PDA

View Full Version : My first try at infrared



kdenkers
11-29-2008, 09:21 AM
So I don't have an infrared filter or lens... but thats a topic for another tread :) will post in a moment..

I did this effect in CS3.... my question is... is this the same effect you would get with a dedicated camera/filter or lens?

Anyway, any tips, tricks, ideas, opinions are welcome... as Ross told me... ahh young grasshopper... yup that's me and I would LOVE any advice!

I am going to only add a few shots in this post.. but I did upload a total of 12 in the gallery here.


http://www.northeastfoto.com/gallery/files/1/9/2/4/IR7.jpg

http://www.northeastfoto.com/gallery/files/1/9/2/4/IR3.jpg

Orgnoi1
11-29-2008, 10:20 AM
Well... lets elaborate on my "young grasshopper" comment with something much more in depth...

To the untrained eye these could easily be IR shots... but for someone that shoots IR you can tell they are post-process manipulated only... and here is why...

IR is a form of light that a human cannot see... so it makes it a little harder to duplicate without having shot or studied its uses and effects...

IR light on a technical scale is any light above 700nm... 700 to around 1200 is near IR and above that number is far IR or thermal... a DSLR actually is fairly sensitive to near IR which is why shooting with a converted camera allows the use of almost the exact shutter and apertures as a visual light camera would allow for. A non-modified camera will still produce an IR image... but will take a fairly long exposure on a bright day... usually around a few seconds or so... the reason for that is the band-pass filter that manufacturers put on to block both UV (below 400nm) and IR (above 700nm)...

Now on to your images... both have parts that truelly DO look IR... and parts that dont... keep in mind that a non-colorswaped IR image is inherently red... not blue or white... when you set a custom WB on a converted camera whatever reflects IR will be white... and the skies will still have a tint of red... then in the post process you color swap the blue and red channels which is what can give you a blue tinted sky... it never looks like a "real" sky though...because the more blue the sky the more dark it will become... so ideally the sky in the first image looks right... and the land features in the second picture look more IR'ish...

The converted cameras come in 4 different forms... a clear glass conversion (full spectrum <400nm to >700nm), an "Enhanced IR" conversion (>650nm), a "Standard IR" conversion (>700nm), or a "Deep B&W IR" conversion (>750, >830nm, and >900nm).... the higher the number you go the less faux color you will achieve so more contrasted B&W....all of the conversions are fun to use... but I wouldnt suggest a full spectrum conversion on a DSLR as you have to still add filters to your lens to get your IR shot... which you cant set up the shot as they are opaque....

Theres your $1.02 worth of information... ;)

adkwalker
11-29-2008, 01:59 PM
May not be true IR... but you get an A for creativity... Great job, Kris....

zacker
11-29-2008, 06:28 PM
............but wow, that second one rocks.

oldnavy170
11-29-2008, 08:42 PM
Real or not they are really cool looking! I like how you did part IR look and part real photo look. Nicely done!

kdenkers
11-29-2008, 08:50 PM
Yes thats what I thought as well.. I just used a tutorial I found for IR in CS3.... I was anxious to start work in IR so this was the way to satisfy me for the time being. I do like the effects even though they are not true IR.

I have no real idea on how to even go about shooting in IR either.. such as equipment and such. I see some have filters all the way to dedicated cameras for IR.

I do understand what you are telling me here.. and I want to thank you for this explaination.. I do understand more now! So thank you again.

*off to write this down in my little book*


Well... lets elaborate on my "young grasshopper" comment with something much more in depth...

To the untrained eye these could easily be IR shots... but for someone that shoots IR you can tell they are post-process manipulated only... and here is why...

IR is a form of light that a human cannot see... so it makes it a little harder to duplicate without having shot or studied its uses and effects...

IR light on a technical scale is any light above 700nm... 700 to around 1200 is near IR and above that number is far IR or thermal... a DSLR actually is fairly sensitive to near IR which is why shooting with a converted camera allows the use of almost the exact shutter and apertures as a visual light camera would allow for. A non-modified camera will still produce an IR image... but will take a fairly long exposure on a bright day... usually around a few seconds or so... the reason for that is the band-pass filter that manufacturers put on to block both UV (below 400nm) and IR (above 700nm)...

Now on to your images... both have parts that truelly DO look IR... and parts that dont... keep in mind that a non-colorswaped IR image is inherently red... not blue or white... when you set a custom WB on a converted camera whatever reflects IR will be white... and the skies will still have a tint of red... then in the post process you color swap the blue and red channels which is what can give you a blue tinted sky... it never looks like a "real" sky though...because the more blue the sky the more dark it will become... so ideally the sky in the first image looks right... and the land features in the second picture look more IR'ish...

The converted cameras come in 4 different forms... a clear glass conversion (full spectrum <400nm to >700nm), an "Enhanced IR" conversion (>650nm), a "Standard IR" conversion (>700nm), or a "Deep B&W IR" conversion (>750, >830nm, and >900nm).... the higher the number you go the less faux color you will achieve so more contrasted B&W....all of the conversions are fun to use... but I wouldnt suggest a full spectrum conversion on a DSLR as you have to still add filters to your lens to get your IR shot... which you cant set up the shot as they are opaque....

Theres your $1.02 worth of information... ;)

kdenkers
11-29-2008, 08:50 PM
Nope not true IR but I did have fun figuring things out and playing in photoshop :)

Thanks for the reply


May not be true IR... but you get an A for creativity... Great job, Kris....

kdenkers
11-29-2008, 08:51 PM
Hahaha Thanks Zacker!


............but wow, that second one rocks.

kdenkers
11-29-2008, 08:52 PM
hey thanks! It was a lot of fun.. and will have to try this effect more on things.. just playin around.. you know what i mean?


Real or not they are really cool looking! I like how you did part IR look and part real photo look. Nicely done!

Orgnoi1
11-30-2008, 06:37 AM
When you would like some hands on let me know.. Trish and I can meet up with you and you can check out a few different styles of shooting IR... both of us have dedicated cameras plus I have the filters for shooting with my full spectrum camera...


Yes thats what I thought as well.. I just used a tutorial I found for IR in CS3.... I was anxious to start work in IR so this was the way to satisfy me for the time being. I do like the effects even though they are not true IR.

I have no real idea on how to even go about shooting in IR either.. such as equipment and such. I see some have filters all the way to dedicated cameras for IR.

I do understand what you are telling me here.. and I want to thank you for this explaination.. I do understand more now! So thank you again.

*off to write this down in my little book*

kdenkers
11-30-2008, 07:36 AM
Aww you would do that for me? *Thanks you both* I would love that :) Though I probably do not have time until after the holidays are over with if that is okay?

Orgnoi1
11-30-2008, 08:00 AM
Sure... its better to have hands on when it comes to spending the type of cash you would for a converted camera...

kdenkers
11-30-2008, 08:12 AM
I have to agree with you there.. its easier to learn hands on too..

can we say kid in a candy shop? lol



Sure... its better to have hands on when it comes to spending the type of cash you would for a converted camera...

MrsCL
11-30-2008, 06:34 PM
They came out cool!!!

kdenkers
11-30-2008, 06:35 PM
Hey thanks sweetie :)

how are the girls?

MrsCL
11-30-2008, 06:47 PM
Great! They cant stop talking about you all lol

mulletbay1
03-11-2009, 07:15 AM
Real or not they are really cool looking! I like how you did part IR look and part real photo look. Nicely done!

Hi,

I am new to the site and see you have a xsi which I have.
Would you mind me asking a ? or two on it's operation?

Bill

stoneylonesome
03-11-2009, 10:34 AM
Nice work, I really like the second one, very dramatic effect.

lrp12196
03-11-2009, 08:24 PM
I like the looks of your conversions, plus I learned something! Thanks for posting.