Sony Digital Camera Forums

Digital Photography Technique => Taking Photos => Topic started by: Rob aka [minolta mad] on April 03, 2008, 10:00:43 PM

Title: Questions and Answers on IR
Post by: Rob aka [minolta mad] on April 03, 2008, 10:00:43 PM
If anyone has any questions that they would like answering about anything to do with Infrared then Post them in this thread and then either myself or one of the growing number of IR enthusiasts this site has will answer them.

If you have any tips for taking photographs in Infrared then post them in the A Guide To Infrared Photography (http://www.dynaxdigital.com/index.php/topic,5045.0.html)



Rob
Title: Re: Questions and Answers on IR
Post by: Dr.Theo on April 20, 2008, 07:37:25 PM
Rob, have you every tried taking any ultra wide Ir shots with say a 10-20 or 17-35?
Title: Re: Questions and Answers on IR
Post by: Rob aka [minolta mad] on April 20, 2008, 08:52:53 PM
No i havent,

I have read on an IR dedicated forum that the Sigma 10-20 produced hotspots on a Canon, but generally, if it produces it on one make of camera it will produce them on most makes ( though this is not always the case )

I also recall from memory that the Sigma 17-35 (if thats the one youre referring to) also produces hotspots, but i cant find where i read it too at the moment.


Rob
Title: Re: Questions and Answers on IR
Post by: Rob aka [minolta mad] on May 08, 2008, 07:37:38 PM
Lenses



Lenses that I have used or know that do cause hotspots

Konica/Minolta 17-70 kit lens
Minolta 17-35 G
Tamron 17-50 f/2.8


I know this list doesn’t have a lot of lenses on it at the moment, but it will be updated as myself and others find lenses that do or don’t work.

Quote
My Minolta 28-70G causes hotspots as well - seems like the G lenses aren't good for IR :(

I know that my old tokina 28-80 ATX-Pro worked and almost kept it for IR due to the hotspots with the 28-70.

Fud


Cheers Fud, have updated lens list

Rob
Title: Re: Questions and Answers on IR
Post by: Rob aka [minolta mad] on June 08, 2008, 08:24:45 PM
Had a personal message from calosdivega

Quote
Hi minolta mad!

I've tested the Sigma 28-70 EX DG 2.8 with the Hoya R72. Camera was the A700.
The good news, no hot spots on the pics. I can also test the lens with the 5D and 7D (when back from repair).

I like your IR guide very much.

;) Carlos Di Vega


Many thanks i have updated the list


Rob (minolta mad)
Title: Re: Questions and Answers on IR
Post by: LillyViolet on August 09, 2008, 12:43:01 AM
I just bought a sony 350k for the sole purpose of starting infrared photography. How do you set this thing up to where its not shooting black and red? Ive tried Manual mode and different. exposure settings to no avail. I could use some help.
Title: Re: Questions and Answers on IR
Post by: Rob aka [minolta mad] on August 09, 2008, 03:43:20 PM
Hi there LillyViolet,
If you havent already read my guide to IR photography then it may be a good starting point. See Here (http://www.dynaxdigital.com/index.php/topic,5045.0.html)

Where you say "shooting black and red" i can only imagine that you are reffering to this ???
Your shots coming out 'black and red' is normal, and to get the image to display either 'semi normal' colours, this will have to be done in Photoshop or similar (explained in the tutorial, or converted to black and white.)

You will have to shoot in manual at all times when shooting IR.

How long expsures are you using at the moment ???
And any chance of uploading an image, as it will help me see whats going on easier ???


Rob [minolta mad]
Title: Re: Questions and Answers on IR
Post by: LillyViolet on August 10, 2008, 12:28:58 AM
Usually set the exposure 25 sec and f11 on Manual mode. But I have been trying different exposures to see if it would make any difference on the shots and I just get a black image on the screen. Im thinking its because the CWB isn't properly set.  Ive used a white piece of paper, a patch of green grass, etc with the filter on. and I'm shooting in daylight or mid-day from a shade and Im getting the same results. The camera would display an error message with the color temperature after trying to set the CWB. Ive read in other tutorials mentioning that with the correct CWB the images shouldn't turn out red but more of a brownish or grayish tones. How do I get the camera to do that?  I get red images in different modes but never in manual just a black screen and the closest IR image I get is in landscape mode which creates a brown sky but the foliage remains green. Oh, and as it is typical in IR photography to have longer shutter speeds, I dont see a difference in the shutter speeds at all when I adjust it. =/ As for sending you a picture of what I get, well its just black. I hope this information helps. Thanks for taking your time to help me.
Title: Re: Questions and Answers on IR
Post by: Rob aka [minolta mad] on August 10, 2008, 05:19:21 PM
Strange,
What IR filter are you using ???
As these can make a huge difference to exposures. I knew someone that had an IR filter he used and even with lengthy shutter speeds his images were very dark, almost unusable (120+ seconds) i can only assume that the IR filter you are using coupled with the A350 isnt allowing for very good  IR light transmisitivity.

You are right in what you say about setting a CWB and getting brownish tone's.
You should be able to still set the CWB even though its saying that its an error.

When you set your CWB, are you using a 25 sec shutter speed ???

Speak to you again


Rob [minolta mad]
Title: Re: Questions and Answers on IR
Post by: LillyViolet on August 10, 2008, 08:24:15 PM
Im using a Hoya R72. I use a 25 sec shutter speed on Manual mode when trying the customize the white balance and I don't get any images at all. Ive tried uploading the black shots on photoshop or adobe camera raw to see if there is any chance of adjusting the black shots to no avail. I dont think the filter is defective because if it was I wouldn't be able to get any shots at all in any of the modes. Yes, it is strange and Ive been trying to figure it out for approx a month. Im beginning to think the camera may be the one at fault or Maybe it's stuck on some setting that Ive overlooked...shouldn't though....But what do you think might be the prob?
Title: Re: Questions and Answers on IR
Post by: Rob aka [minolta mad] on August 10, 2008, 09:05:31 PM
Quote
But what do you think might be the prob?
You've got me stumped ???

Whats the longest shutter speed you have used ???
Its very strange that youre getting images on other modes, with the IR filter in place but not the IR effect.

As for setting i nearly always use Manual mode, iso 200, f/8, and 20-40 sec exp. WB is usually left in auto as its easier to change it in PS.
So i cant see that you are doing anything wrong !
Its just that.

I'd almsot say, and this is only me thinking to myself. I'd say that the sensor is not susceptable to IR wavelenghts and this is why the images in landscape mode come out the way they do, BUT this doesnt hold any weight as they'd be the same in M mode ???
So unfortunately i dont know what to suggest :-( as this is something i have never come across before.

If you find out what it is and sort it out, please let me know.


Rob [minolta mad]
Title: Re: Questions and Answers on IR
Post by: fother on August 10, 2008, 10:47:07 PM

Silly question, but are you sure you're using a 25 second exposure, not a 1/25th second exposure? 1/25 is displayed as 25 on the lcd, whereas 25 seconds is displayed as 25" ... I realise this is not likely to be the problem, but worth checking.... :)
Title: Re: Questions and Answers on IR
Post by: LillyViolet on August 14, 2008, 10:47:07 PM
Funny thing is, I was going to change the exposure to bulb and on my way there 25" worked instead of 1/25 and I logged on and read the response from fother which exactly what I did. I feel dumb now haha because it was so easy. haha.
How do you customize the white balance? I'm not really sure how to set it up because whenever I try shooting under the sun I get a custom WB error 2500k G9. Sorry, Im really new at this. =(
Title: Re: Questions and Answers on IR
Post by: fother on August 15, 2008, 12:17:52 AM
Don't apologise - no need, everyone was new at this at some point :)

To set the white balance on the a350 (or a300)

       Fn button -> [White balance] -> Select the desired setting

• When [AWB] is not selected, you can finely adjust the color tone with < / > on the controller. Adjusting it toward + turns the image reddish and
adjusting it toward – turns the image bluish.

• Use the white balance bracket function if you cannot get the desired color in the selected option (see page 100 of the manual).

• When you select [5500K] (ColorTemperature) or [00] (Color filter), you can adjust the value to the desired value.

• When you select  (Custom), you can register your setting (page93 of the manual).

      Fn button -> [White balance] -> [5500K] (ColorTemperature) or [00] (Color filter)

• To set the color temperature, select the value with < / >.

• To set the color filter, select the compensation direction with < / >.AWB (Auto WB) The camera automatically detects a light source and adjusts
the color tones.
Title: Re: Questions and Answers on IR
Post by: LillyViolet on August 20, 2008, 07:36:56 PM
Ive tried the cwb but Im not sure exactly what Im suppose to take a pic of and the precise time of day to take the shot.  I tried white paper, green grass, leaves and made sure it took up the whole screen and did it during daytime around the afternoon but I still get an error. Should I keep trying until the error message doesnt show up?
Title: Re: Questions and Answers on IR
Post by: Rob aka [minolta mad] on August 20, 2008, 09:07:35 PM
I have taken CWB settings off all sorts of things, as some give really great results.
Generally you take a reading of of grass, fill the whole frame and use a 25-30 sec exposure as you are doing.
With my A700 i also get the error message, but ignore this and save the CWB setting.
Your IR pics should then look something like this (http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2362/2374954862_580050f347_o.jpg)
As opposed to everything being reddish.


Rob [minolta mad]
Title: Re: Questions and Answers on IR
Post by: LillyViolet on September 13, 2008, 12:07:42 AM
Thanks for all your help!
Title: Re: Questions and Answers on IR
Post by: Rob aka [minolta mad] on September 13, 2008, 09:37:43 AM
Thanks for all your help!

No problems,
Love to see some of your IR shots ???


Rob [minolta mad]
Title: Re: Questions and Answers on IR
Post by: Frank [aka Wires] on September 13, 2008, 12:36:19 PM
That's a really great shot Rob :)

I thought it was one taken on a very frosty morning and the trees all covered in hoare frost! Thanks for putting that up... and this guide! Something I may one day get round to trying :)
Title: Re: Questions and Answers on IR
Post by: LillyViolet on September 14, 2008, 03:46:05 AM
(http://i30.photobucket.com/albums/c349/Vistillian/IR.jpg)

(http://i30.photobucket.com/albums/c349/Vistillian/1stIR.jpg)

I did this as a trial in my backyard. I finally took advantage of the sun since work has dominated my life for the past few weeks and I dont get home til sundown. The first pic is the original and the second pic is obviously a quick tweak in photoshop. It was windy so the pic came out blurry and I took the shot towards the end of the day hence the weird colors =/ I will update with better IR shots. haha. Im hoping that sooner than expected Ill be taking IR with better foliage and in a nature environment. =)

Title: Re: Questions and Answers on IR
Post by: asildroca on November 25, 2008, 09:16:04 PM
In your tutorial you said that although you hadn't used the A100 for IR you knew it was possible.  However, a few weeks ago as I was on another site it described testing for IR sensitivity in the same way that you did, but mine didn't work.  Granted, I didn't take the photo, just looked through the lens, but couldn't see the light.  I also tried my husband's point-and-shoot Fuji and it did show IR sensitivity, so does the A100 not have IR capabilities, is it the lens I had on (the kit lens), or is it because I didn't take the shot?

I could wait 45 minutes until I go home (I'm at work), but I'm impatient and will probably forget.  :)
Title: Re: Questions and Answers on IR
Post by: Rob aka [minolta mad] on November 25, 2008, 09:36:56 PM
Hi there asildroca,
You wont actually see the light when looking through the viewfinder. You are right that you will actually have to take the picture.

I assume that the point and shoot has a liveview ??? as with liveview you can see instantly whether or not the camera is IR sensitive or not.

I found the kit lens on the Minolta Dynax 5D and 7D did produce hotspots, i dont know whether it will  on the A100 or not.
Either way let me know and i can add it to the tutorial for the benefit of others.


Rob [minolta mad]
Title: Re: Questions and Answers on IR
Post by: asildroca on November 25, 2008, 09:56:54 PM
Well I am SO glad that I came across your IR tutorial, because I thought I'd have to steal the hubby's camera!  Now to find a good, cheap IR filter...

BTW, if anyone does have a point-and-shoot they'd like to use for IR, I found a cool site that gives instructions on how to make your own IR "lens filter", and it's super cheap:

http://www.instructables.com/id/Take-Infrared-Pictures-With-Your-Digital-Camera/  (http://www.instructables.com/id/Take-Infrared-Pictures-With-Your-Digital-Camera/)
Title: Re: Questions and Answers on IR
Post by: Rob aka [minolta mad] on November 25, 2008, 10:16:32 PM
Glad the tutorial was of use.
Try the Hoya R72 filters, have found these to be the best quality for the cheapest price, otherwise have a look at the Kood ones.


Rob [minolta mad]


p.s thanks for the link
Title: Re: Questions and Answers on IR
Post by: Numpty on November 30, 2008, 06:06:41 PM
Tha A300 is sensitive to IR light if you want to add it to the list.
Title: Re: Questions and Answers on IR
Post by: Rob aka [minolta mad] on November 30, 2008, 06:07:25 PM
Thanks Numpty, will do.


Rob [minolta mad]
Title: Re: Questions and Answers on IR
Post by: groovyone on February 19, 2009, 05:04:20 PM
Has anyone found someone who will do IR only modifications to Sony SLRs?  I really enjoyed IR with my A700, and haven't had much of a chance to use it on my A900, but I would LOVE a modded A300 to have in my bag.
Title: Re: Questions and Answers on IR
Post by: Rob aka [minolta mad] on February 19, 2009, 05:40:49 PM
Hi there grooveyone,
As of yet i havent found anyone that will modify Minolta or Sony DSLR's.
They will do some of the P&S camera's, but not DSLR's as far as im aware.
Hopefully as Sony becomes more popular some companies may start doing it.


Rob
Title: Re: Questions and Answers on IR
Post by: groovyone on February 19, 2009, 05:58:43 PM
maxmax.com has a model request area, so I keep submitting the Alphas.  No luck yet.
Title: Re: Questions and Answers on IR
Post by: groovyone on February 24, 2009, 04:15:46 PM
Since IR filters throw off your focus a little, do you focus slightly behind or in front of your intended target to compensate?

