Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
iPhone X Apple iPhone X laser damage with Face ID
- Thread starter JokerABC
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Lmao! Can you imagine if you had actually do that every time and see that in public! That be hilarious
Not even Samsung would do this stupid thing.Lmao! Can you imagine if you had actually do that every time and see that in public! That be hilarious
Great, another...
-Face Id will make you blind
-Face Id will melt your face
-Face Id is slower then touch ID
-Face Id still works with my tin foil hat
-Apple sends your face to a database
-I miss touch ID
-X screen is not bigger then the 8plus
-Your X chip is slower then mine
-Eye strain
-Why the notch
-The notch hides important info
-X speaker louder then...
-Badly designed interface on the X
-I take my X back to the store
-I feel the X is...
-X is too expensive
-Scuffing the stainless edge
-X is a beta product
-X screen better or not then....
-Bugs, Bugs bugs
-The X causes chemtrails
THREAD....did I forget any ?
-Face Id will make you blind
-Face Id will melt your face
-Face Id is slower then touch ID
-Face Id still works with my tin foil hat
-Apple sends your face to a database
-I miss touch ID
-X screen is not bigger then the 8plus
-Your X chip is slower then mine
-Eye strain
-Why the notch
-The notch hides important info
-X speaker louder then...
-Badly designed interface on the X
-I take my X back to the store
-I feel the X is...
-X is too expensive
-Scuffing the stainless edge
-X is a beta product
-X screen better or not then....
-Bugs, Bugs bugs
-The X causes chemtrails
THREAD....did I forget any ?
The willfull ignorance and arrogance in this forum never fails to amaze...
Nice and vague, are they doctors? I doubt they are, as infrared is even radiated by your own body. It's good to be critical, but saying "I have medical people in my family THUS we were concerned" is trying to use the 'authority argument'.
Good job focusing on distracting and focusing on that. The point is the lasers, IR and medical aspect of it. No use of authority here as there are many articles regarding this. Would suggest you do a search yourself instead of picking apart posts.
People just don’t want to think about this potentially serious issue, it would seem. Everyone round here’s an expert on IR and Apple’s VCSEL implementation – they obviously have access to privileged information that the rest of the scientific community doesn’t.
We should take their word for it and just not worry about the possible physiological effect of repeated ocular exposure to focused IR beams of unknown intensity. Because they ‘just know’.
Unknown intensity? Dude you can literally know (in large terms) how much infrared is being emitted, remember kids, IR is heat.
Read up on VCSEL then come back when you’ve got something relevant to contribute. You do know that it’s a laser, right, not just an infrared ‘light’?
Well to be fair, laser only indicates that the light is shot in a small bundle. As far as I understand it the VCSEL is used for the flood illuminator, which cannot be a laser because then there won't be a 'flood'.
Please elaborate behind the reasoning of your concerns and then I can dig into it a bit better because now the thing I'll have to go off is IR might be bad for your eyes, but everything that is warm radiates IR even your own body, I'd love to dig in deeper and have a fact based discussion.
So where were all the reports of people going blind with the Kinect if this was an issue? It’s the same tech and actually the Kinect sensor was many times more powerful as it had to illuminate pretty much the whole room!
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4763141/
Read this and then come back to me, I'd love to discuss
Kinect was also not held right up to the face many times a day. People also used the Kinect primarily in rooms with the lights on, so pupils were not dilated.
I spoke to an optometrist about this issue. She said without knowing specifically the details of what the Face ID emitter is putting out then it’s hard to determine what is and isn’t bad for the eyes. She did say that it is definitely possible to damage the retina by absorbing IR-A radiation especially if regularly exposing dilated pupils to it such as in low light or dark environments.
She also said that as an iPhone user herself that she is going to wait until more is known about the IR-A emissions of Face ID and related health effects on the eyes before getting an X.
I spoke to an optometrist about this issue. She said without knowing specifically the details of what the Face ID emitter is putting out then it’s hard to determine what is and isn’t bad for the eyes. She did say that it is definitely possible to damage the retina by absorbing IR-A radiation especially if regularly exposing dilated pupils to it such as in low light or dark environments.
She also said that as an iPhone user herself that she is going to wait until more is known about the IR-A emissions of Face ID and related health effects on the eyes before getting an X.
That is true, though it is worth noting that is diffuse radiation, whereas the dots are focused.
Well... she's still an optometrist, (at least in my country) basically the only thing they do is measure if you have the right glasses. Better talk to a real medical professional like ophthalmologist about that stuff
Sorry, she’s an Opthamologist (practicing at a hospital and a professor of Ophthalmology at a university). My own mistake in confusing the title 
Sorry, she’s an Opthamologist (practicing at a hospital and a professor of Ophthalmology at a university). My own mistake in confusing the title
Ah well. I doubt they use IR-A in a mobile phone tho, as Near-Infrared has been suggested to possibly be a bit harmful (vague study). I'm pretty sure Apple has consulted medical experts about this, you can imagine especially in America that they don't want to lose Billions over a case where their device harmed users.
Yes, I think apple has definitely carried out research on this before releasing it to the public. I’m not worried about the exposure for an average healthy person but rather for someone already living with early stage cataract conditions or otherwise compromised eye health.
Just like a couple beers a day is no big deal for the mass population but someone with an existing kidney or liver condition might be advised not to have any at all, much less on a regular basis.
Yeah sure. I doubt the low-energy IR will have any measurable effects on cataract formation though, but at this point only time will tell. I'm pretty sure you get more IR in your eyes by watching a fire for 15mins than that IR flooder will in years
Well... she's still an optometrist, (at least in my country) basically the only thing they do is measure if you have the right glasses. Better talk to a real medical professional like ophthalmologist about that stuff
Or you, presumably...
[doublepost=1511734296][/doublepost]
Yes, it is a laser.
[doublepost=1511734537][/doublepost]
I’ve read it. It suggests that near IR, which is the range in which Apple’s VSCEL is quite probably operating, is potentially problematic.
How about this, from a manufacturer of lasers? (And yes, I know it’s not the same kind of laser, but the general thinking is clearly that lasers are not 100% safe with regard to eye exposure.)
https://seminex.com/lasers-and-eye-safety.aspx/
Last edited: