How to Ruin Your (or Our) Gear in 5 Minutes (Without Water)
If there hasn’t been a Color Run 5k or 10k race near you, there probably will be soon. And with all that color, you certainly want to take some pictures, right? Not with your camera you don’t (and not with ours either).
I’m never one to worry much about lens dust. I’ve written about why you shouldn’t worry about some dust in your lens. But the color bombs they throw out at Color Runs are different. In the last month we’ve had over 20 lenses and several cameras nearly ruined by these things. For what it’s worth, all of the renters tell us they really weren’t near any of the major ‘color bombs.’
Here’s a few pictures from a brand new lens that returned after its first rental — at a Color Run. These pictures are, of course, after the lens was cleaned externally. All of that dust is inside the front and rear elements.


Now a few dust specs rarely cause problems, but this kind of dust affects light transmission and contrast, as well as causing fascinating flare (in pretty colors). The color dust is very fine, tiny specs, made to stick on people as the run by (I’m still trying to figure out why someone thought this was a good idea). Because of this, the lenses’ weather sealing, front filters, etc. don’t even slow this stuff down. It’s throughout the entire lens stuck on every element, on the gears and helicoids, and in the mirror box of the camera too. And yes, that includes pro-level lenses on pro-level cameras, all of which are supposedly weather sealed. As an added bonus, it doesn’t blow out like regular dust. It must be wiped off.
Here’s a look at the inner rim after the front element was removed.

Here’s the front of group 2, nice and deep inside the lens (excuse the lights, this is a quick post just using worklights).

And here’s one of a dozen Q tips I used to clean out around the focusing gears and helicoids. Remember, this was a brand new lens only used for this one shoot.

The end result for this lens was complete disassembly and cleaning. This was a fairly lucky one – it’s a lens that we can disassemble and clean without requiring factory readjustment. For a lot of lenses that’s not an option.
A number of lenses, including Canon L’s and Nikon Pro lenses had to go to the factory, and at least one has been given the “financially not feasable to repair” sticker. Your guess is as good as mine as to whether they cover it under warranty or not.
You know what I’d probably find more interesting than the photos of what the insides of lenses look like after this? What the inside of the runner’s lungs look like. All my medical training leaves me curious about that kind of thing.
Addendum – here’s a bonus picture. A Sigma 8-16mm with the barrels removed so you can see how pervasive the Fun Run dust was throughout the entire lens. The dust around the mount side of the lens is so thick that it’s blocking the AF motor from working properly and it’s so caked into the lubricant that the helicoids don’t zoom normally. This will have to be completely disassembled and cleaned piece by piece.

Roger Cicala
Lensrentals.com
May 2013
BTW – Because I’ve already been asked: this won’t be covered by the rental damage waiver going forward – it’s considered negligent use of equipment just like when salt spray soaks the camera on the beach.
158 Comments
John Dillworth ·
Let me guess. Spike in color related repairs right after March 30th? Perhaps from areas with large India populations? Welcome to Phagwah or Hole. The spring festival where colorful powders are thrown. I was going to go to one with my new Canon 5DIII. Glad I didn’t do. anyway, the plan was to cover the camera in a bad and just leave the front element of an old 50 1.8 exposed. If the lens got damaged it was a throw away. Didn’t want to go with a zoom as they can be “dust pumps” Might have worked but the story above scared me off for life. Thanks for this
David ·
Thanks for the tip, they are having one in Indy soon and now I know to stay away, very far away. I had the same musings about the lung issue too.
Katie Bohannon ·
I was wondering the same thing. I photographed the Color Me Rad for their official photos. (I only used a rebel and pretty cheap lens) Even with the rain guard, it was everywhere and I was left hacking and coughing the rest of the day.
Joe Gunawn ·
In your opinion, which camera maker has the best weatherseal? I hear that Pentax’s and Olympus’s weatherseal are legendary and trumps Canon’s and Nikon’s.
– Joe | fotosiamo.com
Jim Shepherd ·
This would be a good place to use an underwater camera and hose it off before opening the housing.
Jay Frew ·
I wonder if chest x-rays, shot on color-run participants, would be in technicolor ;~)
All joking aside, I would be more worried about the dust that finds its way into my respiratory tract, than lens flare, light transmission and contrast.
Cheers! Jay
Michael ·
I know there was one local recently. I didn’t shoot it. I didn’t even know about it until afterward. I saw some pics on Facebook. It looked stupid to me.
Like you said, I wouldn’t want to breathe the stuff. I definitely don’t want it in my gear.
If someone wants to shoot those things they should go by themselves a P&S and treat it like a disposable and trash it afterward. Or maybe put the camera and lens in a zip lock type bag? Of course I bet the IQ would be terrible.
Best to just avoid these things!
Ben ·
Technicolor Asbestos.
Trenton ·
Color runs are insanely unsafe thing, both for yours and your gear’s health. I wonder what’s gonna be the next fad: long exposure night shoots of a glowing nuclear fallout maybe?…
Richard ·
Given that this post is a disclaimer/warning, Holi should probably also be mentioned.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holi
Same idea with colored dust/powder.
Ben ·
Wow, I am kind of shocked here. Roger, I love this blog but your statement that this would be considered negligent use and wouldn’t be covered under the damage waiver has just ensured I will never rent from you all.
How could someone shooting this event from the sidelines possibly be expected to know that pro-level weather sealed equipment would be at risk from this? How can you say that is negligent use?
Roger Cicala ·
Ben,
We haven’t said a word to the 25 or so renters who sent stuff back full of dust already and have simply eaten several thousand dollars worth or repairs without a complaint (including several people who did not purchase the damage waiver). We will be considering it negligence going forward – because now we’ve told everyone.
Roger
Adam ·
Frankly, if you’re renting pro-level gear you should know weather-sealed does not dust proof.
Richard ·
“How could someone shooting this event from the sidelines possibly be expected to know that pro-level weather sealed equipment would be at risk from this? How can you say that is negligent use?”
I think he just told us.
silke ·
There’s a simple solution for this problem, just buy a rain cover for your camera, they normally are very cheap, you can just take pictures on these color runs with them and they protect your camera very well ! And maybe buy a protection-filter for your lens, those aren’t that expensive either.. I’d rather spend 40dollars for good protection than the cost of a new camera/lens ..
Alex ·
It is excess particulate matter in the air, same as a sandstorm, dust storm or volcanic fallout. Negligence seems completely appropriate to me. If you want to shoot these, use a disposable OR underwater rig.
Debra ·
I just watched some videos on this. I had never heard of it before reading this. Watching all that ‘colored dust’ may be kind of cool, but I seriously think it cannot be good for the lungs. Heck, Dr. Oz says I shouldn’t use my mineral based makeup (still do) because of it’s small particles. I would not want my gear anywhere near this stuff. Nor my lungs for that matter. Thanks for the heads up.
John Pren ·
Roger, you wondered what the human lung might look like after one of these, I was wondering how the lung deals with normal dusty conditions, and is there any medical procedures?
Roger Cicala ·
John,
This dust is so fine I think you’d need almost a micropore respirator mask – a simple surgical mask isn’t going to do much – as far as prevention. If I’m informed correctly the colored powder is basically finely ground corn starch and coloring. The lung is a pretty impressive filter for dust until it gets overwhelmed – but there have been articles in the medical literature about breathing in other forms of cornstarch. Basically it sure doesn’t make anyone’s lungs better: http://erj.ersjournals.com/content/21/4/646.full but I don’t know of any permanent damage.
Roger
Shane ·
How about one of those clear plastic housings for underwater photography? Not to mention a ventilator and goggles if you HAVE to shoot one of these things.
Scott ·
http://blogs.reuters.com/photographers-blog/2013/03/28/riot-of-color/
Better out the holi/ color run disclaimer on your faq page as well so people are adequately warned.
Roger Cicala ·
Scott, we are adding it both to the FAQs and the damage waiver specifically – but we’ll cover damages for any rentals shipped up to the time we do that (which will be today).
Joe ·
I’m with Jim Shepherd – time to see how well sealed the Sea and Sea units are. Either that or setup the camera in a fish bowl and seal it, using a rf remote to shoot.
Daemonius ·
Interesting and bit disappointing.
Got any spare Olympus SHG lens to test against all those failed Nikkors and Canons? 😀
Theresa ·
I was reading about the Color Runs this week, my immediate reaction was to check my schedule to see if I was free to shoot at one…and in the same moment my brain said”hmmmmmmm, I hate the dust I get at a horse barn/riding ring, this might be bad, maybe I won’t try it” So, thank you for this information….and you’re right, this CAN’T be good on our lungs, either!
Ben ·
Roger, that seems very reasonable of Lens Rentals. Taking the hit for people who didn’t pay for the waiver seems above and beyond, actually.
thomas ·
I have been to a color run event and I was absolutely in the clouds of dust or whatever it is they toss. My gear did not look anything like this. whatever that person said about not being in the middle of it all is in no way true. I used my 70-200 and a 24mm lens (both canon L lenses probably sealed better than most lenses out there) neither of my lenses has a speck of dust on the inside. What you have there is seriously negligent treatment to the equipment.
Kevin Purcell ·
I’d never heard of this before. Useful to know.
One thie FAQ page they point out that this is colored food grade cornstarch. That’s why it’s so fine.
There is going to be a run in Seattle on 5/12. If it rains it should be interesting (just like UK “custard powder”).
http://thecolorrun.com/faqs/
Do the kilometer “Color Zones” affect runner vision? Or breathing?
The Color Run™ explosions are basically food grade cornstarch and are 100% natural and SAFE. As with any substance, you want to keep it out of your eyes and our “certified” color throwers make sure to aim low as you pass by. Some “Color Runners” opt to wear glasses or goggles for their eyes and use a bandana or dust mask for their mouths. As shown on the “about” page the middle lane is the “low color lane,” which offers a “lighter” color experience. In summary: We work pretty hard to make it so our precious “Color Runners” get as much or as little color on them as they like.
Not much work has been done on the harm of inhaling this material (even the OSHA warning sheets show “No data” for acute and chronic inhalation.
It’s also that white powder they put in surgical gloves so some folks were interested what happens if you breath it in. Result: “The results show that inhalation of cornstarch glove powder leads to the development of a subclinical inflammation in the airways, with an accumulation of eosinophilic granulocytes.”
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12762351
The FAQ also points out:
Are cameras and phones safe to have in the color zones?
Our race photographers are totally fine shooting from a medium distance (25-50 feet). If you want to get shots right in the midst of the color we recommend covering cameras/phones with plastic wrap.
THX723 ·
Festival of Colors 2013 …
http://youtu.be/04k6guPY-AQ
Couldn’t image being the videographer from this shoot, man and machine. *cringe*
Erika Thornes ·
I have to say that my underwater bag (EWA Marine) was sealed before I left the car, and I didn’t take my camera out until I got home, and had run the bag under water. My bag STILL has remnants on the outside of it, waiting for its next dunk. But, I did have a blast shooting the color run, but there is no way I’d do it with rental gear or a rental underwater bag, as my bag is still dusty. Great (and sad) post.
CarVac ·
@thomas:
I presume you had less of an issue because 70-200’s and fixed 24mm lenses don’t pump air in and out.
Frank Sheeran ·
Could you list the lenses that seem to be damaged, and whether the list matches my following theory?
If the lens changes size when focusing or zooming, air has to go from outside the camera/lens to inside (or vice versa). If it was air-tight, the air pressure would act like a spring forcing it back against your attempts to move it. Even with pro, “weather-sealed” lenses. (eg 24-70L) they are so easy to zoom that we can be certain there isn’t that much impediment to air, and therefore to dust, entering. I haven’t tested this and am only a (long-term) amateur, but I suspect that no matter how dusty it is outside the camera, you’ll get practically no dust inside if:
1) the lens size does not change at all. Thus even though there might be gaps, they’re may be literally no air moving through the gaps.
2) if your lens does change size from focus or zoom, focus/zoom it before getting to the site. Many Speedgraphic and Leica photogs got most of their good photos with pre-focused cameras; just use the hyperfocus rule or whatever and you should be good.
2a) its conceivable that an internal-focus lens may not change size externally, and yet inner movement may force air out gaps in the back and in gaps in the front, or something. So if a lens with a fixed front element still seems to suck dust in, try not focusing it either.
3) don’t change lenses on site. Don’t change lenses later without a full external wipedown.
Roger Cicala ·
Frank, they’ve run the gammut of every brand and every quality (including weather resistant lenses), however, they all seem to have been standard or wide aperture lenses. No 70-200 and up yet. Mostly zooms, but zooms are most rentals so I don’t think that means too much.
Soooo, that either means people with longer lenses were standing further back away from the dust, or people who have the sense to use longer lenses also have the sense to wrap things up before shooting this. I can’t say which.
Mr Char ·
Color Run. Never heard of it. Feels like I unwittingly stumbled into a cult. A commercial one at that. Weird.
nandadevieast ·
What about smoking?
grh ·
I learned of Holi while watching the film “Outsourced” Quite entertaining, and recommended.
The underwater housing idea is excellent. Can’t see how corn starch molecules can be any smaller than water molecules.
Joann McCraw ·
I was also thinking of the same thing. I woder how the lungs of those runners would look like. For sure they’ve inhaled all those dust while running too. Anyway, i wonder if those who rented those lenses have to pay anything after returning those lenses with dust already? Do they have to pay for the cleaning of the lenses?
Roger Cicala ·
Joann, we haven’t charged anyone yet — we didn’t know what it would be like so we can’t expect the renters to know — but we will be going forward. FWIW a full cleaning like this costs a couple of hundred $$.
Brad K ·
Hmm, this is interesting. I shot a color run at my university last semester and didn’t have any problems with it, and I was literally standing arms length away from the color throwing at times. Of course, I wrapped my 16-35 in a trash bag and sealed the end around the hood with gaff tape, so that seems to have been enough to keep things clean inside. I also at a few points made pictures with my 70-200 and 300, neither of which were wrapped at all and I was still only 20-30 feet away from the color at that point.
I guess ‘nice’ L lenses and 1D bodies really are sealed pretty well.
Denis O'Donovan ·
Madness! Thanks for the heads up and will be steering well clear of those things.
BigEater ·
Business opportunity!!! If everyone is so curious about the dust in the lungs you gotta start renting out bronchoscopes!!!! Olympus makes some very nice ones.
Roger Cicala ·
BigEater, given the number of times a week I write emails like “I’m sorry, but there’s no way to mount the Canon 500mm to your point and shoot camera” I’m really not too excited about helping people learn bronchoscopy via email 🙂
Tony ·
Sounds like a perfect time to use the five buck disposable film cameras you find at the corner drug store. Get nasty, develop, throw it away – easy peasy.
Chester ·
Interesting. I photographed a Holi-related color throwing event a while ago using my D600, 80-200/2.8 AF-S, and 300/2.8 AF-I. I stayed upwind of the event, using the 300mm’s reach to avoid the worst of the colored dust. Some dust did end up getting on my setup, but I don’t see any sign of it getting inside the camera. Perhaps Holi color dust is different…
Tony ·
Everyone should keep in mind that camera company’s claims about “sealed” are basically wishful thinking except for their underwater cameras. The rubber skirts at the base of the pricier Nikon lenses are closer to an umbrella than a deep sea diving suit. The skirt doesn’t even contact the body on the 16-35 or the 14-24. Canon is probably no better. I’ve worked in R&D at a manufacturer of equipment that goes down 600 feet into oceans, and other electronic gear that has to run outdoors in the weather 24/7/365 so I’ve seen what it takes. I’d use a Nikonos to shoot a Color Run and I agree Roger that going forward this counts as equipment abuse. I’m sorry to hear about the costs your company is eating. You obviously need to do several rentals on the average piece of gear to have a good financial picture.
My son attended a Holi festival at the local hindu temple. I was out shooting landscapes 4 miles away and I was able to see the dust cloud which covered about 10 acres. I didn’t get a straight answer about the identity of the powder, either there or at the Color Run web page. It’s been described as both talcum powder and as corn starch. Color Run says it’s “like” powdered sugar which might imply corn starch.
They have this in their FAQ which also seems a bit cavalier:
“How is the color administered? Will I be hurt, maimed, or killed?
Ha ha ha! we love this one. No, it doesn’t hurt at all. It is like getting into a powdered sugar food fight.”
jseliger ·
A person on Reddit posted some links about airway health and inhaling corn starch.
P. Roberts ·
Many thanks for posting this up Roger.
Jason ·
Hi Roger,
I guess a waterproof cover designed for underwater work would help.
But apart from that and don’t change lenses and stay upwind (or away), any suggestions for methods that might protect lenses in such environments?
Or is this buy a cheap lens and prepare to sacrifice it territory?
Thanks
Roger Cicala ·
Jason, I think 1) front UV filter, 2) Plastic bag or wrap taped to the filter and extending over the camera (either a bag, or clear wrap you can press buttons through) and a longer lens staying a bit further away would be appropriate. Several people have mentioned they shot with 70-200 lenses and that would seem ideal. I have gotten one 70-200 back with this stuff in it but it didn’t seem as bad as the shorter focal length lenses.
Roger
NancyP ·
This sounds like a job for a “sealed” cell phone with tape over the power/ computer connection, microphone, and buttons. After all, these phones do put up with a lot of pocket lint. Have a damp microfiber cloth or cotton tip at the ready, because even these small cornstarch particles might show up over the minute lens beneath the touch-screen. Barring that, disposable film camera would be fine.
Yes, I’d recommend a N95 respirator at least. I am surprised that any runners participate.
The race organizers could make it much more pleasant by having the race on a reasonably warm day, and throwing or spraying colored water at the participants
Tony ·
NancyP: My son used a ziplock baggie to protect his Ipod when he was at Holi. He took it out to shoot two pictures and then he got it right back into the protection; it was in excellent shape at the end of the day.
Your taping idea might work pretty well too but even the edges of the displays count as an entry point.
(His friend had his cell phone either in his pants pocket or handheld for frequent pictures and it came back heavily infiltrated just like in Roger’s pictures of the lenses.)
And fine dust isn’t the only form of exposure – big wads of powder end up in people’s faces, etc.
Geoff Bryant ·
If that’s how much gets in a lens what does it do to your lungs?
Arun ·
I rent from you and read your blog, but this is one of the most practical and useful posts I’ve seen. My wife and I drove to a Holi event earlier this year, and I had my 7D/17-55mm f/2.8 IS with me. The crowd looked a little rowdy and we chose not to get out of our car. Reading this, seems like this decision saved me a couple thousand dollars. The 17-55mm is not exactly renowned for its weather sealing.
Mike ·
Ouch!
Love your BLOG, Roger. But, when I saw this post my first reaction was hoping this didn’t hit your business too hard in the wallet.
With the way these color runs seem to be popping up everywhere, seems like it is going to be a real challenge going forward.
Tim ·
I would consider using these findings as a launching point to supply quality underwater housing rentals. This would be a compelling market as most gearheads will buy superb optics if they want it, but expensive underwater housing cases are truly a prime use case for both rentals and expert advise and reviews. You can give me some rental credit later for this brilliant business plan.
Scott ·
So, if it is getting past the seals what do the camera sensor, mirror and mirror box look like?
Lauren ·
Would WR (Weather Sealing) like on many high end Pentax lenses helped?
Water would have been fine too in the case of Pentax WR/DA* lenses!
Roger Cicala ·
Weather sealing helps, but doesn’t stop it. We’ve had it in several weather sealed camera-lens combinations, although there does seem to be less of it.
The mirror boxes are every bit as bad as the lenses. The only good thing is it seems to blow of the sensors rather easily, but the bad news is we have at least one camera where it’s all up around the prism.
Mike M ·
Re: the health effects, some distressing comments in an LA Yelp (http://www.yelp.com/biz/the-color-run-los-angeles): “It is not fun inhaling/swallowing copious amounts of powder… It was nasty and made it hard to breathe.” “My lungs hurt like sh*t from inhaling a ton of powder.” “Expect to breathe in corn starch, and a lot of it. I don’t know how people with asthma could do it.” “Yes, I breathed it in and coughed a lot as a result and yes, I should have carried water with me because of the dehydration ingesting so much powder brings.”
Doesn’t sound like a great event for anyone who cares about their lung health.
James Conner ·
Protect the camera and lens with plastic bags taped to a clear glass or UV filter on the lens. I recommend double-bagging in this case. After the race, put the still bagged camera in a large plastic bag. Remove the bags and filter at home. No guarantees, but it should keep your gear clean. It works well for me in rain and snow. Still, I wouldn’t risk shooting a color run, let alone taking part in one. Those brightly colored fine particulates do one’s lungs no good. If I had to take photos at such an event, I probably would use a disposable film camera.
Rocky Sharwell ·
Wow…..I am going to post this on my FB page as I have a number of friends who have done color runs…
John Taylor ·
Unfortunately it sounds like people may have decided not to take a risk with their gear and instead use yours. I hope you go after them if insurance doesn’t cover the damages.
Jim ·
I have one of those weather proof Panasonic Lumix P&S cameras. I wonder if these would get penetrated. However I’d want to wear a breathing mask rated to protect against asbestos to even consider being anywhere near that stuff.
A G Dorsey ·
If you treat your LR property as if you owned it you would think several times over before you used LR equipment in such dubious situations. The condition of the returned equipment speaks volumes about this client’s lack of consideration and common sense.
FM ·
Keep distance: rent a 300mm f/2.8 – problem solved.
Darryl ·
WRT Tim’s comment:
This is perhaps an ideal use for the plastic U/W housings for some high-end point-n-shoots, but a “quality underwater housing” for a dSLR starts at about 7 lbs for a small housing/lens port and only goes up from there. Not at all pleasant to lug around where Archimedes’ principle doesn’t apply.
James’ suggestion about double plastic bagging taped to a clear lens filter is pretty ideal.
jason holzworth ·
i recently met with a bride who wanted to do this for her engagement session, i will be passing on that one.
J. Dennis Thomas ·
I was hired to photograph one of these events last week (05/04). I was there for 4 hours and shot almost 6,000 frames right in the thick of it. I simply used a cheap Opteka rainsleeve, a ziptie to keep it tight on my lens hood, a UV filter on the front of the lens, and a bandana over my face.
After the run was over I took the camera out of the rainsleeve and wandered around with the camera and lens unprotected and I did get close to the crowd as they were unleashing color bombs.
At the end of the event I blew off the camera with compressed air and there’s not a speck of dust on or in my camera or my lens.
My camera has gotten much dustier when shooting Bonnaroo, ACL Fest, Lollapalooza, Fun Fun Fun Fest, etc…
“For what it’s worth, all of the renters tell us they really weren’t near any of the major ‘color bombs.’”
It sure looks like none of your renters took the proper precautions, or ANY precautions for that matter. And I don’t believe they’re being exactly 100% truthful.
You can definitely cover these events with absolutely no detrimental effect to lenses or cameras.
Please take a look at my photoset on flickr. You can see how insanely dusty it is, and you can see photos of my lens taken a couple of days afterward. I’d post pics of the camera, but I lent it to someone for the weekend. The only residual dust you can see is on the lenshood, which is perpetually sticky from gaff tape.
http://flic.kr/s/aHsjF3y7eX
Daniel Cormier ·
Have you had any equipment come back after Burning Man? I hear there’s a pretty constant, fine dust cloud. I imagine you’d get similar results after a few days.
Roger Cicala ·
We do have equipment come back from burning man covered in dust, but that doesn’t seem to get inside the equipment the way this does.
Tony T ·
I guess it could be worse … I’ve always had respect for people photographing paintball events:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u1rr7QgmaSc
1:30 comes to mind.
Robin Leveille ·
Sounds like a job for Duclos Lenses.
Chris ·
A company called Outex make a completely airtight solution for underwater photography that isn’t as loose as the aquapac-style covers, nor as heavy or expensive as a full dive housing… their front elements screw onto the lens threads and the back of the sleeve clips onto your viewfinder, so things line up perfectly. Have a look! 🙂
Paul ·
I shot one of these events earlier this year using an Olympus OM-D, sealed in a modified 1 gallon ziploc bag with a hole cut out for the lens. I sealed the hole by taping it to the lens hood and also had a skylight filter on the front of the lens. I also carried a small can of compressed air to clear the front of the lens periodically. The camera and lens made it through fine, but it took 2 days colored dust to clear from my sinuses.
Pat M ·
Ouch, that poor lens!!
I love their tag line – be healthy. Yeah, running through and breathing clouds of fine particulate matter that can likely get down nice and deep into your lungs. THAT sounds healthy to me!
Dennis Krukover ·
Thanks for the post and warning. This is similar to Indian festival called Holi – https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holi
I have heard of it before and recently seen Seattle Color Run online. Indian festival really captured my attention, at the time, from photography point of view. I thought it would be cool to be a spectator @ Holi some day. The colors, the colors, the colors… This all changed after your post.
Thanks for the warning.
Will KISS.
R. R. Photography ·
A lot of the photographers of color run stand safely on the side and most of them use some type of plastic bag to cover it. Ive ran two colors runs and im probably the only who ran it with a dslr. I ran both with a 24-70L version and and had no issues. The filter and hood helps blog alot of the dust. I barely got any on the lens itself. i have a 5dmk2 and a 6D. The 5dmk2 worked fine of course but i was scared for the 6d, although canon does state that it is weather sealed and that there is only 1 type of weather sealing when i called them. i did start the race with a bag over it but was so hard to see thru the bag so i took it off the other half of the race.
The camera look like a mess after i was done with it but it quickly came off using a blower and qtips.
I am NOT advocating that it is 100% safe, but what is the point of spending that much money for the weather sealing if you cant even uses for these purposes.
Check out my pics from the color run. Thanks
Roger Cicala ·
“Weather Sealing” is two lies for the price of one: it isn’t sealed and it can’t stand up to weather past a certain degree. A little rain or snow – probably so. But I can’t tell you the number of people who have sent back dead equipment after shooting in the rain because they really believed in ‘weather sealed’.
1) It’s obviously not waterproof, otherwise you could immerse it and you can’t. It resists water droplets getting inside and the resistance is done mostly with tape and foam rubber.
2) If it’s not waterproof, it definitely isn’t dust proof – dust particles are much smaller (1-10 microns) than water droplets (although the micro droplets in water mist can be that small). Water also tends to adhere to surfaces through capillary action much more than dust does.
So far, we’ve had to disassemble Canon and Nikon 70-200 f/2.8, Nikon 24-70 f/2.8 AF-S, and Canon 17-40L, and 16-35L lenses for internal dust after Color Runs or Holi photography. Those are all ‘weather sealed’. I will say it was less than unsealed lenses, but still enough to require complete disassembly.
Obviously sometimes you’ll get by with it, and sometimes you won’t.
As an aside, I understand that many lenses require a front filter to ‘complete’ their weather sealing. But since UV filters also aren’t water tight, again, it’s a matter of more water resistant, not ‘weather sealed’.
Roger
Mark ·
If the gear looks like that on the inside you have to wonder if breathing this super fine dust seems like a “fun” idea.
pingu666 ·
you could put sealer around the edges of a cheap uv filter, on the glass to metal bit, both sides, maybe chuck a moist tissue in the bag to attract any dust that gets in?
could be a great use of a action sampler waterproof camera too 🙂
Luke Mike ·
Hi Roger, you stated that:
‘ …it’s considered negligent use of equipment just like when salt spray soaks the camera on the beach…’
Could you please tell us in what situation it happens exactly, is it enough to stand on the beach on a stormy weather??
Thank you.
Roger Cicala ·
Luke, salt water is 99.9% guaranteed to ruin a lens and / or camera. After about 150 of our renters had freak accidents where the largest wave in the history of the world happened to splash all over the equipment despite the fact that they were amazingly careful and hundreds of yards away from the nearest surf, we had to change our policy: if you were close enough that salt water got in it, you were negligent. I know it sounds harsh, but we literally wrote of a couple of dozen cameras and 50 or more lenses before we changed it (which was several years ago).
Dave Young ·
Thanks for the heads up. I’ve never heard of a colour run, but it’s the kind of event I guess would attract a lot of photographers for the visual element.
Having seen what it does to lenses it’s definitely one to avoid for the sake of your equipment, let alone one’s health!
Luke Mike ·
@ Roger.
Thanks for the answer. I was not thinking of the situation where a camera falls or is sprayed with salty water but rater wondering if the gear are in any danger if they are used near the sea side i.e. if the morning breeze may do any damage, or if the see is really rough – will the airborne water be any danger to equipment (not droplets – rather mist). I am asking this because I am planning to spend about 4 weeks in the sea resort this year shooting with 40mm pancake, 135 f/2.0 and 300 mm f/2.8 IS II (which are owned by myself)
After above article I am getting a bit paranoid 🙂 Thanks.
Nicholas Condon ·
If this silly color dust is getting stuck inside the camera like this, I wonder what it is doing to the lungs of the participants? If the stuff is water-soluble, the runners are likely to get a good dose of the dyes into their bloodstream. If it’s insoluble, I’d wonder about silicosis.
Personally, I’d rather not run that experiment on my own lungs.
Alex ·
Thanks for the heads up! I will definitely take an underwater casing to my next colour run…
Diane ·
What a great post! I had just read this when we had a bride ask for a color bomb “trash the dress”. I declined! Thank you so much!!
James ·
WHAT THE HELL??? How does the dust even make it in the camera??? At what points are they sucked in? This makes no sense to me!! WTF
Roger Cicala ·
James,
Dust gets in anywhere: cameras and lenses aren’t even watertight (even ‘weather sealed’ ones aren’t watertight). Even if they were, there are still air leaks and dust is much smaller (1 to 10 microns) than water droplets. If air circulates, dust will circulate with it. It’s inevitable.
And for all those people who like to use the word “pump” with zooms, I’ll throw out that even focusing elements move and move air with them. 4 of the 10 lenses we most commonly clean dust out of are primes.
Kentaro ·
I shot a similar event last year with no problem. It was fun but the health concerns did cross my mind as people were coughing all around me. I wouldn’t recommend it to anyone who care about their equipment but had no problem with mine. It rinsed right off under the tap.
Here’s the lens today.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/akakage/8963289507/in/photostream/
Here’s how close I was. As you step into the clouds of starch, you get a lot of boring pictures, so there’s no point in showing most of them.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/akakage/8069859536/in/set-72157631727341209
Brandon Schatz ·
It’s good to have an article like this that explains the risks of covering a color run event. I strongly believe that the renters of the equipment that had these issues didn’t care about your gear and should have paid for the maintenance, because they did knowingly abuse your gear. They are saying that they weren’t close to the color bombs and it just isn’t true. The lens with all yellow came from a direct hit of bag of yellow or they camped out in the yellow color zone for the duration of the event and took several direct hits. If it was in or around the festival it would have had a blend of colors and not be just yellow.
When you get ready to go into the festival area, you know that color is going to be everywhere, so by going in with rental gear is just plain abuse. Also, they do a countdown, so you would have had plenty of time to get out of the way.
We cover these events all the time and haven’t had any problems at all with our gear. We also don’t go into the middle of the Festival areas where a majority of the color is being thrown. The better photos are from the outside of the festival anyways like a few have said in the comments. If someone were to want to get some nice stills inside the festival… I would recommend just using a GoPro on a mono-pod with a water proof case. Most photos are not usable after the first couple seconds of the color throw because it’s just a haze.
The color runners are some of the most positive people. They are very respectful and appreciative of you trying to help them capture their moment. It’s a great event and photographers shouldn’t be afraid to cover it as long as they respect the gear.
It’s completely reasonable for you to charge people that return gear in this shape. It’s not right and people should pay for this kind of abuse.
Also, if you do want to cover this kind of event, you should try to get with the company organizing the photography. It takes a lot of photographers to cover 15-30k participants in an organized manner. Your photos will get the most exposure, you’ll get full access to the venue, make some money, and have a blast doing it.
Brandon
Brett ·
I think that is totally negligent of the renter, I have rented for years from LR – and I treat the lens I rent as if they were my own; always very careful about where and HOW I am using the lens. I never change lens outside, instead do so in a near clean-room environment and do it fast to reduce any chance of dust entering either the camera or lens itself. I usually do not get the extended coverage, but do so for certain lens i.e.(Canon 300mm f/2.8L ISII) – I just always want to be a ‘good’ renter of the products I can get from LR, because there are soooo many other lens I want to try ! Roger you guys are great ! I tell everyone that I in fact, do not own the $5,000 lens projecting from my Canon 60D – but am renting it, and peeps are always keen to know where from…
Andrew ·
@Luke Mike
I live at the coast and take A LOT of shots in windy conditions. When I get home, I lick the camera and if its salty I wipe it down, same with the lenses. The only problems I have had is that the rubbers on the lenses and body have ‘grown’ quicker than normal. Im assuming they are absorbing the salts. – Nikon D200, Nikon D700, Nikon 24-70mm 2.8 and nikon 70-200mm f2.8
Andrew ·
..Oh and Nikon NC filter’s on both lenses.
W Sanders ·
A lot of the synthetic colors used for Holi in India are toxic or carcinogenic. For this reason some festivals have banned synthetic colors and gone back to using traditional, natural spices. I would hope the US festivals have vetted their powders for toxicity.
ken ·
Wow…didn’t realize salt spray was enough to void the insurance (picturing stereotypical bikini shoot in the surf 🙂
I’m amazed that much dust got in. FWIW, I never had problems w/ Pentax gear in the slot canyons in AZ and there’s a lot of dust there…just not this man-made stuff…
paul ·
you should add this new disclaimer to your rental contract “if your use our gear in a ‘color run’ event you pay for cleaning cost”
that is every disrespectful to you guy and all of us who will be renting it next.
Anthony ·
Time to rent Nikonos’ again, they’d eat color runs for breakfast!
Colin Lenton ·
Noted. For beach shoots and color run shoots I will rent from BorrowLenses , and I will use you guys for everything else I shoot.
Balloon dog ·
It amazes me that there are posters here who still claim, after seeing and reading this article, that their camera and lens made it without any precautions.
The dust may not be inside the lens elements, but I am sure that if you disassembled you gear, you would find a fine, gunky, colorful mess at every spot that has lens lubricants or oils.
I bet your cameras are pretty foul too, once the cover comes off.
Plastic bags, taped to a UV filter lens is the least amount of protection I would use.
Most likely I would use a (bagged) disposable camera or a (bagged) throw-away anslig with kodak ektar or provia film.
Why risk thousands of dollars in equipment anyway?
Pete ·
Hope you and all rental companies put in a policy that if there is any evidence that the gear was used to shoot a “Color Run” upon return, that they will not only be responsible for purchasing the uncleaned lens/body/etc., but that they will be blacklisted across all rental companies and not allowed to ever rent equipment from any shop ever again. Seriously, why on EARTH would anyone not being actually paid by a media outlet want to put gear through that crap? No, the picture “coolness” doesn’t justify it anything.
How is this not like running through tear gas?!??!?!?!?!
http://www.flickr.com/photos/55791101@N00/8535148698
Adam ·
Wow this is just crazy. Personally, I treat rented gear BETTER than my own stuff. The reasons I rent some equipment are either the piece is way out of my price range or it is a specialty piece that I don’t want to invest fully in. Either way; it’s equipment I don’t want to pay for, for myself let alone pay back the rental company.
John H. ·
I must be living in the dark ages. I hadn’t even heard of Color Runs / Fun Runs until today. Good to know to stay away.
Andrew W ·
Can I ask were any of these lenses weather sealed products (e.g canon L lenses with weather sealing) and were they fitted with filters over the front element?
Roger Cicala ·
Andrew, there’s no such thing as weather sealed, but yes, several were ‘weather resistant’.
Reggie ·
You’d need to shoot these events with an underwater housing.
Alan O. ·
I’m wondering the same thing as Reggie, if even an UW housing will keep this dust out, if it’s that fine.
My interest is academic only; I have no desire to ever be anywhere near one of these events. I can buy new gear, but new lungs? Not a chance.
Thanks for the warnings in this article.
Gavin Greenwalt ·
Anyone tried one with an underwater enclosure? I would think if it could survive saltwater and depth it could probably survive dust but maybe not.
Cody Caissie ·
That’s wild! I saw those ads on Craigslist looking for photographers for such a low amount. Now I am glad I didn’t even try for it. I’m so sorry to the photographers who got involved and had this happen to them. Should they try to get damages out of the client?
Dan ·
An underwater enclosure would do the trick to keep the camera and lens free of color dust, but the hinges and seal on the UW housing would be a mess. Considering a good housing costs a few grand….
It’s just better to stay away from those runs because of what the color dust will do to your lungs, and because The Color Run is a bunch of scumbag thieves. http://fstoppers.com/the-color-run-counter-sues-college-photographer-after-he-asks-for-compensation-for-image
Brian Lingle ·
The foundation used for the color powder during the Festival of Color in India is corn starch.
Roger Cicala ·
Brain, that’s correct, but I don’t want people to think that ‘natural’ cornstarch makes it harmless (it is harmless for most people, but not for everyone, especially with repeated exposures). http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12762351
Brian ·
Just think what it is doing to peoples lungs!!!!!
Mitchell Dennis ·
I had ideas of shooting color runs myself. I thought it would be cool. I reconsidered, because I kept thinking about all that dust. I saw how it sticks to everything. I even read all the comments that my friends posted about it being hard to breathe because it got all into their lungs. Even those that wore makes our bananas. So I opted not to take photos at the color events, be it dust or paint.
Domanique ·
Thanks so much for this article! I was thinking if I should bring my camera and lenses to the color run or not, and now I will NOT be!! Thanks!
TT ·
Color runs are dumb anyway.
Trina ·
Thanks for the heads up on this… I saw some cool shots from the one that was just done here recently…but after this.. won’t go anywhere near it.. and can you imagine if it gets into the lenses like this what about the runners lungs… Wow!
Earl_J ·
In reality, I would rent a lense only in the event I wanted to stay out of the fray and get shots from a distance… never going into the cloud or having the cloud blow in my direction.
It also appears as though the renter changed lenses while near the cloud…
no…?
It’s a fine powder, I know. . . might creep in there without
changing lenses. . .
(sigh)
Maybe not a fully guaranteed UW housing…
perhaps one of those plastic 30-foot bags
for snorkeling and such might work…
oh well. . . some photographers have no
respect for other peoples’ stuff. . .
(sigh)
Lori ·
why would anyone want to shoot colour runs anyway? it’s a 100% copyright grab, they own all your shots, photographers are not paid, its volunteer.
Jenny ·
Well all I have is kit lenses so I’ll definitely be marking color runs off my photography bucket list.
Bert ·
I know a photographer who went to one of these. She wrapped her camera in plastic. She didn’t have to do any unusual cleaning of lenses, etc, that I know of – but she did say she was really worried about her camera while she was there.
David ·
I believe that this is a bad blog. As with any rental, the rental was not taken care of, by any stretch of care. I have been to many color races and I can tell you that not camera has been ruined.
If you are upset that you rented something and it got ruined then I would contact the person that was in charge of the equipment. The problem was not where it was used but the lack of care while in the possession of the renter.
This is just another sad reminder of our society. Instead of telling the person at fault it was there responsibility, we lay fault at the person or in this case the event, as being liable. At the end of the day, it is the owners responsibility to rent or no rent the equipment.
Roger Cicala ·
David,
I accept your point of view, but this isn’t “a bad renter”. We’ve written off a dozen or so lenses and a couple of cameras from color runs not to mention spending hours and hours disassembling and cleaning other lenses that could be salvaged. Not a big issue, we write off and repair damaged goods every day. But it has always been our practice to let people know when we detect things that can harm equipment, or find equipment that has issues. But if you’d looked at this blog other than to click one link and get defensive, you’d already know that.
I’m glad you haven’t had problems. But other people have. Another “sad part of the internet” is people who assume because they haven’t had a problem, the problem doesn’t exist. See D800 left focus points, D600 sensor dust, Movi electrical fires, or dozens of other examples.
I allowed your post, despite the fact that newly created, anonymous hotmail accounts have a tendency to be people who for whatever reason don’t want others to know who they are, which often turns out to be people who are invested in some way in the product. But I do think it important to let people know there are two points of view here and numerous people have survived color runs with their equipment intact.
Roger
Jim ·
I’ve been hesitant to shoot these. This is telling me maybe I’ll still stay away.
Bernd ·
That’s gotta be excellent for your lung.
My only conclusion is that these particels are extremely small so they can creep into the lens.
I’ve been in the Sahara in Sand storms with my gear an never had such an infestition of dust.
Thanks for making us aware on this.
Mark James ·
I shot one a few months ago. I wasn’t overly worried, but after seeing this I’ll be more careful. My body is sealed and I used my long sealed zoom because I knew it would be messy. I just blew the dust off of the outside of the lens and body when I was done and can’t see any adverse effects.
https://www.facebook.com/media/set/?set=a.632207866867105.1073741830.609617992459426&type=1
echoy97 ·
A lot of camera rental requires customer to use credit card to pay a safety deposit, enough to cover the cost of a brand new lens. Cant you just make your customer buy the ruined lens?
Roger Cicala ·
echoy97 – no, we don’t work that way.
Lynn Allan ·
Roger,
Good article … and this reply is rather long after it appeared.
I thought I’d check with you on a semi-related issue that came up on DPReview, about an appropriate camera to take along on a week-long ocean cruise.
http://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/54305077
One of my first reactions to the OP was “rent a nice camera for the week”, but then I got to wondering if that would be fair to the rental company.
I was wondering if anything like the above “color run issues” might apply, except for the scenario of renting a camera to take on an ocean cruise. Have you and your repair techs observed that cameras and/or lenses need special attention after an ocean cruise? I suppose you would tend to not know how the camera was used.
I suppose some would return with obvious salty residue on the front element. Or not?
I guess my question is whether I am too cautious about taking my camera to the beach. I wouldn’t take a “bare camera” without something like a gallon freezer zip-lock for a DSLR, or quart size for point-and-shoot.
Is the air heavy with salty humidity an issue? Or is that yet something else I’m uninformed about?
I have observed that when I attempt to take star trails in lower temperature in high humidity, the lens can mist over, or frost over if that chilly and a certain dew point. The camera body will be moist, clammy, and almost sweaty.
I have to think something like that is going on inside the camera also, maybe to a lessor extent. Residue from salty, humid air can be wiped off with a damp towel, but not the internal logic board, or the sensor.
If you have the time and interest to respond … not really expected but appreciated … perhaps you could also respond directly to the DPR post, por favor?
Roger Cicala ·
HI Lynn,
We don’t really see much trouble on Ocean cruises except the occasional camera dropped overboard. If we do, it tends to be sand, not salt spray causing problems. We don’t ding renters for sand getting into the works, but we do a lot of disassemblies to clean sand out of focus and zoom rings.
Octavian ·
I just shot one of these events with my own gear. I put filters in the front of the lenses (Canon 6D + 85mm F/1.8 and Canon 7D + 17-40mm F/4 L USM) and I wrapped the combos in plastic wrap, carefully so that it was tight around the filters. A whole lot of it! Of course I decided some the settings ahead of time: picked a focal length on the 17-40, etc. I went in the middle of the action and took a whole bunch of shots. The powders are not toxic. Based on stuff one would use in cooking. The only things that got messy were the neck straps… which were dirty to begin with, so now I washed them and they’re cleaner than before the event.
It is a very nice event, totally worth trying!
Octavian ·
Here’s the set of pics (dear moderator, feel free to add this to the previous comment). I also uploaded a photo of my gear wrapped in plastic in the set.
https://www.facebook.com/media/set/?set=a.585386634898220.1073741889.317059128397640&type=1
Me ·
“…The powders are not toxic. Based on stuff one would use in cooking…”
None of the the stuff one would use in cooking is meant to be sniffed and inhaled. “Non-toxic” means they are safe to ingest (eat), not inhale (breathe).
Have a thought about how non-toxic ordinary flour is, then google “flour dust exposure”.
Use common sense.
D to the J ·
Because of this comment, I won’t ever be using your company for rentals.
“BTW – Because I’ve already been asked: this won’t be covered by the rental damage waiver going forward”
Not because I do these color runs, or sea-salt-seas, or burning man dust-fest events, but because “going forward” you should add a clause that states if you are doing a shoot that is invasive you will be liable for the cost of cleaning and/or replacement of the camera or lens, OR add an insurance policy OR get out of the business.
Corporate America is killing America.
gearhed ·
Well, if someone threw powder on me, to breathe into my lungs, I would consider that assault, and possibly affecting my long term health. Is this substance certified not to cause emphysema, or cancer in twenty years? Even the best pulmonary doctors recommend NOT to breathe in ANY foreign substance, if you don’t have to. Just because some stupid person thinks it would be cool to color all the runners purple for laughs, does not mean it is a healthy idea. The JAMA Medical Annals are full of supposedly harmless substances causing many deadly illnesses years later. Why risk it?
David Parsons ·
It’s colored cornstarch. If that is cancerous, then every grocery store in the world has a huge problem.
gearhed ·
Many artificial food dyes are banned both domestically, and in many foreign countries. Just a short search produced the following . . .
FD&C Red No. 2 – Amaranth, E123,
FD&C Red No. 4,
FD&C Red No. 32 was used to color Florida oranges,
FD&C Orange Number 1 was one of the first water-soluble dyes to be commercialized, and one of seven original food dyes allowed under the Pure Food and Drug Act of June 30,
FD&C Orange No. 2 was used to color Florida oranges.
FD&C Yellow No. 1, 2, 3, and 4,
FD&C Violet No. 1.
How do you or anyone else know for sure that the dyes used in this “Harmless Cornstarch” will not cause lung cancer in children twenty years from now? Would you want your child to breathe this stuff?
Candace ·
You’re correct. Pigments are all considered carcinogenic. The fda approves them based on slanted tainted tests. And if you’ve been following them closely, you know that nutrisweet (aspartame) was openly admittedly carcinogenic and publicly protested but people vs coke and the chemical companies lost and FDA approved it with only the exception being in the case of a pregnant woman. It turns out that it causes a lot side effects within a few days of beginning to drink it. and long term it does considerable damage both neurologically and causes holes to occur throughout your brain tissue. They nerve and brain damage can not be reversed, yet this is still on the market. And it really became the Roe v Wade if you will, heavily toxic chemicals and elements being introduced into our food supply and medicine supply regardless of public opposition, and regardless of health risk . When they finally succeeded in getting a DA approval, that open the gate for a flood dangerous chemicals to be putting out food, beverages, household cleaners, air fresheners, weed killers, bug sprays, you name it. The market suddenly started Mushrooming with all these new products.
Good Housekeeping published an article back in the nineties about a highly dangerous preservative called BHT and others. BHT is mostly listed in cereals, and was at the top of the list with big warning symbols. I started checking labels and found it was on the label of just a few kinds of cereal… Some of which I normally used. So I started avoiding purchasing those serials. But I kept an eye on my labels. After about 6 months I’d say it started popping up on more and more brands and kinds until I literally had to switch eating oatmeal and completely gave up boxed cereals. Intestinal cancers stomach cancers, lymphomas, renal cancers, they’re all on the rise. Four generations in generations literally multiple millennia, people worked outdoors all day getting sun exposure and skin cancer was unheard of. but then came the Sun tanning lotions and Sun screens that are full of chemicals that you are slathering on your skin and then baking them in. No skin cancers are through the roof. I don’t know why people don’t recognize the connection between chemicals and cancer.
Candace ·
They aren’t selling starch to you to inhale. So no. The problem it can cause isn’t limited to inhaling corn starch, its inhaling pigment too. And it’s not just your lungs, it’s also your kidneys, liver, lymph nodes, etc. Organs that must filter pigments from your body. You wont reap the results in the short-term … it’s down the road.
FDA-approved substances make it into our sphere of consumption all the time. I don’t understand why people dont start a movement to start banning the fda-approved chemicals … cancer has sky-rocketed.
People are being fed a lie that cancer is hereditary or genetic. It’s a misleading statement. Only a few cancers are potentially hereditary ….VERY FEW. Almost all are from toxic chemicals and substances that the FDA has approved. Bee populations are collapsing. Over 75% of food we consume are SOLELY pollinated by bees. I am over a half century old so I remember a time when any kind of cancer was RARE. You just didn’t hear about it. Suddenly every other person has or has had it at least once. Cancer was a mystery illness just a few decades ago. Now you can go on cancer website and see the LIST. Of chemicals, pesticides, herbicides, spermicides, fungicides, pigments, plastics, cleaners, insulation, petroleum products and byproduct, etc. that cause cancer (your oncologist can tell you just where it came from. And interestingly, sugar, viras, bacterial, and fungal infections are also cancerous. That leaves little room for “hereditary/genetic” cause. What they really mean is some people dont possess a specific gene that they *THINK* is responsible for fighting certain cancers … or the mechanism for disposing damaged genes (yep you guessed it … these chemicals damage your genes or gene replication a d THAT causes a cancer cell to be produced … but it’s not a genetic damage you inherited.
gearhed ·
Well, if someone threw powder on me, to breathe into my lungs, I would consider that assault, and possibly affecting my long term health. Is this substance certified not to cause emphysema, or cancer in twenty years? Even the best pulmonary doctors recommend NOT to breathe in ANY foreign substance, if you don't have to. Just because some stupid person thinks it would be cool to color all the runners purple for laughs, does not mean it is a healthy idea. The JAMA Medical Annals are full of supposedly harmless substances causing many deadly illnesses years later. Why risk it?
David Parsons ·
It's colored cornstarch. If that is cancerous, then every grocery store in the world has a huge problem.
gearhed ·
Many artificial food dyes are banned both domestically, and in many foreign countries. Just a short search produced the following . . .
FD&C Red No. 2 – Amaranth, E123,
FD&C Red No. 4,
FD&C Red No. 32 was used to color Florida oranges,
FD&C Orange Number 1 was one of the first water-soluble dyes to be commercialized, and one of seven original food dyes allowed under the Pure Food and Drug Act of June 30,
FD&C Orange No. 2 was used to color Florida oranges.
FD&C Yellow No. 1, 2, 3, and 4,
FD&C Violet No. 1.
How do you or anyone else know for sure that the dyes used in this "Harmless Cornstarch" will not cause lung cancer in children twenty years from now? Would you want your child to breathe this stuff?
Candace ·
You're correct. Pigments are all considered carcinogenic. The fda approves them based on slanted tainted tests. And if you've been following them closely, you know that nutrisweet (aspartame) was openly admittedly carcinogenic and publicly protested but people vs coke and the chemical companies lost and FDA approved it with only the exception being in the case of a pregnant woman. It turns out that it causes a lot side effects within a few days of beginning to drink it. and long term it does considerable damage both neurologically and causes holes to occur throughout your brain tissue. They nerve and brain damage can not be reversed, yet this is still on the market. And it really became the Roe v Wade if you will, heavily toxic chemicals and elements being introduced into our food supply and medicine supply regardless of public opposition, and regardless of health risk . When they finally succeeded in getting a DA approval, that open the gate for a flood dangerous chemicals to be putting out food, beverages, household cleaners, air fresheners, weed killers, bug sprays, you name it. The market suddenly started Mushrooming with all these new products.
Good Housekeeping published an article back in the nineties about a highly dangerous preservative called BHT and others. BHT is mostly listed in cereals, and was at the top of the list with big warning symbols. I started checking labels and found it was on the label of just a few kinds of cereal... Some of which I normally used. So I started avoiding purchasing those serials. But I kept an eye on my labels. After about 6 months I'd say it started popping up on more and more brands and kinds until I literally had to switch eating oatmeal and completely gave up boxed cereals. Intestinal cancers stomach cancers, lymphomas, renal cancers, they're all on the rise. Four generations in generations literally multiple millennia, people worked outdoors all day getting sun exposure and skin cancer was unheard of. but then came the Sun tanning lotions and Sun screens that are full of chemicals that you are slathering on your skin and then baking them in. No skin cancers are through the roof. I don't know why people don't recognize the connection between chemicals and cancer.
Candace ·
They aren't selling starch to you to inhale. So no. The problem it can cause isn't limited to inhaling corn starch, its inhaling pigment too. And it's not just your lungs, it's also your kidneys, liver, lymph nodes, etc. Organs that must filter pigments from your body. You wont reap the results in the short-term ... it's down the road.
FDA-approved substances make it into our sphere of consumption all the time. I don't understand why people dont start a movement to start banning the fda-approved chemicals ... cancer has sky-rocketed.
People are being fed a lie that cancer is hereditary or genetic. It's a misleading statement. Only a few cancers are potentially hereditary ....VERY FEW. Almost all are from toxic chemicals and substances that the FDA has approved. Bee populations are collapsing. Over 75% of food we consume are SOLELY pollinated by bees. I am over a half century old so I remember a time when any kind of cancer was RARE. You just didn't hear about it. Suddenly every other person has or has had it at least once. Cancer was a mystery illness just a few decades ago. Now you can go on cancer website and see the LIST. Of chemicals, pesticides, herbicides, spermicides, fungicides, pigments, plastics, cleaners, insulation, petroleum products and byproduct, etc. that cause cancer (your oncologist can tell you just where it came from. And interestingly, sugar, viras, bacterial, and fungal infections are also cancerous. That leaves little room for "hereditary/genetic" cause. What they really mean is some people dont possess a specific gene that they *THINK* is responsible for fighting certain cancers ... or the mechanism for disposing damaged genes (yep you guessed it ... these chemicals damage your genes or gene replication a d THAT causes a cancer cell to be produced ... but it's not a genetic damage you inherited.
Chucklou ·
Having had lung problems recently, I will be going no where near any of those “fun runs.”
I am guessing it would take a lawsuit (or several) against the dust manufacturer and punitive damages to stop this.
Chucklou ·
Having had lung problems recently, I will be going no where near any of those "fun runs."
I am guessing it would take a lawsuit (or several) against the dust manufacturer and punitive damages to stop this.
David Rouse ·
Do you folks have any recommendations for protection (hopefully less expensive than a hard underwater case)? I saw a documentary with Richard I’Anson where he was using something that looked like an AquaTech soft cover (at Holi in India), but some people recommend a marine bag.
David Rouse ·
Do you folks have any recommendations for protection (hopefully less expensive than a hard underwater case)? I saw a documentary with Richard I'Anson where he was using something that looked like an AquaTech soft cover (at Holi in India), but some people recommend a marine bag.
Jim Nooney ·
Having worked in the repair department for both a dealer and for Leica this is a really fascinating article. I totally agree with your decision not to cover this kind of damage under the rental waiver.
Holi Color ·
Color Run is the only event where you get to party once you cross the finish line. The event is immensely popular all over the world and although runners do not receive any prizes, they are showered with colour run powder, which is made of corn starch. Color Run is not your typical fun run event because it puts more emphasis on fun. Even first-time runners are welcome and for families who are looking for a unique way to bond with children, Color Run is a great idea to consider. Participants need to pay for the registration fees, which may vary from region to region.
https://holicolourpowder.com.au
JR ·
So did the renter have to pay? Who paid?
Roger Cicala ·
The first renter did not have to pay (actually there were two at once) because we had not been clear on the damage waiver. Many subsequent renters, despite our warnings, have had to pay.
MD ·
So did the renter have to pay? Who paid?
Florida Freedivers ·
Thanks for sharing.Keep it up Holi Gulal
blankslate1988 ·
Just like it's in your lens it's in your lungs and eyes.
https://medium.com/@Drug_Ju...
Julia Inman ·
Horrified! Like coloured asbestos!! ?
Julia Inman ·
Horrified! Like coloured asbestos!! 😶
Robin Manford ·
Second photo the dust is clearly on the exterior of the lens, right? Because the same trail of dust across the lens extends onto the lens hood or whatever that is to the left of the image.