Well I am well impressed with that Harry. :cool:

Not sure how my experiments will go today as light levels are pretty low. A quick check of the Met Office satellite sequence shows we are not likely to get much better either. :(

I see you mention adjusting temp in Lightroom. Does this mean you did not do a Custom WB ?

Don

Don. You had mentioned having a slight problem with the custom WB, (just a few seconds job on the Canon) so yesterday evening I decided to use raw and adjust the WB on the PC so as to find what I considered an optimum colour temperature.

So yes, as I convert all my raw files via Lightroom. On this occasion I did not do a custom WB.

The weather here is much the as your neck of the woods, so I'm about to redo the horse photo using various other WB settings, if any of these proove to be better than the one posted I will let you know.

Harry

Great Pano Harry, been onto ACS again - another two weeks for the D100, they say they are snowed under.

:D :D

Harry,
I discovered that not only will the D100 not meter with my m/f lenses, but it also will not allow Custom WB. Put an a/f lens on and no probs.
My problem a/f lens wise is I only have 12-24 ( cannot use due to a hotspot ), 35mm, 85mm and 180mm. This has shown m/f lenses have advantages and disadvantages on the D100. At least with m/f I can get to 24mm.

Conditions for testing are not so good. Quite a high wind so the sun comes and goes. Difficult to get a set of directly comparable images at various WB settings. Here is my first effort though, nothing fancy just a shot over the garden fence.

This one is with Custom WB and processing is just a case of convert from RAW to Tiff, Auto levels, run the Action I refered to in post 33, resize and USM .... finished. So with easy processing I will stick with Custom WB for false colour.
Exposure on this is ISO400, 1/6sec at f8, so at least one stop less light loss than the double transparency filter.

Don

Well it looks as though you've cracked it Don. Now all we need is some decent weather.

You will now have realised the downside of using an IR filter and why I had my old DSLR converted. 1/6 sec does not give much scope when shooting in windy conditions, but a least you're now ble to shoot IR.

Andy, what is the turn round time for a conversion now? From what you say it would seem many people who have upgraded are having their old cameras converted.

Soon all the oldies such as Don will be shooting IR:)

Harry

Hi Don, you do seem to have cracked it but I am interested in what you say about the 12-24, I assume Nikkor, because apparently the 12-24 DG Sigma is highly recommended for IR. Here is a link to Nikkor lenses and there use with IR.
http://diglloyd.com/prem/prot/DIP/pu...ses-Nikon.html

Hi Harry, ACS got mine on the 17th April, on Friday they told me another two weeks - so about six weeks at the moment. There is a firm on ebay that advertises conversions for £150, and quotes a week to 10 days turn around. These are the people who told me there was no need to retune the auto focus, just stop down to f8. From my reading, that is why I chose ACS and decided the longer wait was worth it.

Harry,
Well its all a matter of cost. I just could not afford the covenience that an IR converted camera would give. £35 for a 52mm Hoya R72 filter, although more than my for free film filter, still reasonably falls into the IR on the cheap bracket. Of course the advantage of being an oldie is that I am used to what is by todays standards, more primitive kit. :rolleyes: :D

The next step is to get to fully understand the response of the 3 channels to infrared and get a FAR better understanding of photoshop to be able to play with the subleties of tints.
Keep posting pics here as I am sure I will learn a lot from them.

Andy,
Your link is does not work ...... sign in job so I expect it is a pay to view so I cannot see what you are pointing me at.

12-24 then to quote Bjørn Rørslett, and he is a guy who has done a lot of IR with mostly 'UNCONVERTED TO IR' Nikons, and a huge array of lenses, so who I am I to argue. " IR performance: This lens is frequently severely flawed by a dominant hot-spot. The tendency for hot spotting develops towards the shorter focal settings and is exacerbated when the lens is stopped down. You have to try with your own camera to see if the combination works satisfactorily, the chances are against it though. " By contrast from what I read in a previous link Diglloyd appears to be using converted cameras.

A significant difference here as converted cameras have the AA filter swapped out. At IR wavelengths some lenses suffer a 'hotspot' as a result of light bouncing back and forth between the AA filter the rear lens element. I cannot remember what I was playing around with, ( not IR but maybe flash experiments ), but I have come across this 'hot spot' effect before, and it does not show in normal use. So it is a lens specific phenomenon at certain wavelengths of light. Complexity of the lens design and coatings may well be the factors influencing this. So stunning visible light performance does not equal the same in the IR wavelengths, and equally a mediocre lens in normal light can redeem itself in IR. For example for normal light photography the ancient Sigma 24mm f2.8 I am using for IR cannot hold a candle to my Nikkor 28mm f2.8 AIs. In IR though the 28mm produces a 'hotspot', so in this case the Sigma wins, as it has no 'hotspot'.

For your interest I have a number of AIs lenses in 52mm filter thread that I can test when the sun finally comes out for long enough to conduct a series of consistent tests. - 24mm f2, 28mm f2.8 (tested-hotspot), 50mm f1.4, 55 f2.8 micro, 105mm f2.5, 105mm f2.8 Micro and 200mm f4,

I could have gone the Cokin route despite needing to tape the whole thing up to prevent visible light leak, to allow use of the 85mm, 180mm and Stevies 18-35 on adaptor rings but these lenses lack decent distance markings or in the case of the zoom an IR focus mark. So there is something to be said for old technology after all.

Don

Hi Don, I realise cost is a great consideration, but I have a delightful wife who still goes to work (should be retired) and is quite happy to pay for these extras for me.

If you follow this link http://diglloyd.com/diglloyd/ReviewInfo.html then scroll down the page you will see an article marked "Now Free". Click on that and follow the various links.

Harry

:D :D

I showed that to Stevie and she laughed. Still a spend is OK'd if I find a 20mm f3.5 for a good price. ;)

No pics today as the weather has not been on my side. Spent a bit of time making an eye piece blind. Not impressed with what came with the camera.
I read in one of the links that on longer exposures like I am using, it is highly recommended to prevent stay light through the viewfinder degrading the image. That reinforces my view re the Cokin filter and the need to seal the holder from stray light.

Don

Peter,
I think you must have Mark fired up now. I suggested he join so he could follow this thread. :)

A bit frustrated with the weather at the moment, but that has lead to another idea. ........ IR with flash. Some of you could probably have guessed that one might come up. :rolleyes:

We were in Dereham today, so I popped into Norfolk Camera Centre for something I had ordered, and they had Cokin IR filters on a really good deal. So I got one. The idea is to tape it inside my bellows hood and fire a flash through it. Not sure if it will work but nothing ventured nothing gained. At least that will keep me going until the weather improves. If it works then the next plot will be to try it with a double layer film filter as that is pliable and easier to wrap around a Stofen diffuser.

Of course now I have that, I can test Stevies lenses for hotspots as I am not limited to the 52mm filter thread of the Hoya R72 when I use the bellows hood.

Don

Don you may find this interesting

http://www.flickr.com/photos/matt/se...146318/detail/

Thanks for posting that Harry. It must work then. :)

As I do not have any more film I will do a mod on my bellows hood to seal off the 75mm square filter holder to make the thing light tight with the Cokin filter, and then try firing a flash though it.

Don

IR Flash
 

Well I cobbled together a method of firing a flash through the Cokin IR filter. A second IR filter Hoya R72 was fitted to the camera lens.

The pics were taken in the workshop which was lit by flourecent tubes only - no daylight. A straight flash shot was taken with the the pop up flash to give a master to guage the IR effect.
As I am unlikely to take pics in pitch black, for the IR shot I selected an exposure that would benefit a bit from the workshop lighting. I really needed a more powerful flash than the SB-80DX as there is significant light loss. Exposure for the IR shot was ISO800, 2secs at f8, with the flash 30 inches from the subject.

