Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Infra Red with DSLRs

Last response: in Digital Camera
Share
Anonymous
May 18, 2005 1:08:44 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

Has anyone played about with infra red with their DSLR?

I used a Fuji S3 Pro and a Cokin 89B filter to produce these images:

http://www.bipp.com/en/dyn/toonfoto.shtml?RSES=20054817...
http://www.bipp.com/en/dyn/toonfoto.shtml?RSES=20054817...

Please let me know what you think. I've never tried IR film (can I use that
word here?!) so I don't know what to compare against. The effects is better
than I expected though I must admit! <g>

Cheers all,
Best regards,
Craig.

p.s. it was a very windy day and the exposures were 20 seconds...

More about : infra red dslrs

Anonymous
May 18, 2005 1:08:45 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

Craig Marston wrote:

> Has anyone played about with infra red with their DSLR?
>
> I used a Fuji S3 Pro and a Cokin 89B filter to produce these images:
>
> http://www.bipp.com/en/dyn/toonfoto.shtml?RSES=20054817...
> http://www.bipp.com/en/dyn/toonfoto.shtml?RSES=20054817...
>
> Please let me know what you think. I've never tried IR film (can I use that
> word here?!) so I don't know what to compare against. The effects is better
> than I expected though I must admit! <g>

Certainly have that "IR" look.

--
-- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm
-- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm
-- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin
-- e-meil: Remove FreeLunch.
Anonymous
May 18, 2005 1:59:54 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

>
> Certainly have that "IR" look.
>

I did have to perform quite a bit of buggering about in Photoshop though..!
At capture the histogram looks like a monolith rather than a nice hill, and
the chromatic spread is tiny too. I can adjust this easily with the
HyperUtility software though before converting it to B+W in Photoshop via
the channel mixer. The infra red parts of the image tend to be light blue...

Craig.
Related resources
Anonymous
May 18, 2005 2:21:24 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

"Craig Marston" <binaries.newsgroup@craignospammarston.com> writes:
> Has anyone played about with infra red with their DSLR?

I think a lot of us have.

> I used a Fuji S3 Pro and a Cokin 89B filter to produce these images:
> http://www.bipp.com/en/dyn/toonfoto.shtml?RSES=20054817...
> http://www.bipp.com/en/dyn/toonfoto.shtml?RSES=20054817...
> Please let me know what you think.

They're nice, in particular the last one.

> I've never tried IR film (can I use that word here?!) so I don't
> know what to compare against.

I've used IR film, and IR digital is a lot simpler. Just to be able
to use the review and histogram to tune exposure simplyfies things
a lot.

I mainatin an difital IR resource page with exposure data for various
digital cameras: http://folk.uio.no/gisle/photo/ir.html .

I would appreciate to have the full exposure data (ISO, aperture and
shutter) for your Fuji S3.
--
- gisle hannemyr [ gisle{at}hannemyr.no - http://folk.uio.no/gisle/ ]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Kodak DCS460, Canon Powershot G5, Olympus 2020Z
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Anonymous
May 18, 2005 2:21:25 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

> They're nice, in particular the last one.

Cheers mate! Everyone likes that one best, but I prefer the one with just
the trees...

> I've used IR film, and IR digital is a lot simpler. Just to be able
> to use the review and histogram to tune exposure simplyfies things
> a lot.

Hell yes! I never had to consider the handling precautions either.

> I mainatin an difital IR resource page with exposure data for various
> digital cameras: http://folk.uio.no/gisle/photo/ir.html .

Now that is one fantastic resource - I wish I'd know of it earlier!

> I would appreciate to have the full exposure data (ISO, aperture and
> shutter) for your Fuji S3.

You certainly can mate, I have emailed the two EXIF JPEGs extracted from the
RAW files to you.

Rgds
Craig.
Anonymous
May 18, 2005 3:34:40 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

"Craig Marston" <binaries.newsgroup@craignospammarston.com> writes:

> Has anyone played about with infra red with their DSLR?
>
> I used a Fuji S3 Pro and a Cokin 89B filter to produce these images:
>
> http://www.bipp.com/en/dyn/toonfoto.shtml?RSES=20054817...
> http://www.bipp.com/en/dyn/toonfoto.shtml?RSES=20054817...
>
> Please let me know what you think. I've never tried IR film (can I use that
> word here?!) so I don't know what to compare against. The effects is better
> than I expected though I must admit! <g>

I've done a bit with my S2 and a 72R filter -- but I don't seem to
have the better set on the web. I found that picking *one* channel
and exposing for it (so I chose red, of course) worked better. And I
needed to use a tripod more than I did (the S2 is considerably less
sensitive than the previous camera I did digital IR with).
--
David Dyer-Bennet, <mailto:D d-b@dd-b.net>, <http://www.dd-b.net/dd-b/&gt;
RKBA: <http://noguns-nomoney.com/&gt; <http://www.dd-b.net/carry/&gt;
Pics: <http://dd-b.lighthunters.net/&gt; <http://www.dd-b.net/dd-b/SnapshotAlbum/&gt;
Dragaera/Steven Brust: <http://dragaera.info/&gt;
Anonymous
May 18, 2005 6:10:35 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

On Tue, 17 May 2005 21:08:44 +0100, "Craig Marston"
<binaries.newsgroup@craignospammarston.com> wrote:

>Has anyone played about with infra red with their DSLR?
>
>I used a Fuji S3 Pro and a Cokin 89B filter to produce these images:
>
>http://www.bipp.com/en/dyn/toonfoto.shtml?RSES=20054817...
>http://www.bipp.com/en/dyn/toonfoto.shtml?RSES=20054817...
>
>Please let me know what you think. I've never tried IR film (can I use that
>word here?!) so I don't know what to compare against. The effects is better
>than I expected though I must admit! <g>
>
>Cheers all,
>Best regards,
>Craig.
>
>p.s. it was a very windy day and the exposures were 20 seconds...
>

Excellent shots. I've always loved the look of IR shots, black and
white that is. You find out some interesting things doing it, for
instance, some black objects turn almost white due to having high
IR reflectivity while others stay dead black. Now, if only good IR
filters weren't so pricey, except for wratten.
-Rich
Anonymous
May 19, 2005 2:38:27 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

> Excellent shots. I've always loved the look of IR shots, black and
> white that is. You find out some interesting things doing it, for
> instance, some black objects turn almost white due to having high
> IR reflectivity while others stay dead black. Now, if only good IR
> filters weren't so pricey, except for wratten.
> -Rich

Thanks for the kind comments.

The filter I have, I ordered from Jessops online as they are like hens'
teeth to get hold of! Have you seen Gisle's web page on this subject, it's
very good. I shall have to investigate the effect you mentioned as that
could make for some awesome shots! This is the filter that I bought:
Item: 1.COKA007 - A SERIES INFRARED 89B (A007)

Availability: Usually available in 2-4 weeks* Quantity Ordered: 1 Unit
Price: 17.99 GBP Line Total: 17.99 GBP
Anonymous
May 19, 2005 2:43:40 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

> I've done a bit with my S2 and a 72R filter -- but I don't seem to
> have the better set on the web. I found that picking *one* channel
> and exposing for it (so I chose red, of course) worked better. And I
> needed to use a tripod more than I did (the S2 is considerably less
> sensitive than the previous camera I did digital IR with).

It would seem that higher-end cameras have more IR filtration (high-pass)
over their sensors, hence the long exposures as the two filters are kind of
fighting each other! I've seen some stunning images taken with compact
cameras because they don't have the same level of IR filtration built in.

What do you mean by "picking one channel and exposing for it"?

Cheers,

Craig.
Anonymous
May 19, 2005 6:20:30 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

Craig Marston wrote:

>>I've done a bit with my S2 and a 72R filter -- but I don't seem to
>>have the better set on the web. I found that picking *one* channel
>>and exposing for it (so I chose red, of course) worked better. And I
>>needed to use a tripod more than I did (the S2 is considerably less
>>sensitive than the previous camera I did digital IR with).
>
>
> It would seem that higher-end cameras have more IR filtration (high-pass)
> over their sensors, hence the long exposures as the two filters are kind of
> fighting each other! I've seen some stunning images taken with compact
> cameras because they don't have the same level of IR filtration built in.
>

Re: filters fighting each other...

There's a site that describes modifying DLSR's (D70 specifically) by
removing the IR blocking filter in front of the sensor, and replacing it
with an opaque IR pass filter (obtainable from Edmond Scientific, but
has to be cut down to size). Then you've got an IR camera, no external
filter required, that yields exposure times fast enough to go without a
tripod! I've been waiting for D70's to become cheap enough on the used
market to pick one up and give this a try...

Here's the link:

http://www.lifepixel.com/IR.htm

Cheers,

RM
Anonymous
May 19, 2005 6:20:31 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

On Thu, 19 May 2005 02:20:30 GMT, RM <rainmen1956@yahooREMOVETHIS.com>
wrote:

>Craig Marston wrote:
>
>>>I've done a bit with my S2 and a 72R filter -- but I don't seem to
>>>have the better set on the web. I found that picking *one* channel
>>>and exposing for it (so I chose red, of course) worked better. And I
>>>needed to use a tripod more than I did (the S2 is considerably less
>>>sensitive than the previous camera I did digital IR with).
>>
>>
>> It would seem that higher-end cameras have more IR filtration (high-pass)
>> over their sensors, hence the long exposures as the two filters are kind of
>> fighting each other! I've seen some stunning images taken with compact
>> cameras because they don't have the same level of IR filtration built in.
>>
>
>Re: filters fighting each other...
>
>There's a site that describes modifying DLSR's (D70 specifically) by
>removing the IR blocking filter in front of the sensor, and replacing it
>with an opaque IR pass filter (obtainable from Edmond Scientific, but
>has to be cut down to size). Then you've got an IR camera, no external
>filter required, that yields exposure times fast enough to go without a
>tripod! I've been waiting for D70's to become cheap enough on the used
>market to pick one up and give this a try...
>
>Here's the link:
>
>http://www.lifepixel.com/IR.htm
>
>Cheers,
>
>RM

If you don't want to destroy the camera for other types of
photography, you can replace the hot mirror filter with a clear
anti-reflection filter, then use either infrared filters or
hot mirror filters (for regular shots) on the front of your lens.
I believe B&W stocks IR blocking screw-on filters. Another thing
the article didn't mention was that IR has a different focus point
than white light and I don't know if a P&S will focus on it correctly
if all other light frequencies are blocked off.
-Rich
Anonymous
May 20, 2005 4:00:23 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

"Craig Marston" <binaries.newsgroup@craignospammarston.com> writes:

> What do you mean by "picking one channel and exposing for it"?

I found the histograms in red, green, and blue were placed
considerably differently. So to get "ideal" placement I had to pick
just one (and then use only that channel in my image). Given Bayer
filtering, that may be a losing proposition in other ways, though. I
need to try photographing the same scene that way, and setting
exposure based on the composite histogram and using all three channels
in my B&W conversion, and see if there are differences in sharpness or
resolution. Plus overall appearance of course.
--
David Dyer-Bennet, <mailto:D d-b@dd-b.net>, <http://www.dd-b.net/dd-b/&gt;
RKBA: <http://noguns-nomoney.com/&gt; <http://www.dd-b.net/carry/&gt;
Pics: <http://dd-b.lighthunters.net/&gt; <http://www.dd-b.net/dd-b/SnapshotAlbum/&gt;
Dragaera/Steven Brust: <http://dragaera.info/&gt;
Anonymous
May 20, 2005 4:02:42 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

RichA <none@none.com> writes:

> Another thing the article didn't mention was that IR has a different
> focus point than white light and I don't know if a P&S will focus on
> it correctly if all other light frequencies are blocked off.

A P&S that does its autofocus off the CCD sensor will autofocus
correctly for infrared with an IR filter. For a DSLR, it depends
whether the separate autofocus sensor is sensitive to the IR, can work
in that low a light level, and probably other things.
--
David Dyer-Bennet, <mailto:D d-b@dd-b.net>, <http://www.dd-b.net/dd-b/&gt;
RKBA: <http://noguns-nomoney.com/&gt; <http://www.dd-b.net/carry/&gt;
Pics: <http://dd-b.lighthunters.net/&gt; <http://www.dd-b.net/dd-b/SnapshotAlbum/&gt;
Dragaera/Steven Brust: <http://dragaera.info/&gt;
Anonymous
May 20, 2005 12:19:40 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

David Dyer-Bennet <dd-b@dd-b.net> writes:
> RichA <none@none.com> writes:

>> Another thing the article didn't mention was that IR has a
>> different focus point than white light and I don't know if a P&S
>> will focus on it correctly if all other light frequencies are
>> blocked off.

> A P&S that does its autofocus off the CCD sensor will autofocus
> correctly for infrared with an IR filter.

That depends. The Oly C2020Z, which has a sensor that is fairly
sensitive to IR, autofocuses fine with a R72. The Canon G5, which
is about five stops less sensitive, don't. Too dark for AF in the
G5 too find anything to lock on, I guess.

> For a DSLR, it depends whether the separate autofocus sensor is
> sensitive to the IR, can work in that low a light level, and
> probably other things.

My experience is that if the built-in AF in a DSLRs work at all - it
back-focuses. Using manual focus and short focusing by the amount
indicated on the lens barrel is necessary to get an in-focus picture.
--
- gisle hannemyr [ gisle{at}hannemyr.no - http://folk.uio.no/gisle/ ]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Kodak DCS460, Canon Powershot G5, Olympus 2020Z
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Anonymous
May 21, 2005 6:29:25 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

> I found the histograms in red, green, and blue were placed
> considerably differently. So to get "ideal" placement I had to pick
> just one (and then use only that channel in my image). Given Bayer
> filtering, that may be a losing proposition in other ways, though. I
> need to try photographing the same scene that way, and setting
> exposure based on the composite histogram and using all three channels
> in my B&W conversion, and see if there are differences in sharpness or
> resolution. Plus overall appearance of course.
> --
> David Dyer-Bennet, <mailto:D d-b@dd-b.net>, <http://www.dd-b.net/dd-b/&gt;
> RKBA: <http://noguns-nomoney.com/&gt; <http://www.dd-b.net/carry/&gt;
> Pics: <http://dd-b.lighthunters.net/&gt;
> <http://www.dd-b.net/dd-b/SnapshotAlbum/&gt;
> Dragaera/Steven Brust: <http://dragaera.info/&gt;

Aah, I see!
Well, I shoot in RAW and for the IR images I adjusted the curves [in the RAW
processing s/ware] quite severely. I pulled the middle of the red curve
quite low and pushed the middle of the blue curve quite high. It appears
that the IR wavelengths affect the blue sensors the most. When in Photoshop
I added a channel mixer layer and changed the output to green before ticking
the monochrome option. I can then alter the red an blue components to
increase the contrast; the blue being the reflected IR.

I tried converting to Lab colour mode but I found it like riding a bike
backwards!

Regards,

Craig.
!