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
|
|||
|
|||
Back to the IR light source concept...
I have never found any economy in building what I can buy. Just takes
to much time. You can buy inexpensive IR gells from which you can cut out what you need. Look for a low pass gell at about 750nm. A cheep way is to process a sheet of unexposed slide film if you need a large piece. Or take some of the ends from a processed roll of 35mm or 120 slide film. You can layer them if you need it darker to visable light. Performance wise though, it is going to be hard to beat a real IR illuminator like what is use on night vision devices. Oh by the way, all CCD sensors are sensitive to IR (down to 1300nm) light. All you need to do is to remove the camera's high pass filter and replace it with a clear to IR glass. I have been playing around with a CCD digital camera with a Hoya R72 (720nm low pass) It is an Olympus 2020 and I am comparing it to Kodak HIE film with the same filter. The film is about 5 stops faster than the digital sensor. Don Bruder wrote: Some of you may recall my post a few weeks ago asking about IR LEDs, filters, and other yakkety-yak about cheap ways to fab a light source that puts out either pure IR, or "close enough to it", with little or no visible component, for use in what boils down to a homebrew "Night Vision" system designed around a video camera that has a well-demonstrated sensitivity to IR in the same region of the spectrum that TV remotes use. |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
Back to the IR light source concept...
I have never found any economy in building what I can buy. Just takes
to much time. You can buy inexpensive IR gells from which you can cut out what you need. Look for a low pass gell at about 750nm. A cheep way is to process a sheet of unexposed slide film if you need a large piece. Or take some of the ends from a processed roll of 35mm or 120 slide film. You can layer them if you need it darker to visable light. Performance wise though, it is going to be hard to beat a real IR illuminator like what is use on night vision devices. Oh by the way, all CCD sensors are sensitive to IR (down to 1300nm) light. All you need to do is to remove the camera's high pass filter and replace it with a clear to IR glass. I have been playing around with a CCD digital camera with a Hoya R72 (720nm low pass) It is an Olympus 2020 and I am comparing it to Kodak HIE film with the same filter. The film is about 5 stops faster than the digital sensor. Don Bruder wrote: Some of you may recall my post a few weeks ago asking about IR LEDs, filters, and other yakkety-yak about cheap ways to fab a light source that puts out either pure IR, or "close enough to it", with little or no visible component, for use in what boils down to a homebrew "Night Vision" system designed around a video camera that has a well-demonstrated sensitivity to IR in the same region of the spectrum that TV remotes use. |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
Back to the IR light source concept...
In article Sa0Pc.8484$Xn.5197@fed1read05, columbotrek
wrote: I have never found any economy in building what I can buy. Just takes to much time. You can buy inexpensive IR gells from which you can cut HAH! Cheapest IR-pass filters I was able to find, whether gell, plastic, or glass, are *WAY* beyond my budget for this sort of tinkering. Besides - Doing it myself is (A) Entertaining (B) Educational and (C) a fun challenge. (Hmm... maybe C should read "both of the above?") Performance wise though, it is going to be hard to beat a real IR illuminator like what is use on night vision devices. Performance is secondary to price. A "real" illuminator with any kind of range is, like buying the IR-pass filter, way outside my budget, even with the idea of going for the cheapest available. Oh by the way, all CCD sensors are sensitive to IR (down to 1300nm) light. Replace "all" with "most", and I'll buy into that last statement. Some of them are very IR sensitive. Others barely notice IR at all, while still others are effectively totally blind to it. Depends on the maker and the process they used. External pre-filtering obviously effects the accuracy of that statement... -- Don Bruder - - New Email policy in effect as of Feb. 21, 2004. Short form: I'm trashing EVERY E-mail that doesn't contain a password in the subject unless it comes from a "whitelisted" (pre-approved by me) address. See http://www.sonic.net/~dakidd/main/contact.html for full details. |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
Back to the IR light source concept...