Processing of the IR was Auto levels followed by the False Colour action I have previously mentioned, so nothing fancy.

Apart from foliage, which would reflect IR light, I added what I considered a IR dead object in the shape of the camera, again to see the effect. Glad I did now as there is a newly observed side effect to IR. Check out the self timer and lens release buttons on the front of the camera. IR light has seen straight through the plastic. A bit like an X ray. :eek:

I am well impressed with this first effort. I need to aquire some film now to try out a film filter which would make it an easier to handle flash set up. Even get back to multiple flash guns.

Managements calling, so I've got to go and help Stevie with her gardening now. :rolleyes: :D

Don

Hi Don, of course Nikon used to make the SB-140 flash that had three changeable sensors, one for normal, one for UV and one for IR. This link explains http://www.ultraviolet-photography.com/
Also spot the other link on that page for "Beyond Visible". I notice that Nikon do IR flash adapters for the SB-600 & 800, - I like your shot of the camera & rose. By the way one of these articles speaks briefly about the effect of the fresnel screen on the front of the flash and how it lessens the power of an IR flash.

Thanks for the link Andy.
Saw the prices in $$ and nearly fell off my chair. :eek: :eek:
I will read through the linked pages at my leisure.

I will mod my Metz 45 first with a Cokin IR filter, and then the Vivitar 283 and Nikon SB80-DX with film filters all for a lot less than that. :)

As far as power loss goes you are right, but then multiple flash exposures on a single frame is a cost free way round that problem as I will only be doing still life.

Don

Don, as I mentioned in my PM. I went out today with the sole purpose of shooting a little IR, unfortunately before I got where I was going the heavens opened up, so IR was really out of the question, but even so here is one taken inbetween the raindrops:)

Harry

Sorry guys if I haven't follow this topic from begining.
Just to jump in, if you don't mind, I learn a lot while web shopping.
Here is one eg. Just go throught the page without playing the role of buyer and a lot of basic info is well shown especially make sure to go throught the sample images.

_ _ L I N K _ _

Nice one Harry.
Just goes to show that there are IR possibilities even in conditions one might not expect. The sky says it all about the conditions that this pic was taken in.

Sassan,
How I wish I had seen those White Balance comparisons when I started with my first film filter shots at the start of this thread. They explain a lot. A great link and thanks for that.

Harry has totally saved my life with his input in this thread so I am much in his debt. ;)

Still early days for me, but as the D100 has two shooting banks, I have one set for Auto WB and the other on Harrys suggested custom WB taken from bright grass. Auto WB gives good B&W and Custom WB for false colour. Still to play with a B&W from custom WB. BTW the flash experiment shot was taken using shooting bank B, with custom WB from bright grass.

Setting a WB to suit certainly seems to be key even if you are shooting RAW.

I guess I am doing IR with a ball and chain round my ankle.
Hoya R72 filter rather than an IR conversion, manual focus lenses that cannot communicate with the camera, and a limited understanding of photoshop. Still I am loving the challenge and it's really broadening my photographic horizons. :)

Don

Very good Harry, nice shot.
Sassan, thanks for the link, I think they pinched the examples from Life Pixel or someone who does conversions.
Keep at it Don. My D100 should be here any day.

I've just been re-reading this thread and have got myself slightly confused, why are you converting a flash for IR? Without the mod the flash will output IR and visable light and the filter on your camera will block the viable light leaving only IR to be recorded by the camera. I'm struggling to see the advantage of adding an IR filter to the flash, but that's probably just me being slow.

As an aside I decided to order a screw in IR filter to give it a proper go, they are relatively inexpensive so will give me a way to try it out before spending out on a conversion.

Not at all Peter, your statement sounds quite logical.

