5DIII and infrared

On 7/20/2013 9:09 AM, Robert Coe wrote:
On Mon, 15 Jul 2013 20:19:14 -0400, rwalker wrote:
:
: I'll have some photos of outdoor vegetation in a bit. Vegetation
: certainly shows up very light colored. From my reading, I know that
: an unmodified DSLR has an infrared filter in place, but it doesn't
: block all the IR, but most of it. So with an IR filter and long
: exposures, you still get some infrared.

But note that the purpose of the built-in filter is to block those IR
frequencies to which the sensor is most sensitive. So those that get through
a) may not be the frequencies you most want and b) are guaranteed to register
poorly on the sensor. So any resemblance to a "true" IR shot will be
coincidental. If that's all you need, you might as well save yourself the
aggravation of trying to photograph in IR light. Just open up a photo editor
and adjust the RGB values to provide an IR-like effect. An editor that offers
a variety of B&W conversions may even have a pre-canned IR setting.


CS6 has one, but it is nowhere near the real thing.



--
PeterN

On Sat, 20 Jul 2013 14:23:53 -0400, PeterN
wrote:
: On 7/20/2013 9:09 AM, Robert Coe wrote:
: On Mon, 15 Jul 2013 20:19:14 -0400, rwalker wrote:
: :
: : I'll have some photos of outdoor vegetation in a bit. Vegetation
: : certainly shows up very light colored. From my reading, I know that
: : an unmodified DSLR has an infrared filter in place, but it doesn't
: : block all the IR, but most of it. So with an IR filter and long
: : exposures, you still get some infrared.
:
: But note that the purpose of the built-in filter is to block those IR
: frequencies to which the sensor is most sensitive. So those that get through
: a) may not be the frequencies you most want and b) are guaranteed to register
: poorly on the sensor. So any resemblance to a "true" IR shot will be
: coincidental. If that's all you need, you might as well save yourself the
: aggravation of trying to photograph in IR light. Just open up a photo editor
: and adjust the RGB values to provide an IR-like effect. An editor that offers
: a variety of B&W conversions may even have a pre-canned IR setting.
:
:
: CS6 has one, but it is nowhere near the real thing.

But is it as near the real thing as photographing through an IR filter with an
unconverted camera?

Bob

On 2013-07-20 11:23:53 -0700, PeterN said:

On 7/20/2013 9:09 AM, Robert Coe wrote:
On Mon, 15 Jul 2013 20:19:14 -0400, rwalker wrote:
:
: I'll have some photos of outdoor vegetation in a bit. Vegetation
: certainly shows up very light colored. From my reading, I know that
: an unmodified DSLR has an infrared filter in place, but it doesn't
: block all the IR, but most of it. So with an IR filter and long
: exposures, you still get some infrared.

But note that the purpose of the built-in filter is to block those IR
frequencies to which the sensor is most sensitive. So those that get through
a) may not be the frequencies you most want and b) are guaranteed to register
poorly on the sensor. So any resemblance to a "true" IR shot will be
coincidental. If that's all you need, you might as well save yourself the
aggravation of trying to photograph in IR light. Just open up a photo editor
and adjust the RGB values to provide an IR-like effect. An editor that offers
a variety of B&W conversions may even have a pre-canned IR setting.


CS6 has one, but it is nowhere near the real thing.

CS3-CS6 & CC can do fake IR, and I agree, it isn't anywhere near the
real thing.

http://www.thedigitalphotographyconn...hp?ID=3D2FkoLr


--
Regards,

Savageduck

On 2013-07-20 12:31:15 -0700, Robert Coe said:

On Sat, 20 Jul 2013 14:23:53 -0400, PeterN
wrote:
: On 7/20/2013 9:09 AM, Robert Coe wrote:
: On Mon, 15 Jul 2013 20:19:14 -0400, rwalker wrote:
: :
: : I'll have some photos of outdoor vegetation in a bit. Vegetation
: : certainly shows up very light colored. From my reading, I know that
: : an unmodified DSLR has an infrared filter in place, but it doesn't
: : block all the IR, but most of it. So with an IR filter and long
: : exposures, you still get some infrared.
:
: But note that the purpose of the built-in filter is to block those IR
: frequencies to which the sensor is most sensitive. So those that
get through
: a) may not be the frequencies you most want and b) are guaranteed
to register
: poorly on the sensor. So any resemblance to a "true" IR shot will be
: coincidental. If that's all you need, you might as well save yourself the
: aggravation of trying to photograph in IR light. Just open up a
photo editor
: and adjust the RGB values to provide an IR-like effect. An editor
that offers
: a variety of B&W conversions may even have a pre-canned IR setting.
:
:
: CS6 has one, but it is nowhere near the real thing.