Don Bruder wrote: HAH! Cheapest IR-pass filters I was able to find, whether gell, plastic, or glass, are *WAY* beyond my budget for this sort of tinkering. Besides - Doing it myself is (A) Entertaining (B) Educational and (C) a fun challenge. (Hmm... maybe C should read "both of the above?") Is unexposed but developed scrap slide film beyond your budget? Perhaps you just need something to keep occupied with. Like polishing old CDs. Replace "all" with "most", and I'll buy into that last statement. Some of them are very IR sensitive. Others barely notice IR at all, while still others are effectively totally blind to it. Depends on the maker and the process they used. External pre-filtering obviously effects the accuracy of that statement... The CCD sensors are before they place a high pass filter in front of it which is why I suggested to remove the thing and replace it with clear glass to preserve the focus. Which is just what Sony does for their night mode. The lever moves the high pass filter out of the way. But now they also strap the aperture wide open when you place it in night mode. So if you use it in the daylight with an IR low pass filter the sensor saturates. |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
Back to the IR light source concept...
Don Bruder wrote: HAH! Cheapest IR-pass filters I was able to find, whether gell, plastic, or glass, are *WAY* beyond my budget for this sort of tinkering. Besides - Doing it myself is (A) Entertaining (B) Educational and (C) a fun challenge. (Hmm... maybe C should read "both of the above?") Is unexposed but developed scrap slide film beyond your budget? Perhaps you just need something to keep occupied with. Like polishing old CDs. Replace "all" with "most", and I'll buy into that last statement. Some of them are very IR sensitive. Others barely notice IR at all, while still others are effectively totally blind to it. Depends on the maker and the process they used. External pre-filtering obviously effects the accuracy of that statement... The CCD sensors are before they place a high pass filter in front of it which is why I suggested to remove the thing and replace it with clear glass to preserve the focus. Which is just what Sony does for their night mode. The lever moves the high pass filter out of the way. But now they also strap the aperture wide open when you place it in night mode. So if you use it in the daylight with an IR low pass filter the sensor saturates. |
#16
|
|||
|
|||
Back to the IR light source concept...
In article sKFPc.5111$Oi.15@fed1read04,
croweflight wrote: Don Bruder wrote: HAH! Cheapest IR-pass filters I was able to find, whether gell, plastic, or glass, are *WAY* beyond my budget for this sort of tinkering. Besides - Doing it myself is (A) Entertaining (B) Educational and (C) a fun challenge. (Hmm... maybe C should read "both of the above?") Is unexposed but developed scrap slide film beyond your budget? Perhaps you just need something to keep occupied with. Like polishing old CDs. Ahh, I get it... post a response so you can make a snide remark. FTR, it's my time to do with as I please, so you can take your snotty commentary and shove it where the sun don't shine. Replace "all" with "most", and I'll buy into that last statement. Some of them are very IR sensitive. Others barely notice IR at all, while still others are effectively totally blind to it. Depends on the maker and the process they used. External pre-filtering obviously effects the accuracy of that statement... The CCD sensors are before they place a high pass filter in front of it which is why I suggested to remove the thing and replace it with clear glass to preserve the focus. Which is just what Sony does for their night mode. The lever moves the high pass filter out of the way. But now they also strap the aperture wide open when you place it in night mode. So if you use it in the daylight with an IR low pass filter the sensor saturates. Wasn't that little addition (cranking the aperture wide open in "night" mode) in response to the "Oh my god! If it's used that way in daylight, it's able to take nude pictures of clothed people!!! Oh, the horror! It MUST BE STOPPED!" garbage that started flowing when somebody actually tried it? I guess saturating the sensor would do a good job of stopping such things... A picture/footage isn't worth much if it's just a white-out. -- Don Bruder - - New Email policy in effect as of Feb. 21, 2004. Short form: I'm trashing EVERY E-mail that doesn't contain a password in the subject unless it comes from a "whitelisted" (pre-approved by me) address. See http://www.sonic.net/~dakidd/main/contact.html for full details. |
#17
|
|||
|
|||
Back to the IR light source concept...