Pure instinct told me the result would be different though hence adding a filter. That is probably based on the fact that I know that years ago Nikon sold a IR/UV specific flash plus the relavent filters. In fact Andy posted a link in post no. 54 to that particular bit of kit. Nobody is going to make specialist kit like that unless there is a requirement based on experiences.

Just to confirm my instinct was correct I took a pic without the filter to compare later while I was at it.

Attached is a side by side screen grab of each Nef with it histogram. It is fairly large 1122 x 764 to give a reasonable view. Exposure on both is identical. White balance was custom, and taken from grass in sunlight. The difference I think you will agree is quite significant, hence I am going to do a job on my three portable flashguns.

As you are going to give it a go, and myself not being familiar with Canon lenses, does the lens you hope to use have an infrared focusing mark. I mention that, as with most lenses infrared focusses in front of the normal light distance. So it is a case of focus then manually refocus on the IR mark.
I will do a pic of one of my lenses to explain that.

Don

interesting stuff Don - looking at your image and thinking about it a bit more I guess that the 720nm filters cut out most visable light but not all, so by adding an IR filter to your flash you are reducing the amount of visable light 'contaminating' the IR image. But that might just be twaddle! If possible I'd like to meet up at somepoint and see your set up and get some tips on this, probably best to leave it until after the half term though!!!

No probs Peter, just PM me so I can e-mail you a map of where we are.

Today I got round to making the infrared accessory for my Metz 45CL3 flashgun. Image attached.

I have previously made a diffuser for the Metz which is almost never off it due to the quality of light it produces. Link to the thread and pics on making that.
http://www.worldphotographyforum.com...ead.php?t=1862

Instead of the bowl being attached to the mounting plate, I stuck velcro to the front on this one. The Cokin has a land 7mm wide on one side, and I made up and attached a velcro ring to that so as to allow the filter to be detatchable for safe storage. While light tight at the front there are some ventilation slots at the side to allow heat from the flash tube to eascape. The small amount of visible light that gets through those is not enough to degrade the IR image.

Don

Infrared focus and compensting for it.
 

Anyone using either Hoya R72 or Cokin 007 Infrared filters needs to be aware of the difference between the plane of focus of infrared light when compared to visible light, and the best way to demonstrate that is by showing it in a photo.

For this I drew a line chart, which is attached ( 1200 wide ), and can be printed on a sheet of A4 paper.

To demonstrate the effect I needed to have the shallowest depth of field I could get. As I am using the D100 for IR I chose to do the test with an autofocus lens so used an 85mm, set to f1.8 at near its minimum focussing distance. A Cokin 007 filter was used for the IR shots, but a Hoya R72 would have given the same result. I did not check the film filter but that is also probably in the same ballpark.

Method :
I firstly autofocussed on the centre mark and took a visible light pic.
Next, I turned A/F off to retain that point of focus, placed the IR filter on the lens and took another pic.
Lastly, I manually refocussed the lens to the IR index and took another pic.
All three were stitched together for the composite attatched.

For Canon users I am afraid I am not familiar with the lens markings, so assuming they are similar, I have attached a pic of Nikon lenses to give an idea of where a focus compensation mark may be found.

When using wide angle lenses its not that much of a problem. If you look at the focus scale on the 20mm lens in the pic you will see that f5.6 will cover everything from 2mtrs to infinity. It is a bigger problem though if you intend to do macro shots at 60mm plus, where depth of field is far shallower. Hence attaching the printable line chart so you can conduct you own tests, particularly if the lens has no IR compensation mark.

Don

Thanks for that Don, I've printed off the line chart already.

Well today was dull enough for an outdoor experiment with the IR attatchment on the Metz. So a Cokin IR filter on the Metz, and a Hoya R72 on the lens.
The composite shows the visible light version in comparison with the IR flash version. I tried direct and diffused flash. Adding a diffuser produced a rather soft image and also showed that I should really have bought a Metz CT60 all those years ago :rolleyes:. Never enough power when I want it ;). Light loss through the diffuser really required ISO to be ramped up to 1600. Not a good plot on the D100 as I think of NR as a detail killer, so never use it.

