"PeterN" wrote:
On 6/12/2012 4:31 PM, David J. Littleboy wrote:


(Really on the thanks. I've been having fun with the IR, but
worry that it will soon turn to a way overused gimmick, so those
comparisons are interesting.)


If your image has good composition the IR effect can greatly enhance the
image.


Well, that's a different question from the overused gimmick problem. But
since contrast appears in such radically different places, the same scene
photographed from the same standpoint with the same AoV lens _can be_ a
different composition in IR. Dramatic sky vs. boring sky, no differentiation
in the foliage vs. wide range of tonalities in the foliage, etc.

One problem I'm having with IR, is that it makes the trees look radioactive,
which is a sensitive issue over here since Fukushima. (FWIW, the Japanese
standard for background radiation is 1/3 the average background level in New
Jersey. And they do cleanup things if said standard is exceeded.)


I use an old Nikon P&S that I had converted by removing the filter. Some
claim you also need an IR filter, but I don't understand what that would
accomplish.


The conversion may have added an IR pass filter (that blocks most or all
visible light) in front of the sensor. If it didn't, you need an IR filter.
There are some odd color effects you can get by doing color photography with
IR contamination of the colors, but I'm not fond of those.

-- David J. Littleboy
Tokyo, Japan