+ Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 19

Thread: My first try at infrared

  1. #1

    My first try at infrared

    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.




    "The past is history, the future is a mystery, and this moment is a gift. That's why we call it the present."

    http://denkersphotography.org
    http://www.myspace.com/sphotography

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Nassau, New York, United States
    Posts
    9,844
    Images
    3013
    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...
    Ross Mealey
    Canon Professional Services Member

  3. #3
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Scotia, NY
    Posts
    253
    Images
    11
    May not be true IR... but you get an A for creativity... Great job, Kris....

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Oxford, Connecticut, United States
    Posts
    12,106
    Images
    45
    ............but wow, that second one rocks.
    Canon EOS 30D With grip, various lenses and stuff...

    see my pics at www.brokenfencephotography.com

    Visit me on Facebook..

    Feel like helping some homeless Pets?
    the proceds from any of the products purchased go
    directly to helping CT animal shelters.
    www.helpwillysfriends.com.org

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Rochester, New York
    Posts
    2,574
    Real or not they are really cool looking! I like how you did part IR look and part real photo look. Nicely done!
    www.flickr.com/photos/oldnavy170

    Canon XTi
    Canon 85mm 1.8 Prime Lens
    Canon 50mm 1.8 Prime Lens
    Sigma 28-70mm 2.8-4.0 Wide Angle Lens
    Canon 18-55mm Kit Lens
    Sigma 500 DG Flash
    Continuous Lights (Generic Brand )

  6. #6
    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*

    Quote Originally Posted by Orgnoi1
    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...
    "The past is history, the future is a mystery, and this moment is a gift. That's why we call it the present."

    http://denkersphotography.org
    http://www.myspace.com/sphotography

  7. #7
    Nope not true IR but I did have fun figuring things out and playing in photoshop

    Thanks for the reply

    Quote Originally Posted by adkwalker
    May not be true IR... but you get an A for creativity... Great job, Kris....
    "The past is history, the future is a mystery, and this moment is a gift. That's why we call it the present."

    http://denkersphotography.org
    http://www.myspace.com/sphotography

  8. #8
    Hahaha Thanks Zacker!

    Quote Originally Posted by zacker
    ............but wow, that second one rocks.
    "The past is history, the future is a mystery, and this moment is a gift. That's why we call it the present."

    http://denkersphotography.org
    http://www.myspace.com/sphotography

  9. #9
    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?

    Quote Originally Posted by oldnavy170
    Real or not they are really cool looking! I like how you did part IR look and part real photo look. Nicely done!
    "The past is history, the future is a mystery, and this moment is a gift. That's why we call it the present."

    http://denkersphotography.org
    http://www.myspace.com/sphotography

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Nassau, New York, United States
    Posts
    9,844
    Images
    3013
    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...

    Quote Originally Posted by kdenkers
    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*
    Ross Mealey
    Canon Professional Services Member

+ Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

     

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts