POWER OF INFRARED (PT.2)

Went back up on the hill today to do a few more comparison shots.
It was much hazier today than yesterday, so much the better to test
out the power of the infrared.

Here are two comparison shots (cropped and resized):
http://www.pbase.com/bret/image/91153550/original

Here is an actual size crop from the 40D:
http://www.pbase.com/bret/image/91153551/original

And the same scene taken a minute later with the Totally Infrared D60:
http://www.pbase.com/bret/image/91153553/original

On Jan 2, 8:37*pm, Annika1980 wrote:
Went back up on the hill today to do a few more comparison shots.
It was much hazier today than yesterday, so much the better to test
out the power of the infrared.

Here are two comparison shots (cropped and resized):http://www.pbase.com/bret/image/91153550/original

Here is an actual size crop from the 40D:http://www.pbase.com/bret/image/91153551/original

And the same scene taken a minute later with the Totally Infrared D60:http://www.pbase.com/bret/image/91153553/original


You've done a superb job with your comparison test. What a
difference! The Totally IR D60 really cuts through all that haze.
Thanks for going through all that work and trouble.
Helen

On Jan 2, 3:37*pm, Annika1980 wrote:
Went back up on the hill today to do a few more comparison shots.
It was much hazier today than yesterday, so much the better to test
out the power of the infrared.

Here are two comparison shots (cropped and resized):http://www.pbase.com/bret/image/91153550/original

Here is an actual size crop from the 40D:http://www.pbase.com/bret/image/91153551/original

And the same scene taken a minute later with the Totally Infrared D60:http://www.pbase.com/bret/image/91153553/original

Very nicely done.

Scott

* Annika1980 is quoted & my replies are inline below :
Went back up on the hill today to do a few more comparison shots.
It was much hazier today than yesterday, so much the better to test
out the power of the infrared.

Here are two comparison shots (cropped and resized):
http://www.pbase.com/bret/image/91153550/original

Here is an actual size crop from the 40D:
http://www.pbase.com/bret/image/91153551/original

That's awesome Bret. Thanks for going up there again. As I said
before, I see the mountains much clearer as you were pointing
out.

And the same scene taken a minute later with the Totally Infrared D60:
http://www.pbase.com/bret/image/91153553/original

But do you see what I mean with this one? It looks like brush
strokes or something. Is that perhaps due to the conversion
affecting the sensor? At the resized version 91153550 above it
looked fine.

--
Troy Piggins
Please feel free to provide constructive criticism on any photos I post. I'm
always learning and appreciate feedback.

On Jan 3, 11:37 am, Annika1980 wrote:
Went back up on the hill today to do a few more comparison shots.
It was much hazier today than yesterday, so much the better to test
out the power of the infrared.

Here are two comparison shots (cropped and resized):http://www.pbase.com/bret/image/91153550/original

Here is an actual size crop from the 40D:
http://www.pbase.com/bret/image/91153551/original

And the same scene taken a minute later with the Totally Infrared D60:
http://www.pbase.com/bret/image/91153553/original

Much better comparison! This is quite intriguing. Have you tried
using an IR filter on the 40D as well? I wonder whether the sensors
read IR or through haze differently - there may be other factors
contributing.

I find the difference quite hard to believe, and will definitely try
this out once the rainstorms finish up. (We are having a nice drought-
breaking few weeks.. but visibility is often down to a km or less..)


As a postscript, this is the sort of thing that Rita and other
pretenders, never seem to be able to manage.. Has anyone ever seen
Rita, DMac, John Navas or the name-change-troll *accept challenges?*
*repost improvements*? *learn anything*?

(O:

On Jan 3, 5:40 am, Scott W wrote:
On Jan 2, 3:37 pm, Annika1980 wrote:

Went back up on the hill today to do a few more comparison shots.
It was much hazier today than yesterday, so much the better to test
out the power of the infrared.