Just as a note- if you are removing aluminum based reflective coatings
(virtually all of them!), then never never scrub them off with abrasives. Dip them in ammonia and it will dissolve the aluminum right away, leaving the plastic pristine and perfect. Cheers! Sir Charles W. Shults III, K. B. B. Xenotech Research 321-206-1840 |
#18
|
|||
|
|||
Back to the IR light source concept...
In article ,
"Sir Charles W. Shults III" wrote: Just as a note- if you are removing aluminum based reflective coatings (virtually all of them!), then never never scrub them off with abrasives. Dip them in ammonia and it will dissolve the aluminum right away, leaving the plastic pristine and perfect. Excellent idea. But what about "breaking the glaze" of the coating over top of the aluminum? Doesn't seem to me like ammonia will be very effective on aluminum it can't get in contact with... -- Don Bruder - - New Email policy in effect as of Feb. 21, 2004. Short form: I'm trashing EVERY E-mail that doesn't contain a password in the subject unless it comes from a "whitelisted" (pre-approved by me) address. See http://www.sonic.net/~dakidd/main/contact.html for full details. |
#19
|
|||
|
|||
Back to the IR light source concept...
Don Bruder wrote in message ...
snip After spending some time looking for, and a grand total of 8 dollars acquiring, a few of these "black" CDs, I went to work on taking my idea from the realm of theory to reality. And I'm pleased to say "it works!" snip So at this point, I'm trying to figure out the best way to polish out the scratches left by the steel wool, and get back to a truly transparent (rather than translucent) finish on my homemade "filter". Have you tried (in other words it probably won't work, but you never know) aplying a water based clear varnish to the ground side. If the refractive index is similar enough to the plastic (tinted polycarbonate I would guess - normal polycarbonate has n~1.56) and you can get good coverage right into the grooves (you might need to dilute with water) AND you get an even layer it might be good enough - it's light delivery, not imaging that you're after. Underdriving the bulb will increase the amount of IR at the expense of vis as previously mentioned, so perhaps the bulb from a 4 or 6 cell maglite would help as well. Chris (p.s. google has given me 1.37-1.48 for refractive index of varnishes) |
#20
|
|||
|
|||
Back to the IR light source concept...
Don Bruder wrote in message ...
snip After spending some time looking for, and a grand total of 8 dollars acquiring, a few of these "black" CDs, I went to work on taking my idea from the realm of theory to reality. And I'm pleased to say "it works!" snip So at this point, I'm trying to figure out the best way to polish out the scratches left by the steel wool, and get back to a truly transparent (rather than translucent) finish on my homemade "filter". Have you tried (in other words it probably won't work, but you never know) aplying a water based clear varnish to the ground side. If the refractive index is similar enough to the plastic (tinted polycarbonate I would guess - normal polycarbonate has n~1.56) and you can get good coverage right into the grooves (you might need to dilute with water) AND you get an even layer it might be good enough - it's light delivery, not imaging that you're after. Underdriving the bulb will increase the amount of IR at the expense of vis as previously mentioned, so perhaps the bulb from a 4 or 6 cell maglite would help as well. Chris (p.s. google has given me 1.37-1.48 for refractive index of varnishes) |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Master Mason Handbook | Doug Robbins | 35mm Photo Equipment | 0 | July 15th 04 03:33 PM |
New Leica digital back info.... | Barney | 35mm Photo Equipment | 19 | June 30th 04 12:45 AM |
IR photo/videography - filter for light source? Long-ish... | Don Bruder | Other Photographic Equipment | 4 | June 29th 04 03:03 PM |
IR photo/videography - filter for light source? Long-ish... | Don Bruder | General Photography Techniques | 4 | June 29th 04 03:03 PM |
Point Light Source? (Richard K?) | jjs | In The Darkroom | 3 | February 22nd 04 07:44 AM |