If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
First images with my infrared converted 350D
Hi Wayne,
Wayne J. Cosshall wrote: Have a look on my other site: http://www.dimagemaker.com/specials/digitalir/digitalir.php Been there I know IR is nothing new, but I'm new to itg It creates such interesting effects and many of the photos you have on your site look just awsome. There are several articles on IR with digital cameras and then tests of all the recent cameras I've had through for testing, unconverted, using a Hoya R72 IR filter for the shooting. They should give you a good idea of what you can get. All digital cameras can shoot in IR, just the exposures can be very long if they have a strong IR blocking filter installed, as most do. I located a Hoya RM-72 IR filter on Adorama for $48 (58mm) - is there a difference between RM-72 and R72? I think they are probably the same thing. They also have RM-90 which is at $285 which is a bit too expensive for me to experiment with. Hope it helps and let me see the results when you start experimenting. Will do Best regards, Arnor Baldvinsson San Antonio, Texas |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
First images with my infrared converted 350D
Hi Arnor, Yes, the R72 and RM72 are the same filter. The R72 still lets in a little red light, whilst the RM90 completely cuts off the visible. This gives a more intense IR effect but also longer exposure times. I'd recommend the RM-72 to start with. It is soooo much more affordable and, with unmodified cameras, more useful, I think. Thanks re the images on my site. Now I have the modified 350D I will be expanding the range of subjects I shoot in IR, which I am looking forward too. Cheers, Wayne -- Wayne J. Cosshall Publisher, The Digital ImageMaker, http://www.dimagemaker.com/ Blog http://www.digitalimagemakerworld.com/ |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
First images with my infrared converted 350D
Wayne J. Cosshall wrote:
Have a look on my other site: http://www.dimagemaker.com/specials/digitalir/digitalir.php There are several articles on IR with digital cameras and then tests of all the recent cameras I've had through for testing, unconverted, using a Hoya R72 IR filter for the shooting. They should give you a good idea To get an idea of how sensitive a camera is to IR: http://www.jr-worldwi.de/photo/ir_comparisons.html -- "Strange, I don't remember suffering from memory loss." /\ /\ /\ / / \/ \ u e e n / \/ a w a z anl |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
First images with my infrared converted 350D
Hi Wayne,
Wayne J. Cosshall wrote: Yes, the R72 and RM72 are the same filter. The R72 still lets in a little red light, whilst the RM90 completely cuts off the visible. This gives a more intense IR effect but also longer exposure times. I'd What kind of exposure times are we looking at? Thanks re the images on my site. Now I have the modified 350D I will be expanding the range of subjects I shoot in IR, which I am looking forward too. On an expanding note: Has anyone experimented with the other end of the spectrum - the ultraviolet? In a previous life, I did some arc welding and the heavy duty UV screens could produce interesting effectsg Best regards, Arnor Baldvinsson San Antonio, Texas |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
First images with my infrared converted 350D
Arnor wrote:
Hi Wayne, Wayne J. Cosshall wrote: Yes, the R72 and RM72 are the same filter. The R72 still lets in a little red light, whilst the RM90 completely cuts off the visible. This gives a more intense IR effect but also longer exposure times. I'd What kind of exposure times are we looking at? Depends on the camera but most recent dSLRs I have tested seem to need around 15-30 seconds at 100ISO and f2.8 with the R72 Cheers, Wayne -- Wayne J. Cosshall Publisher, The Digital ImageMaker, http://www.dimagemaker.com/ Blog http://www.digitalimagemakerworld.com/ |
#16
|
|||
|
|||
First images with my infrared converted 350D
"Wayne J. Cosshall" wrote in message
... Hi All, I received my 350D back which was being converted to IR only shooting by LDP. My first shots with it are up at: http://experimentaldigitalphotograph...ed-to-ir-only/ Should make for some interesting midsummer shooting of female subjects ;-) Hey, don't laugh; I know that's the first thing you all thought about! -- Bob Milutinovic Cognicom - "Australia's Web Presence Specialists" http://www.cognicom.tk/ telephone (0417) 45-77-66 facsimile (02) 4727-1898 ------------------------------------------------------- To respond by e-mail: myname@mydomain (work it out) |
#17
|
|||
|
|||
First images with my infrared converted 350D
"Bob Milutinovic" wrote in message ... Should make for some interesting midsummer shooting of female subjects ;-) Hey, don't laugh; I know that's the first thing you all thought about! Expensive way to find out if a girl has had a "Brazilian" or not IMO :-) MrT. |
#18
|
|||
|
|||
First images with my infrared converted 350D
"Bob Milutinovic" wrote in message ... "Wayne J. Cosshall" wrote in message ... Hi All, I received my 350D back which was being converted to IR only shooting by LDP. My first shots with it are up at: http://experimentaldigitalphotograph...ed-to-ir-only/ Should make for some interesting midsummer shooting of female subjects ;-) Hey, don't laugh; I know that's the first thing you all thought about! Infrared seems to effect greens more dramatically than human skin tones. Are you referring to female frogs? -- Bob Milutinovic Cognicom - "Australia's Web Presence Specialists" http://www.cognicom.tk/ telephone (0417) 45-77-66 facsimile (02) 4727-1898 ------------------------------------------------------- To respond by e-mail: myname@mydomain (work it out) |
#20
|
|||
|
|||
First images with my infrared converted 350D
In article ,
says... "Bob Milutinovic" wrote in message ... "Wayne J. Cosshall" wrote in message ... Hi All, I received my 350D back which was being converted to IR only shooting by LDP. My first shots with it are up at: http://experimentaldigitalphotograph...ed-to-ir-only/ Should make for some interesting midsummer shooting of female subjects ;-) Hey, don't laugh; I know that's the first thing you all thought about! Infrared seems to effect greens more dramatically than human skin tones. Are you referring to female frogs? I assume he's referring to the voyeuristic use of IR -- some clothing is relatively IR-transparent, especially in bright sun. (Then again, so is some skin -- not everyone is thrilled when the camera sees through their perfect complexion to reveal a web of dark veins -- veinous blood reflects much less IR than arterial blood. Kodak's old _Medical Infrared Photography_ had some interesting examples.) -- is Joshua Putnam http://www.phred.org/~josh/ Braze your own bicycle frames. See http://www.phred.org/~josh/build/build.html |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
First images with my infrared converted 350D | Wayne J. Cosshall | Digital Photography | 57 | January 20th 07 05:05 PM |
More test results of Canon 350D for Infrared photography | wayne | Digital Photography | 0 | February 14th 06 07:28 AM |
More test results of Canon 350D for Infrared photography | wayne | Digital SLR Cameras | 0 | February 14th 06 07:26 AM |
Infrared tests of Canon 350D, Sony DSC-R1 and others | wayne | Digital SLR Cameras | 4 | February 9th 06 03:03 AM |
Infrared tests of Canon 350D, Sony DSC-R1 and others | wayne | Digital Photography | 0 | February 7th 06 04:07 AM |