it, they wont have one in the shop if they dont already use the stuff.

jcoote

i have a blacklight already but i would've never thought to bring it with me just as well iasked ..i reckon it'll be a while down the line but i'd love to get something done for sure

Blub2k4

jcoote wrote:

i have a blacklight already but i would've never thought to bring it with me just as well iasked ..i reckon it'll be a while down the line but i'd love to get something done for sure

ai it's kinda hard to tattoo with invisible ink
Keep an eye on the chameleon stuff I think it may be the first "safe" ink that has been made, but you need to give it another few years to see how it pans out it is still too new to know

jcoote

yeah its a bit of a commitment if it goes pear shaped to be left with a big dirty scar or somethin on your body and u can't even see the ink

Blub2k4

There are horror stories on bmezine about the old stuff and infections and itches etc etc

Shelli

I've heard some real horror stories, varying from itches to cancer! But it could be just "chinese whispers" at work there, I still wouldn't trust it though, it hasn't been proved safe at all, I reckon it'll be another at least 7-8 years before it can said to be safe and even then god only knows what the long term effects could be.

amazingemmet

Speaking of uv ink. The girl who's doing my back told me about this guy she worked with in holland, a headcase supposedly, just mixed uv poster paint into some white ink then tattooed his face with it on one of the slower days in their shop.

jcoote

amazingemmet wrote:

Speaking of uv ink. The girl who's doing my back told me about this guy she worked with in holland, a headcase supposedly, just mixed uv poster paint into some white ink then tattooed his face with it on one of the slower days in their shop.

amsterdam is deadly how did it turn out did u hear

Shelli

amazingemmet wrote:

Speaking of uv ink. The girl who's doing my back told me about this guy she worked with in holland, a headcase supposedly, just mixed uv poster paint into some white ink then tattooed his face with it on one of the slower days in their shop.

Jesus H Christ! That cannot be good for you!

amazingemmet

Mine and her thoughts exactly, supposedly he wasn't altogether and no one is sure if he's still alive either

Reku

Blub2k4 wrote:

ai it's kinda hard to tattoo with invisible ink
Keep an eye on the chameleon stuff I think it may be the first "safe" ink that has been made, but you need to give it another few years to see how it pans out it is still too new to know

http://www.blacklight-tattoo-ink.com/tattoo-supplies-supply.htm

All the 17 colors show up in normal light. The 18th color UV Titanium White can be used on light skin tones to create virtually invisible tattoos - some light scaring may occur due to the tattooing process. See some the listings in the Professional Tattoo Studios for Black Light Tattoo Pictures Samples.

Also Chameleon Ink has been around for 10 years so it's not that new, and the FDA seems to be ok with it (though wouldn't be the first safe toxin people have taken due to FDA/similar bodies' approval).

Blub2k4

farohar wrote:

http://www.blacklight-tattoo-ink.com/tattoo-supplies-supply.htm
Also Chameleon Ink has been around for 10 years so it's not that new, and the FDA seems to be ok with it (though wouldn't be the first safe toxin people have taken due to FDA/similar bodies' approval).

Check out the actual FDA approval, what does it say exactly? It is along the lines of it being safe for wildlife in catch and release programs and also that it is safe for use in massive dilutions in drinking water when trying to track certain things....regardless of the details it is not approved as a tattoo ink , but then none of the other inks are either, if it's good enough for you knock yerself out, I have no intentions or wishes to put the stuff in me

Will

Ive seen a few of the tattoo's on bmezine, they look good i think. Havent seen em all though because im not a member (is it worth joining by the way?) You would stand out in a nightclub alright!

porn_star

I don't know would I get tattooed with uv, I don't see it in the near future anyways.
Wilburt, bme is worth joining alright, it's a good site, you get a lot more access with a membership and get to join the iam community and meet some good people!

Thephantomsmask

Wilburt - Easiest way to join is to submit a photo or an experience, at least then if you decide you don't like BME you won't be out of pocket. There's about 30 or so Irish members on IAM.

Will

Yeah iv been really interested in it really. Just dont have a credit card. Itd be nice for once to meet people who like body piercing etc. as much as me! :v:
Back on topic: Id be wary of the ink, was thinking about it alot. Could turn very nasty by what some people are saying

Reku

Wilburt wrote:

Yeah iv been really interested in it really. Just dont have a credit card. Itd be nice for once to meet people who like body piercing etc. as much as me! :v:
Back on topic: Id be wary of the ink, was thinking about it alot. Could turn very nasty by what some people are saying

As could any ink, none of them have any higher approvals than this stuff. I think the big issue people have with this is that it's fluorescent, one of the questions that seems to come up in every physics class is over the danger of the radiation from glow in the dark products as people are just paranoid about materials which don't behave as they would expect, are only visible through current external light source.

There are concerns that the phosphoric acid in many fizzy drinks weakens bone structure by removing calcium from your body (then there's the whole fact of cola being a good paint stripper and cleaning agent for silverware :eek: yum-yum, nice clean insides), how many here are going to stop drinking fizzy drinks? Probably none, the difference is that we've become accustomed to fizzy drinks and are used to having them in our daily lives, fluorescent things however are still a bit more unusual.
Mobile phones are believed to be strongly connected to brain tumours, who here uses one?;)

amazingemmet

farohar wrote:

There are concerns that the phosphoric acid in many fizzy drinks weakens bone structure by removing calcium from your body (then there's the whole fact of cola being a good paint stripper and cleaning agent for silverware :eek: yum-yum, nice clean insides), how many here are going to stop drinking fizzy drinks? Probably none, the difference is that we've become accustomed to fizzy drinks and are used to having them in our daily lives, fluorescent things however are still a bit more unusual.
Mobile phones are believed to be strongly connected to brain tumours, who here uses one?;)

As for the fizzy drinks thing i use coke to clean rusted and seized parts on my bike, wouldn't put the stuff in my body. As for the ink stuff if you read some of the reports on bme you can see where the concern is, as there is a hugely higher instance of reactions and rejections then to normal inks. Can you back the mobile phone comment up with a peer reviewed study or is it just conjecture?

Reku

http://www.powerwatch.org.uk/news/20050516_tumour.asp
and that's just one study connecting them to brain tumours, there are many, many more.

FYI A guy in my physics class in college was doing an experiment on EM radiation in the atmosphere so out of curiousity we put my mobile by the sensor, nothing much happened, so I dialed out with it near the sensor, it jumped to >200V of EM radiation just for phoning 1741! While the device wasn't calibrated for measuring the radiative output of a mobile they clearly put out a lot of radiation when in use, the simple fact of the effect they have on nearby electronics (the noise you get on speakers sometimes when your mobile is near them) when cycling between bands should tell you that, and this is when they aren't even sending a full signal (they are sending partial ones, hence how the mobile companies can track you to within 10ft for their whole find a friend service they started offering about 2-3 years back).

I'll have to see about taking a look at the BME reports, but then I'll take them with a pinch of salt, afterall how many of the Irish tattoo parlours have gotten a number of bad reports and yet people still go to them, many (both new and experienced when it comes to getting tattoos) quite happy with the service.

amazingemmet

Interesting linkage time to don a tin foil hat me thinks when using the phone. as for the reports there a big difference bwtween getting a bad tattoo and having a reaction to the ink

Reku

amazingemmet wrote:

Interesting linkage time to don a tin foil hat me thinks when using the phone. as for the reports there a big difference bwtween getting a bad tattoo and having a reaction to the ink

Ah yes, I can see it now, the entire world population walking around with faraday cages over their heads! lol
Are you aware of the connection between High Voltage pylons and childhood leukaemia? (see can I make you afraid to wake-up in the morning!:D )

Ok, I've only found one article so far on BME about the UV inks and it's a positive one:
http://www.bmezine.com/tattoo/A40319/tatuvand.html

This one only makes reference to the inks and possibilities of their usefulness:
http://www.bmezine.com/tattoo/A40310/tatthefi.html

And this one metions the tattooist doing a UV ink one on himself:
http://www.bmezine.com/tattoo/A51212/tatonema.html


There are certainly plenty of pics of successful ones too so if any of you guys can find negative articles (or more positive or neutral ones even!) please post them here to show both sides of the coin.