But is it as near the real thing as photographing through an IR filter with an
unconverted camera?

Bob

Close, but if you have a critical eye, not close enough.
Perhaps with a few extra tweaks you could make it passable.

Here is one of my attempts; The original with CS adjustments, a Silver
Efex Pro 2 B&W, and bottom right a CS6 fake IR.
https://dl.dropbox.com/u/1295663/Fil...enshot_258.jpg

--
Regards,

Savageduck

On Sat, 20 Jul 2013 14:42:54 -0700, Savageduck
wrote:
: On 2013-07-20 12:31:15 -0700, Robert Coe said:
:
: On Sat, 20 Jul 2013 14:23:53 -0400, PeterN
: wrote:
: : On 7/20/2013 9:09 AM, Robert Coe wrote:
: : On Mon, 15 Jul 2013 20:19:14 -0400, rwalker wrote:
: : :
: : : I'll have some photos of outdoor vegetation in a bit. Vegetation
: : : certainly shows up very light colored. From my reading, I know that
: : : an unmodified DSLR has an infrared filter in place, but it doesn't
: : : block all the IR, but most of it. So with an IR filter and long
: : : exposures, you still get some infrared.
: :
: : But note that the purpose of the built-in filter is to block those IR
: : frequencies to which the sensor is most sensitive. So those that
: get through
: : a) may not be the frequencies you most want and b) are guaranteed
: to register
: : poorly on the sensor. So any resemblance to a "true" IR shot will be
: : coincidental. If that's all you need, you might as well save yourself the
: : aggravation of trying to photograph in IR light. Just open up a
: photo editor
: : and adjust the RGB values to provide an IR-like effect. An editor
: that offers
: : a variety of B&W conversions may even have a pre-canned IR setting.
: :
: :
: : CS6 has one, but it is nowhere near the real thing.
:
: But is it as near the real thing as photographing through an IR filter with an
: unconverted camera?
:
: Bob
:
: Close, but if you have a critical eye, not close enough.
: Perhaps with a few extra tweaks you could make it passable.
:
: Here is one of my attempts; The original with CS adjustments, a Silver
: Efex Pro 2 B&W, and bottom right a CS6 fake IR.
: https://dl.dropbox.com/u/1295663/Fil...enshot_258.jpg

None of the three look particularly IR-like to me. But the CS6 fake, while
clearly the worst rendition of the subject, strikes me as the most IR-like.

But I'm not sure what I'm looking at. Was any of the three taken with an IR
filter? Had the camera undergone IR conversion?

Bob.

On Sat, 20 Jul 2013 04:53:07 -0700, Savageduck
wrote:

On 2013-07-20 00:53:03 -0700, rwalker said:

On Mon, 15 Jul 2013 18:58:40 -0700, Savageduck
wrote:

snip


Ok. Some successful experiments outdoors this afternoon using the 50
mm. lens and the Hoya R72 filter on the 5DIII.

A field of corn (maize):

http://www.flickr.com/photos/51646689@N00/9297836418/

A general view of the same vicinity. Not sure why such vignetting.
This is a 30 sec. exposure at 100 ISo and F1.8. At 10 seconds I still
get the vignetting but not as severe. But the vegetation certainly is
what I was expecting:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/5164668...ream/lightbox/

A crop of the above:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/5164668...ream/lightbox/

I'm much more satisfied now.

Much better.


I will never buy a Bower filter again. Today my Hoya 77 mm IR72
filter arrived, so I went out experimenting again. These were shot at
anywhere from F6.3 to F10 at 100 or 400 ISO using a Canon 25-104 mm. L
lens.

The original cemetery shot of a few days ago with the Bower IR72
"infrared" filter:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/51646689@N00/9283101330/

Reshot today with the Hoya IR72 filter:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/51646689@N00/9326702828/

A few shot today along the shores of Cayuga Lake near Seneca Falls,
New York:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/51646689@N00/9326702046/

http://www.flickr.com/photos/51646689@N00/9323908101/

http://www.flickr.com/photos/51646689@N00/9326702556/

Yup! That meets the expectations for the results one would want to find
in IR photography. My only issue is, in all three shots I find the
result to be very "soft" and not particularly sharp, or "crisp" enough
for my taste.


I know what you mean. I'm working on that.

On Sat, 20 Jul 2013 09:09:07 -0400, Robert Coe wrote:

On Mon, 15 Jul 2013 20:19:14 -0400, rwalker wrote:
:
: I'll have some photos of outdoor vegetation in a bit. Vegetation
: certainly shows up very light colored. From my reading, I know that
: an unmodified DSLR has an infrared filter in place, but it doesn't
: block all the IR, but most of it. So with an IR filter and long
: exposures, you still get some infrared.

But note that the purpose of the built-in filter is to block those IR
frequencies to which the sensor is most sensitive. So those that get through
a) may not be the frequencies you most want and b) are guaranteed to register
poorly on the sensor. So any resemblance to a "true" IR shot will be
coincidental. If that's all you need, you might as well save yourself the
aggravation of trying to photograph in IR light. Just open up a photo editor
and adjust the RGB values to provide an IR-like effect. An editor that offers
a variety of B&W conversions may even have a pre-canned IR setting.

Bob

Yes, but I haven't found a conversion with software that I like. I
also don't want to convert the camera for IR.

On Sat, 20 Jul 2013 09:09:07 -0400, Robert Coe wrote:

On Mon, 15 Jul 2013 20:19:14 -0400, rwalker wrote:
:
: I'll have some photos of outdoor vegetation in a bit. Vegetation
: certainly shows up very light colored. From my reading, I know that
: an unmodified DSLR has an infrared filter in place, but it doesn't
: block all the IR, but most of it. So with an IR filter and long
: exposures, you still get some infrared.

But note that the purpose of the built-in filter is to block those IR
frequencies to which the sensor is most sensitive. So those that get through
a) may not be the frequencies you most want and b) are guaranteed to register
poorly on the sensor. So any resemblance to a "true" IR shot will be
coincidental. If that's all you need, you might as well save yourself the
aggravation of trying to photograph in IR light. Just open up a photo editor
and adjust the RGB values to provide an IR-like effect. An editor that offers
a variety of B&W conversions may even have a pre-canned IR setting.

Bob

Ultimately, it pleases me, and that's all I really care about.

On 2013-07-20 16:19:44 -0700, Robert Coe said:

On Sat, 20 Jul 2013 14:42:54 -0700, Savageduck
wrote:
: On 2013-07-20 12:31:15 -0700, Robert Coe said:
:
: On Sat, 20 Jul 2013 14:23:53 -0400, PeterN
: wrote:
: : On 7/20/2013 9:09 AM, Robert Coe wrote:
: : On Mon, 15 Jul 2013 20:19:14 -0400, rwalker
wrote:
: : :
: : : I'll have some photos of outdoor vegetation in a bit. Vegetation
: : : certainly shows up very light colored. From my reading, I know that
: : : an unmodified DSLR has an infrared filter in place, but it doesn't
: : : block all the IR, but most of it. So with an IR filter and long
: : : exposures, you still get some infrared.
: :
: : But note that the purpose of the built-in filter is to block those IR
: : frequencies to which the sensor is most sensitive. So those that
: get through
: : a) may not be the frequencies you most want and b) are guaranteed
: to register
: : poorly on the sensor. So any resemblance to a "true" IR shot will be
: : coincidental. If that's all you need, you might as well save
yourself the
: : aggravation of trying to photograph in IR light. Just open up a
: photo editor
: : and adjust the RGB values to provide an IR-like effect. An editor
: that offers
: : a variety of B&W conversions may even have a pre-canned IR setting.
: :
: :
: : CS6 has one, but it is nowhere near the real thing.
:
: But is it as near the real thing as photographing through an IR
filter with an
: unconverted camera?
:
: Bob
:
: Close, but if you have a critical eye, not close enough.
: Perhaps with a few extra tweaks you could make it passable.
:
: Here is one of my attempts; The original with CS adjustments, a Silver
: Efex Pro 2 B&W, and bottom right a CS6 fake IR.
: https://dl.dropbox.com/u/1295663/Fil...enshot_258.jpg

None of the three look particularly IR-like to me. But the CS6 fake, while
clearly the worst rendition of the subject, strikes me as the most IR-like.