Fairly pleased with the experiment but it also put a thought in my head that I should try my Multiblitz studio job, as the flash duration is a lot longer and that may boost the IR effect.

For the gallery pic I which is a crop of the IR version here, I added a bit of tint and then boosted the whole effect with curves. Sort of Autumn rose.

To save going back to the gallery to compare, I have put it in this post.

Don

I like the tinted version Don. Now while I'm away on my holidays, how about trying various white balance setting:)

Harry

Hi Don, Harry and all IR on the not so cheap :D

Andy I see the burning enthusiasm at spectrum of IR.
Remember to sleep tonight as there is no usable IR once the sun is set and then there is a full day waiting for you tomorrow.

Enjoy your wonderful new toy.

Andy,

Welcome to the club. :)

Now you have your IR converted D100 I can reference some of my experiments from your pics if you give some details, paricularly WB setting. It would also be very helpful to post an unprocessed pic to reference that info.

Now we actually have some sun, I will be able to compare a double thickness film filter with Hoya or Cokin IR filter as they both have the same cut-off. Still not sure at what wavelength the film filter cuts off.

Don

Hi Don, The filter that was installed is a 720 nm, in the camera and on download they all show the magenta cast. At the moment my white balance is set to auto. This is the original of Bodnant Hall

At last Andy, welcome to the club. "Bodhall" is what IR is all about, great sky.

I will now be absent for a couple of weeks. Holidays in the Carribean, perfect weather for IR, but it's doubtful the IR camera will be with me due to weight constraints.

Harry

Cheers Andy,

I have saved it so I can compare side by side with a Hoya R72 shot. Yours has quite a different tint to my film filter ones taken on auto WB.

Normal rules apply here. Get a bit of kit and the weather changes to limit your possibilities to play. :rolleyes: So I have no good sunshine shots with the R72 filter.

Still we are on sun, sun, sun for the next few days. :) :)

Don

Thanks Harry, enjoy a well earned break, I will be looking forward to your contributions on your return - enjoy ! :)

Have a great holiday Harry.

There should be a fair bit for you to catch up with on your return.

Don

Thanks, will do, My wife reckons she can manage the IR camera, so maybe I'll come back with a few IR shots.

Harry

have just been playing around with "One to Back Process"
There are quite a few alternate methods with this one. All of which IMO are well worth pursuing.

Paint Shop Pro12 infra-red
 

I've attached an old colour pic converted to infra red, just out of interest.It's another way of looking at the problem.I used to shoot Kodak and Konica IR in the old days when we got our hands smelly in the darkroom.

I tried a similar thing last year but cannot remember, or find info on, the steps I took. Hence I got involved in the film filter bit at the start of this thread.

It may help others if you can post a processing step by step, as I do not recall anyone doing this in the Digital Darkroom Forum.

Don

Well I ordered a screw in filter to have a go on the cheap, unfortunately the 30D clearly has a very strong internal IR filter - without the filter I was getting 1/400th at f8, with the filter on I needed to push the shutter speed out to a ridiculous 25 seconds to anything. Even then the files don't have that IR feel, I think with the long shutter speed I'm also getting some visable light contamination. I think I now have two choices, get the camera converted or forget about IR for now...

As an aside has anyone tried the Sigma SD14? It has an IR filter just behind the lens mount that can easily be removed and replaced, it could make IR much easier... a good solution if you're a Sigma user.

For those who are interested in doing this without conversion here is a link to a set of Photoshop Actions that recreate IR effects - known a "faux or false infrared" This link comes from Steve's Digicams and one of them is an action where you can tweek the results yourself. There is also a pdf guide to how it all works.




http://forums.steves-digicams.com/pl...d-effects.html