I have an STF on its way and just ordered a 72-77mm ring do I can try my 77mm Hoya R72 filter on it.  Should be interesting.
Title: Re: Questions and Answers on IR
Post by: Rob aka [minolta mad] on February 24, 2009, 05:02:56 PM
I am lucky in that the lens i use for infrared has an adjusted focus mark for IR See under focussing, here (http://www.dynaxdigital.com/index.php/topic,5045.0.html)on it.
Its best to use 'Hypefocal distance' if your lens doesn't have any IR marks. There is an exact calculation for a given length in mm, for how far your lens will need to be adjusted for IR. I have always found it simpler to use the 'hyperfocal distance' method. For an explanation of the method and focal distance calculations see here (http://www.cambridgeincolour.com/tutorials/hyperfocal-distance.htm)


Hope this helps


Rob
Title: Re: Questions and Answers on IR
Post by: groovyone on March 10, 2009, 01:35:17 PM
Well, I got the A900 out for some good IR attempts.....and it is no good at IR!  I used the same settings range that I used successfully with my A700, but this thing must have a much stronger IR filter on it.  The shots just came out red instead of red + IR like normal for the R72.  No IR 'pop' to them at all, even with shots in the 20-30 second range.  Even with a lot of help from photoshop, the IR effect is not there.

I did get an IR modded F828 to play with, and it did quite well, but I am not used to editing photos from an actual modified camera yet.  Need some more practice there.  I may have found a place that modifies Sony's even though they are not on the website list.  Too bad I did not grab an A300 when they were on sale cheap at Circuit City!
Title: Re: Questions and Answers on IR
Post by: Rob aka [minolta mad] on March 10, 2009, 04:36:50 PM
Did you try much longer shutter speeds, say 60-70 secs and what did the historgram look like with the 30 sec pics ???
Was it the same lens that you used peviously, with the other camera, as i have found that different lenses can sometimes give different results.


Rob
Title: Re: Questions and Answers on IR
Post by: groovyone on March 10, 2009, 07:37:48 PM
I did not try even longer speeds due to the fact I was trying it at lunch.  I hope to experiment more this weekend.  At first I thought maybe the Zeiss coatings on the 24-70Z may be causing more difficulty, but I used the 16-80Z in the A700 and also tried the STF on the A900.

My plan for the next round is higher ISO to see if I can get a reasonable result and go from there.  I'll have to check the histograms tonight against the A700 ones and see.
Title: Re: Questions and Answers on IR
Post by: groovyone on March 10, 2009, 07:41:14 PM
Here are some shots to compare, all straight from their respective camera with daylight WB:

IR modded Sony DSC-F828:
(http://www.smugmug.com/photos/488737983_4HFgu-XL.jpg)

Standard A700 + R72 on 16-80Z:
ISO 200, 30 Sec, f/5.6
(http://www.smugmug.com/photos/356730697_zQrB2-XL.jpg)

Edited in IDC:
(http://www.smugmug.com/photos/356730559_y6Gv8-XL.jpg)

Standard A900 + R72 on 24-70Z:
ISO 200, 30 sec, f/5.6
(http://www.smugmug.com/photos/488736566_tQh5Y-XL.jpg)

ISO 200, 20 sec, f/5.6
(http://www.smugmug.com/photos/488736593_Y8RXw-XL.jpg)

Maybe I just need higher ISOs to increase the sensor sensativity to IR too.  I should have taken a better range of settings than I did, but I was doing it on a work break with a setup I know worked with the A700.  Either way, it is more resistance to IR light than the A700. (yes, it was windy)
Title: Re: Questions and Answers on IR
Post by: Rob aka [minolta mad] on March 10, 2009, 08:28:29 PM
Very strange, it looks like they are close to being overexposed.
Upping the ISO probably wont have much effect other than shortening the exposure time to get the same effect.
Will be interested to see how you get on, as i am planning to get an A900 at some point.


Rob
Title: Re: Questions and Answers on IR
Post by: groovyone on March 10, 2009, 09:24:56 PM
Yeah, that was my thought too since it just seems to become a big red blur.  I fixed the A700 in camera shot and you can see the huge difference.
Title: Re: Questions and Answers on IR
Post by: groovyone on May 20, 2009, 04:26:24 PM
Well, after a lot of looking I have a reputable place to convert an A-mount camera.  Now I am just trying to get my hands on an A350 body.  I was hoping the new A380 announcement would lead to a price drop, but it hasn't yet.
Title: Re: Questions and Answers on IR
Post by: Rob aka [minolta mad] on May 20, 2009, 04:53:59 PM
Well, after a lot of looking I have a reputable place to convert an A-mount camera.

Could you let me have the details or perhaps post them on here ???
Would be much appreciated.


Rob
Title: Re: Questions and Answers on IR
Post by: groovyone on May 20, 2009, 09:28:43 PM
I sent you the details in a PM.  I haven't done the conversion yet and want to make sure they do a good job before I recommend them, but I have little doubt they will do it well.
Title: Re: Questions and Answers on IR
Post by: Rob aka [minolta mad] on May 20, 2009, 09:54:28 PM
Thanks for that, let us know how you get on.


Rob
Title: Re: Questions and Answers on IR
Post by: groovyone on May 28, 2009, 05:46:59 PM
I have an A100 on its way to me.  I should have it on its way for IR conversion by next weekend and I will post results as soon as I have them.

I do have to say, this is your fault, Rob. Your guide got me to start playing with IR on my A700 and it has been all downhill since.  A big thank you from me, and a not so big "thanks a lot" from my wife.  hahah
Title: Re: Questions and Answers on IR
Post by: Rob aka [minolta mad] on May 28, 2009, 05:58:33 PM
OOPs :roll:

Cant wait to see the results.


