dedomed emitter with half of the phosphor missing, effect to my eyes?

I have a blf x6 flashlight and put in my newly dedomed xpg2. When i turned on the light, blue light comes out and i wondered what the hell it is because i thought it’s going to be neutral to warm white after dedoming. And to my stupidity i look at it directly while in low mode to see what’s making it blue. I can’t see anything wrong with it so i removed the reflector and use my aspheric lens to focus the emitter on the wall. Well half of the phosphor from the emitter is missing so that’s what making it blue light. I may have damaged the phosphor of the emitter while putting in the reflector.
What will be the effect of it to my eyes because i looked at it directly for less than a second?

You shouldn’t notice any effect to your eyes. Even when there is some slight vision damage the brain is really good at filtering it out so you don’t notice it. Check out the blind spot we all have that the brain just fills in.

Intense blue light is hazardous so I wouldn’t use that led myself.

I read somewhere that the blue light emitted without the phosphor is UV and i am worried that it will damage my eyes.

With Cree leds (and most others) it’s blue, not UV. There are a few white leds that use UV but they are rare.

You can check out the emitted spectrum in the datasheet. Cree XML datasheet Page 4, Cree uses about 440nm –450nm blue. UV starts around 400nm.

I have noticed that it can be extremely disorienting but it was not a Cree led and there was no phosphor coating at all on that one. Remote phosphor was removed

What Halo said.
I’ve had this happen to an emitter a couple of times.
Checking the resulting light on my $40 kit spectrometer,
the emitter was putting out some blue well out toward the high energy end verging into the ultraviolet, even though the “color temperature” looked just blue.

There’s no line in nature separating “blue-safe” from “blue-dangerous” from “uv-dangerous” — no sudden change whatsoever.

Once you get into the blue range the photons are energetic enough to cause chemical damage.

Just this year’s papers so far: Google Scholar

Note it’s the tiny size of the bright spot that makes LEDs a (short term) hazard to eyesight.
This was written in 2007 — they’ve gotten smaller and brighter since then.

EDIT: that’s distinct from macular degeneration, which seems to be the long term hazard:“blue+light”+macular+degeneration

Figure 2:

I think there will always remain some dispute between hank and me about this subject. My opinion is that everything less intense as sunlight (70,000-130,000lux) for brief moment (you do not deliberately keep looking in the sun either) will not directly harm your eyes, our eyes are build to last many years (but not 100) with occasional flashes of direct sunlight . This is blue light of course which is more energetic and your pupils contract less to it as well, so less intensity is needed to do harm, but it still takes quite some light to really damage your eyes permanently.

Well its not that it wont directly harm your eyes, its just that you wont be able to tell the difference. It just makes no sense to go on with something that does harm when its cheap to fix: short and sweet is its advisable to get another light or LED to use.

If you use it occasionally, it probably wont be a big deal, you’ll never notice if it does some damage either way unless you are on the edge of a major detectible amount of damage from something else. It makes no sense to use it though when you can go get a $12.99 Convoy S2+ with a 4C tint (even less in the blue than what you started with completely undamaged) for even less eye strain and possible damage. Much cheaper than the increased eyeglass prescription when you are older, or having to have a cataract surgery earlier, or losing your vision a bit sooner I’d say. Since we are living closer to 100, which eyes don’t generally last that long with average usage, small built up exposures do become an issue as you get close to that unknown damage level and get older, and your future self will thank you for the extra couple days of vision, or at least the memories in higher color rendition of the 4C tint :wink:

I'd go for a new led too :-)

Research keeps coming in on this issue, e.g.:

how it can damage the eye and its link to age-related macular degeneration (AMD)

EDIT to add:

I don’t think there’s a right-or-wrong divide here; I’m into my later 60s, had my first cataracts show up in my 40s, have an early type implant replacement lens that passes well up into the ultraviolet (I can see spectral lines that aren’t visible to people with normal lenses)

Here’s another guy with the same situation: Ultra Violet SUPERPOWER (!) after Cataract Surgery with Crystalens - color glow
And another: (scroll down to the last paragraph)

So I’ve had to be very careful since then about exposure to light, because I have nothing protective at all between my retina and the outside world. My retina is as exposed to damage as a young child’s whose natural lens hasn’t started to get yellowish yet.

That’s the real caution as far as I’m concerned. Not old guys like me who’ll never notice the damage — but young people coming along in an environment unlike anything people have lived in before.

Sorry I missed the first time that this was a BLF X6! Not only can you probably sell it to someone who wants to mod it and recoup the money, but BLF D80 and A6 group buys will be coming out soon, both of which have higher output and more mode selections for around $20 if you are willing to wait.