But I'm not sure what I'm looking at. Was any of the three taken with an IR
filter? Had the camera undergone IR conversion?

Bob.

Only the fake IR (bottom right) was meant to resemble an IR, and
faux-IR isn't a replacement for the real thing. It is just the Adobe
allegation that it can be done to to some images to fake it. So for me
this was just an exercise. Not a particularly successful exercise, but
an exercise.

There was only one capture and that was a plain old vanilla color shot
without any filter. The B&W conversion was just that a B&W conversion,
and not intended to be anything else.
I still feel that if I am going to explore IR photography, paying the
$275 to convert my D70 is going to give me the best results.


--
Regards,

Savageduck

On 7/20/2013 8:12 PM, Savageduck wrote:
On 2013-07-20 16:19:44 -0700, Robert Coe said:

On Sat, 20 Jul 2013 14:42:54 -0700, Savageduck
wrote:
: On 2013-07-20 12:31:15 -0700, Robert Coe said:
:
: On Sat, 20 Jul 2013 14:23:53 -0400, PeterN

: wrote:
: : On 7/20/2013 9:09 AM, Robert Coe wrote:
: : On Mon, 15 Jul 2013 20:19:14 -0400, rwalker
wrote:
: : :
: : : I'll have some photos of outdoor vegetation in a bit.
Vegetation
: : : certainly shows up very light colored. From my reading, I
know that
: : : an unmodified DSLR has an infrared filter in place, but it
doesn't
: : : block all the IR, but most of it. So with an IR filter and
long
: : : exposures, you still get some infrared.
: :
: : But note that the purpose of the built-in filter is to block
those IR
: : frequencies to which the sensor is most sensitive. So those that
: get through
: : a) may not be the frequencies you most want and b) are guaranteed
: to register
: : poorly on the sensor. So any resemblance to a "true" IR shot
will be
: : coincidental. If that's all you need, you might as well save
yourself the
: : aggravation of trying to photograph in IR light. Just open up a
: photo editor
: : and adjust the RGB values to provide an IR-like effect. An editor
: that offers
: : a variety of B&W conversions may even have a pre-canned IR
setting.
: :
: :
: : CS6 has one, but it is nowhere near the real thing.
:
: But is it as near the real thing as photographing through an IR
filter with an
: unconverted camera?
:
: Bob
:
: Close, but if you have a critical eye, not close enough.
: Perhaps with a few extra tweaks you could make it passable.
:
: Here is one of my attempts; The original with CS adjustments, a Silver
: Efex Pro 2 B&W, and bottom right a CS6 fake IR.
: https://dl.dropbox.com/u/1295663/Fil...enshot_258.jpg

None of the three look particularly IR-like to me. But the CS6 fake,
while
clearly the worst rendition of the subject, strikes me as the most
IR-like.

But I'm not sure what I'm looking at. Was any of the three taken with
an IR
filter? Had the camera undergone IR conversion?

Bob.

Only the fake IR (bottom right) was meant to resemble an IR, and faux-IR
isn't a replacement for the real thing. It is just the Adobe allegation
that it can be done to to some images to fake it. So for me this was
just an exercise. Not a particularly successful exercise, but an exercise.

There was only one capture and that was a plain old vanilla color shot
without any filter. The B&W conversion was just that a B&W conversion,
and not intended to be anything else.
I still feel that if I am going to explore IR photography, paying the
$275 to convert my D70 is going to give me the best results.



But becauseof the focus issue, you might want to give them the lens you
will mostlikely be using. With my P&S it was not an issue.


--
PeterN