Rob
Title: Re: Questions and Answers on IR
Post by: groovyone on June 01, 2009, 04:01:37 PM
My A100 has shipped out to be modified.  I did shoot some quick and dirty IR shots yesterday before boxing it up and tried again with the A900.  The A900 is TERRIBLE for IR.  Even with 30s exposures I get no signs of IR at all.

Unmodified A100, in camera, Daylight WB, ISO 100, 30s, f/8 and then with quick WB/Hist adjusments:
(http://www.smugmug.com/photos/551789164_bThsY-M.jpg)(http://www.smugmug.com/photos/551789141_nDiMV-M.jpg)


Unmodified A100, in camera, Custom WB, ISO 100, 30s, f/8 and then with quick WB/Hist adjusments:
(http://www.smugmug.com/photos/551789318_KG6GN-M.jpg)(http://www.smugmug.com/photos/551789188_huAXg-M.jpg)

Title: Re: Questions and Answers on IR
Post by: Rob aka [minolta mad] on June 01, 2009, 07:28:30 PM
Which lens are you using for the images above, it looks like there is a touch of a hotspot to the first 4 ???

Rob

P.s Have modified your post as there is a max of five images per post
Title: Re: Questions and Answers on IR
Post by: groovyone on June 02, 2009, 02:52:00 PM
It was the 16-35Z.  It was hard for me to tell if there is a hotspot or if it was due to the wind blowing that tree around a bit.  I'll have to try it again when I get the camera back.

I fixed the post to knock it down to 4.  =)
Title: Re: Questions and Answers on IR
Post by: groovyone on June 09, 2009, 10:58:20 PM
My IR modified A100 has returned!  I am uploading photos now, straight out of camera and batch processed.  They need some editing, but that is more my fault for incorrect exposure.  I'll post some when they are uploaded.

Okay, lets try posting some of the decent ones.  Bear in mind these are all unedited, straight from camera with custom WB.  All were Aperature Priority with some tinkering with +ev steps.  Once I get a better feel for it I think I'll be switching to manual.  The histogram is your friend!

*reduced image size

Sony A100 : Min 28-75 @ 30mm : f/4 : 1/500s : ISO 100
(http://www.smugmug.com/photos/559444610_MgQDn-S.jpg)

Sony A100 : Min 28-75 @ 28mm : f/9 : 1/60s : ISO 100
(http://www.smugmug.com/photos/559445070_6CpBK-S.jpg)

AF Test for 16-35mm (focussed on left petals)
Sony A100 : 16-35Z @ 35mm : f/2.8 : 1/640s : ISO 100
(http://www.smugmug.com/photos/559447301_ngkLY-S.jpg)

Sony A100 : 24-70Z @ 70mm : f/7.1 : 1/125s : ISO 100
(http://www.smugmug.com/photos/559452410_SUYeb-S.jpg)
Title: Re: Questions and Answers on IR
Post by: groovyone on June 09, 2009, 11:15:25 PM
A few test shots with the 135Z and 16mm fisheye:

*REDUCED IMAGE SIZE

AF Test for 135Z (yes, that is 1/3200s IR exposure)
Sony A100 : 135Z @ 135mm : f/2.8 : 1/3200s : ISO 100
(http://www.smugmug.com/photos/559452826_Rsadq-M.jpg)

AF Test for 16 fisheye
Sony A100 : 16mm fish @ 16mm : f/2.8 : 1/2500s : ISO 100
(http://www.smugmug.com/photos/559453681_HzAyv-M.jpg)
Title: Re: Questions and Answers on IR
Post by: groovyone on June 10, 2009, 03:12:40 AM
I did some quick a dirty IDC editing.  I really need to work on my photoshop editing I think to get the right pop to them IR photos.  I am going to try the before on the left and after on the right...

Sony A100 : Min 28-75 @ 28mm : f/9 : 1/60s : ISO 100
(http://www.smugmug.com/photos/559445070_6CpBK-S.jpg)(http://www.smugmug.com/photos/559640118_6scyv-S.jpg)

Sony A100 : 24-70Z @ 70mm : f/7.1 : 1/125s : ISO 100
(http://www.smugmug.com/photos/559452410_SUYeb-S.jpg)(http://www.smugmug.com/photos/559639340_hbKCs-S.jpg)

I liked the edited B&W version of this one better than the color one.

Title: Re: Questions and Answers on IR
Post by: groovyone on June 10, 2009, 03:13:01 AM
AF Test for 135Z (yes, that is 1/3200s IR exposure)
Sony A100 : 135Z @ 135mm : f/2.8 : 1/3200s : ISO 100
(http://www.smugmug.com/photos/559452826_Rsadq-S.jpg)(http://www.smugmug.com/photos/559640995_cr9Gf-S.jpg)

AF Test for 16 fisheye
Sony A100 : 16mm fish @ 16mm : f/2.8 : 1/2500s : ISO 100
(http://www.smugmug.com/photos/559453681_HzAyv-S.jpg)(http://www.smugmug.com/photos/559641053_vi3JU-S.jpg)
Title: Re: Questions and Answers on IR
Post by: Rob aka [minolta mad] on June 10, 2009, 04:35:03 PM
Seems to work well, and with all lenses.
But then after being converted it should do.
Seems strange not seeing them red, straight out of camera though.