Might do as one person has shown in the images and get a wee test bit done somewhere see how it heals up and if it's still visible after healing, it'd certainly let me know if I should risk the full thing or if it'd stick out like a zit.
If it was only as visible as this:



I might go for it, but I'd rather it to be a bit less noticeble than this even. Obviously would need to book time off work to let it heal so that no-one would know but that wouldn't be an issue for me.

amazingemmet

farohar wrote:

Ah yes, I can see it now, the entire world population walking around with faraday cages over their heads! lol
Are you aware of the connection between High Voltage pylons and childhood leukaemia? (see can I make you afraid to wake-up in the morning!:D )

Yeah i know that one alright kinda makes sense when you can hold a flurscent tube under one and it'll light up glad i don't live near any. I'll try dig up some reports but they were from awhile back so might not have any joy.

Reku

amazingemmet wrote:

Yeah i know that one alright kinda makes sense when you can hold a flurscent tube under one and it'll light up glad i don't live near any. I'll try dig up some reports but they were from awhile back so might not have any joy.

Dang! Those things must have a HUGE EM-field to induce currents in the bulb filament like that! Definitely glad I don't live near one, would probably screw with every TV and radio in the house!

No worries if you can't find the reports but it would be good to hear what kind of reactions can occur if the inks don't agree with you.

amazingemmet

Its crazy alright this artist done a installation where he "planted" a load of the bulbs to look like corn and they were all lite up tis crazy alright.

I remember the reactions alright, the mild ones are just constant itching and the severe ones are like scabs forming over the tattoo. Most case i've read have gone fine but there is more cases of reactions per tattoo with the uv inks then per normal inks

Blub2k4

farohar wrote:

I think the big issue people have with this is that it's fluorescent

Eh no it's the skin cancer tbh......the entries in the Bme encyclopedia with regard to UV ink are gone.....strange that.

Reku

Blub2k4 wrote:

Eh no it's the skin cancer tbh......the entries in the Bme encyclopedia with regard to UV ink are gone.....strange that.

Your assumption that they'd be connected to cancer just proves my point, just because they glow under UV does not make them a source of dangerous radiation (right now you yourself are putting out large amounts of various forms of radiation, some from decay of carbon isotopes, large amounts of thermal radiation, absorbed and re-emitted photonic radiation <== a non-wavelength shifted version of what happens with the UV inks). If the inks were a known carcinogen they would be banned outright and they would not be authorised in any way by the FDA, either for human or animal use since they would risk it entering the food supply and indirectly contaminating people.
The fact that all the negative articles you guys refered to are gone leaves me thinking that even BME was skeptical of their integrity, please lets keep any accusations of sideaffects to what can be backed up.
Itching I would believe since this can happen with any tattoo ink, if for some reason one of it's components just doesn't agree with you, claiming cancer is just scare mongering since it would've been withdrawn from the market the instant even a vague connection was established since the resulting lawsuits if it was kept in circulation would cost more than the company could possibly earn from sales.
The only possible connection to skin cancer I can see would be if you were stupid enough to keep exposing yourself to UV (blacklight) day-in-day-out, UV DOES cause skin cancer, the light re-emitted by the inks will not as it is of a longer wavelength.

Blub2k4

search for tatuscotty and UV inks, he's the guy all over BME with the tatted face, he's a tattoo artist and had inks in his skin in 2003 until he had them lasered out.
Do you have a UV tattoo?

Blub2k4

farohar wrote:

If the inks were a known carcinogen they would be banned outright and they would not be authorised in any way by the FDA, either for human or animal use since they would risk it entering the food supply and indirectly contaminating people.

That's horse**** by the way, the FDA have Fcuk all to do with tattoo inks, make up your mind, one minute they regulate none of it and the next they will pull approval for an ink they never approved.......duh

Reku

Blub2k4 wrote:

That's horse**** by the way, the FDA have Fcuk all to do with tattoo inks, make up your mind, one minute they regulate none of it and the next they will pull approval for an ink they never approved.......duh

I never said they had nothing to do with it, in fact I was the one who pointed out that they, chameleon inks, do have FDA approval, they are the only tattoo ink which does. The FDA, or any other similar organisation, would not permit any carcinogenic chemicals to be used on animals which may enter the food chain after the mistake they made with pesticides years back (DDT).

And FYI getting hostile and aggressive does not make your point either more valid or make you seem smarter, quite the contrary, find someone else to vent your personal issues on.