Here are two comparison shots (cropped and resized):http://www.pbase.com/bret/image/91153550/original

Here is an actual size crop from the 40D:http://www.pbase.com/bret/image/91153551/original

And the same scene taken a minute later with the Totally Infrared D60:http://www.pbase.com/bret/image/91153553/original

Very nicely done.


Yes, looks like no flowers are in order. I have to say, though, the IR
version does have a noise-reduced look to it; I wonder what Brett used
for conversion.

On Jan 3, 6:20 am, acl wrote:
On Jan 3, 5:40 am, Scott W wrote:

On Jan 2, 3:37 pm, Annika1980 wrote:

Went back up on the hill today to do a few more comparison shots.
It was much hazier today than yesterday, so much the better to test
out the power of the infrared.

Here are two comparison shots (cropped and resized):http://www.pbase.com/bret/image/91153550/original

Here is an actual size crop from the 40D:http://www.pbase.com/bret/image/91153551/original

And the same scene taken a minute later with the Totally Infrared D60:http://www.pbase.com/bret/image/91153553/original

Very nicely done.

Yes, looks like no flowers are in order. I have to say, though, the IR
version does have a noise-reduced look to it; I wonder what Brett used
for conversion.

Actually, after also looking at the non-IR version, it seems the "NR"
I thought I saw is due to atmospheric effects or something. It's
present in both. So never mind

On Jan 2, 10:11*pm, Troy Piggins wrote:
http://www.pbase.com/bret/image/91153553/original

But do you see what I mean with this one? *It looks like brush
strokes or something. *Is that perhaps due to the conversion
affecting the sensor? *

Don't know. I figured it looks that way because it is shooting
through about 45 miles of haze between me and the Smoky Mountains in
the distance. They don't call them the Smokies for nothing.

On Wed, 2 Jan 2008 17:37:18 -0800 (PST), Annika1980
wrote:

Went back up on the hill today to do a few more comparison shots.
It was much hazier today than yesterday, so much the better to test
out the power of the infrared.

Here are two comparison shots (cropped and resized):
http://www.pbase.com/bret/image/91153550/original

Here is an actual size crop from the 40D:
http://www.pbase.com/bret/image/91153551/original

And the same scene taken a minute later with the Totally Infrared D60:
http://www.pbase.com/bret/image/91153553/original


I wonder if there might be some way of combining the photos to give
the illusion of clarity and color at the same time.

Troy Piggins wrote:
* Annika1980 is quoted & my replies are inline below :
Went back up on the hill today to do a few more comparison shots.
It was much hazier today than yesterday, so much the better to test
out the power of the infrared.

Here are two comparison shots (cropped and resized):
http://www.pbase.com/bret/image/91153550/original

Here is an actual size crop from the 40D:
http://www.pbase.com/bret/image/91153551/original

That's awesome Bret. Thanks for going up there again. As I said
before, I see the mountains much clearer as you were pointing
out.

And the same scene taken a minute later with the Totally Infrared D60:
http://www.pbase.com/bret/image/91153553/original

But do you see what I mean with this one? It looks like brush
strokes or something. Is that perhaps due to the conversion
affecting the sensor? At the resized version 91153550 above it
looked fine.

Keep in mind that infrared doesn't "see" things the same as visible
light. Looking at the vehicles on the road, for example - where a
visible-light photo might see things like shadows, painted logos on
truck, and things that provide "texture" (even at that small size), IR
sees only large expanses of surfaces emitting the same IR signature.
There isn't really a "tonal quality" to the light. Same with the trees
- where you'd normally see a lot of detail because of shadows and such,
the IR won't really show that up.

That large vertical tank just right of center-frame is a good example:
on the visible-light version, you can see the curvature of it from the
varying shadows and filtered light caused by the haze (ie. the shadowed
side is still lit somewhat because of the atmospheric scattering of
daylight). On the IR version, it's lit on one side, and not on the
other... period.

The reason the mountains are so clear is because the IR isn't affected
by the haze... which means the haze also doesn't scatter and "soften"
the light like it does for the visible spectrum.

It certainly does look like a "brush strokes" effect though, doesn't it?