Rob
Title: Re: Questions and Answers on IR
Post by: groovyone on June 10, 2009, 04:58:46 PM
Seems to work well, and with all lenses.
But then after being converted it should do.
Seems strange not seeing them red, straight out of camera though.


Rob

Custom WB of 2800K G9
Title: Re: Questions and Answers on IR
Post by: groovyone on June 11, 2009, 04:13:22 PM
Seems to work well, and with all lenses.
But then after being converted it should do.
Seems strange not seeing them red, straight out of camera though.


Rob

Daylight WB:
(http://www.smugmug.com/photos/560872996_6hCNH-M.jpg)(http://www.smugmug.com/photos/560873037_i86fm-M.jpg)
Title: Re: Questions and Answers on IR
Post by: pointblank on June 15, 2009, 04:07:14 PM
Really groovy indeed. As I ordered the mighty A700 I was thinking of using my 5D for IR. Preferably I would like a conversion but it seems hard to find a place to get this done. While getting the R72 filter I think of using the CZ16-35 as I was mainly thinking of landscapes. I'm a bit sceptical though in thinking that the lens might not be suitable. Any ideas?
Title: Re: Questions and Answers on IR
Post by: Rob aka [minolta mad] on June 15, 2009, 04:29:54 PM
If you get the camera converted any lens will work and give no problems.
If you use the R72 filter its down to trial and error as to whether they will cause hotspsots. I havent heard of anyone using the CZ16-35 so cant help you. Though traditionally ultra wide angle lenses are not normally the best for IR.


Rob
Title: Re: Questions and Answers on IR
Post by: groovyone on June 15, 2009, 08:30:28 PM
My 16-35 works great on the modded A100, but does look like it may have shown a little sign of a hotspot when it was unmodified.

I used the 16-80Z on my A700 with thr R72 and LOVED it.
Title: Re: Questions and Answers on IR
Post by: pointblank on June 16, 2009, 09:34:21 AM
Noted Rob, I need to find a place to do the modification I guess. I don't mind the trial and error but expect the R72 to be not so cheap fitting a 77(?)mm which the CZ16-35 is. Facing unpleasant results in that case would instantly make me want to sell off the filter and obviously it will cost me a few dollars.
Title: Re: Questions and Answers on IR
Post by: groovyone on June 16, 2009, 10:02:21 PM
My A100 was modifed by Precision Camera.  They did an awesome job.  Total cost to me was $264.99 which included shipping.  I sent it to them on a Monday, USPS Express, and I had it back in hand the next Tuesday!

I'll post the contact info here.


 Mark Soares (MSoares at precisioncamera.com)

Send Mark and email requesting the required form for an IR conversion and tell him Keith (aka groovyone) sent ya!  (No, I do not get a referral)  They did a great job with mine and Mark answered many annoying emails from me.  I am very, very happy with the results, service and cost!  The cost was $249 + S&H for APS-C and $299 + S&H for full frame.  They do any brand (as far as I know) and since they are a major repair center, and one of Sony's warrenty repair centers, they have all the correct factory tooling to do the job.
Title: Re: Questions and Answers on IR
Post by: pointblank on June 17, 2009, 05:15:02 AM
Thanks for the info. I have visited their website and they are very elaborate on the service. I have sent Mark and email and now let's just wait and see.
Title: Re: Questions and Answers on IR
Post by: J. on June 25, 2009, 02:49:15 PM
Standard A700 + R72 on 16-80Z:
ISO 200, 30 Sec, f/5.6
(http://www.smugmug.com/photos/356730697_zQrB2-XL.jpg)

Edited in IDC:
(http://www.smugmug.com/photos/356730559_y6Gv8-XL.jpg)


Hello.
I have the A350, and when I tried IR photos, I get the same red pictures, and I don't know how to edited pictures to have a better results, like yours.
How you doing?

(So sorry, I don't speak English very well)
Title: Re: Questions and Answers on IR
Post by: Rob aka [minolta mad] on June 25, 2009, 05:31:18 PM
Hi there J.
I wrote a tutorial about IR See Here (http://www.dynaxdigital.com/index.php/topic,5045.0.html) if there is anything that is still unclear, just ask.


Rob
Title: Re: Questions and Answers on IR
Post by: groovyone on June 29, 2009, 09:05:26 PM
Hello.
I have the A350, and when I tried IR photos, I get the same red pictures, and I don't know how to edited pictures to have a better results, like yours.
How you doing?

(So sorry, I don't speak English very well)

Sorry for the slow response.  Rob's tutorial is a great start.  On that particular photo I used the Sony IDC software and set the white balance using the "Set Gray Point" option on the brighter tree.  After that I just adjusted the contrast and saturation a little until I liked how it looked.
Title: Re: Questions and Answers on IR
Post by: groovyone on July 05, 2009, 08:09:31 PM
I have been working on my IR workflow and panoramic stitching, so I figured why not combine them!  These stitches gave me the equivallent of 20-24MP, so close to having a converted A900!

Did some quick editing with Photoshop Elements 5.  Orange is close to how it comes out with my custom WB, and the Blue is just kind of cool:

2x3 stitch with the camera horizontal:
(http://www.smugmug.com/photos/582149644_fxyhz-M.jpg)(http://www.smugmug.com/photos/582151939_nVp5P-M.jpg)

2x3 stitch with the camera vertical:
(http://www.smugmug.com/photos/582156344_5YANW-M.jpg)(http://www.smugmug.com/photos/582154278_xAYJy-M.jpg)

4 shots, horizontal pan with the camera vertical:
(http://www.smugmug.com/photos/582158014_UGE7z-M.jpg)

I am definately enjoying the modified camera.
Title: Re: Questions and Answers on IR
Post by: groovyone on July 13, 2009, 03:38:34 PM
Advantage, modified camera:

(http://www.smugmug.com/photos/589234947_xzPen-L.jpg)

I also discovered the 16-35Z seems to have a hotspot.
Title: Re: Questions and Answers on IR
Post by: groovyone on July 29, 2009, 07:11:30 PM
Well, I shot 362 IR photos in Colorado this past week and made a few quick observations on the lenses.

The 16-35 Zeiss is terrible for IR.  Very bad hotspot and a funky tint to them right out of the camera.  They are a lot harder to work with then the 24-70Z.  The 135 Zeiss has the same blueish tint, but not the hotspots.  I found that I was even getting some bad hotspots with my 24-70Z but couldn't get them consistently to figure out why.  I tried the 24-70Zwith many different settings and with and without a UV filter and could not pin it down.

24-70Z with hotspot, very mild historgram adjustment in IDC:
(http://www.smugmug.com/photos/601772708_EDaEe-L.jpg)

16-35Z, odd tint and hotspot
(http://www.smugmug.com/photos/601777318_qj55E-L.jpg)

16-35Z, odd tint and hotspot is a little less obvious because of the clouds
(http://www.smugmug.com/photos/601838343_u8QLi-L.jpg)

135Z with odd tint
(http://www.smugmug.com/photos/601842726_63v9R-L.jpg)

All are with the exact same custom WB.  I need to play with the 135Z shots in Photoshop some to see what I can do with them.


Title: Re: Questions and Answers on IR
Post by: groovyone on July 29, 2009, 07:14:12 PM
24-70Z, back to the sun, wicked hotspot
(http://www.smugmug.com/photos/603455250_dSadm-L.jpg)
Title: Re: Questions and Answers on IR
Post by: groovyone on July 29, 2009, 07:22:48 PM
Now the good:

One of my favs, modified A100, no photoshop and very very mild histogram adjustment in IDC and the similar shot with the A900:
(http://www.smugmug.com/photos/601826456_BFtuy-L.jpg)(http://www.smugmug.com/photos/602262077_WDgTD-L.jpg)
Title: Re: Questions and Answers on IR
Post by: groovyone on August 13, 2009, 05:34:00 PM
I have been testing the 16-80Z on the midified camera, and so far it looks like it does have hotspot issues too.  I shot some more today with a few different tests, so I'll see how it goes.
Title: Infrared Photography using A700 and R72 : cannot get false color result
Post by: pcabot on September 08, 2009, 01:42:39 PM
Hi,

I read the tutorial on infrared written by minolta.mad (which is very good, thanks!) , but I can't seem to be able to obtain proper false color results.

I use an a700 with SAL16105 lens (which by the way does not seem to produce any hotspot, which is great), along with a UV filter and the Hoya R72 Infrared filter stack together. I took a lot of infrared pictures, but I cannot get the false color result I want. May be it is my setup or my post production skills.

Here is a raw file that I took, using manual mode, focus to infinity, ISO400, f8 and 20sec exposure (if I recall properly):
http://philippecabot.com/infrared1.arw   (~15Mo)

Here is the result that I get by importing the file in Photoshop and switching channels (with a few adjustments):
http://philippecabot.com/infrared1.jpg   (~800Kb)

I am not getting the "white trees" and "colored" sky result that I see on other pictures.


I have a few questions:
1. How can I get the false colors look ? Is this a capture problem, or a post production problem ? Can someone check the attached ARW file attached and tell me if it is possible to achieve it with that file ?

2. My image has a very soft focus: how can I make it sharper ? I don't have a infrared focus line on my lens....

3. Is the UV and R72 filters stacked together could be the cause of the problem ?


All comments are welcome !
Thanks in advance,
Philippe
Title: Re: Infrared Photography using A700 and R72 : cannot get false color result
Post by: Rob aka [minolta mad] on September 08, 2009, 07:26:58 PM
I'll have a look at the RAW file and get back to you.
I dont use the UV and IR filters together, though i dont think that that would make too much difference.
As for the focus, you will need to use, hyperfocal distance
http://www.cambridgeincolour.com/tutorials/hyperfocal-distance.htm

Rob
Title: Re: Infrared Photography using A700 and R72 : cannot get false color result
Post by: Rob aka [minolta mad] on September 08, 2009, 08:27:42 PM
Had a look at the raw file, and i am also unable to get the channel swap to work. And as you mention, the trees arent as white as id expect.
The tree's not being white can be down to a number of things.
The time of day and and type of tree for starters, also as the leaves on the trees become older, they have less chlorophyl in them which reflects the IR light which causes them to be 'white'

I have always found that my best IR images, are taken either in the morning 9-11:00 ish and 3-5:00 ish, and i will alwyas try to make sure that the sun is behind me if possible.

Some times i have found that some days are just not good IR days, never found out why, but even with 60 seconds shutter speeds the images are just flat.
As for why the image of yours wont channel swap, i have no idea as i have never encountered this before. Though i suspect it will be due to avaliable IR light and atmospheric influences, just as some days when the isnt a cloud in the sky, but even with a polariser the sky just wont give that deep blue that you expect.

One thing that i would suggest is to find a lacation with several tree's and grass as well as a building or two, preferably on a day with the sun behind you and id imagine that you wont have any problems.
Id also use ISO 100, as opposed to 400, as this will cut down noise.


Rob
Title: Re: Infrared Photography using A700 and R72 : cannot get false color result
Post by: pcabot on September 08, 2009, 09:41:49 PM
Hi Rob,

Wow. Thanks for the detailed answer. It makes sense after all that the amount of IR radiation is linked to the current weather, and to the items in the scene. (The scene I posted above was taken at noon on a bright sunny day)

As you mentioned, I will try again (I rarely give up on photography!) and try with different scene and time of the day.
I will also look at the hyperfocal distance document that you mention.

Also, btw, how do I know if the image is properly exposed ? Just by looking at the red histogram, or all the colors histogram ?

Thanks again
Philippe
Title: Re: Infrared Photography using A700 and R72 : cannot get false color result
Post by: groovyone on September 09, 2009, 04:28:03 AM
Hi,

I read the tutorial on infrared written by minolta.mad (which is very good, thanks!) , but I can't seem to be able to obtain proper false color results.

I use an a700 with SAL16105 lens (which by the way does not seem to produce any hotspot, which is great), along with a UV filter and the Hoya R72 Infrared filter stack together. I took a lot of infrared pictures, but I cannot get the false color result I want. May be it is my setup or my post production skills.

Here is a raw file that I took, using manual mode, focus to infinity, ISO400, f8 and 20sec exposure (if I recall properly):
http://philippecabot.com/infrared1.arw   (~15Mo)

Here is the result that I get by importing the file in Photoshop and switching channels (with a few adjustments):
http://philippecabot.com/infrared1.jpg   (~800Kb)

I am not getting the "white trees" and "colored" sky result that I see on other pictures.


I have a few questions:
1. How can I get the false colors look ? Is this a capture problem, or a post production problem ? Can someone check the attached ARW file attached and tell me if it is possible to achieve it with that file ?

2. My image has a very soft focus: how can I make it sharper ? I don't have a infrared focus line on my lens....

3. Is the UV and R72 filters stacked together could be the cause of the problem ?


All comments are welcome !
Thanks in advance,
Philippe

The stacked UV filter can be an issue as many block IR to some degree.
Title: Re: Infrared Photography using A700 and R72 : cannot get false color result
Post by: groovyone on September 09, 2009, 04:32:03 AM
Here is an in camera and post edited photo:

A700 + 16-80Z + R72 Filter, f/5.6, 30s exp, ISO200, Daylight WB:
(http://www.smugmug.com/photos/356730697_zQrB2-L.jpg)

After editing in IDC, I set the WB to one of the trees that I knew was in direct sunlight:
(http://www.smugmug.com/photos/356730559_y6Gv8-L.jpg)
Title: Re: Infrared Photography using A700 and R72 : cannot get false color result
Post by: Stef. on September 09, 2009, 05:59:15 AM
Great shots- grovyone! Just a quick one- you do have a converted IR camera? Any reason why you shot this with a filter on the A700??? I have just sent my A100 off for IR conversion as I don't need this camera body for anything else. Which gives the better results: the converted camera or the A700 with filter???
Stef.
Title: Re: Infrared Photography using A700 and R72 : cannot get false color result
Post by: pcabot on September 09, 2009, 01:24:30 PM
Wow !
Nice picture groovyone !
This is exactly what I am trying to achieve !

Hmmm. I think you are right: I will try to remove my UV filter from my lens, before adding the IR filter.
The only problem is that my UV filter seems "stuck"....

Do you have any trick on how to remove a filter that is attached very tightly (on  my SAL16105) ?

Thanks,
Phil
Title: Re: Infrared Photography using A700 and R72 : cannot get false color result
Post by: Rob aka [minolta mad] on September 09, 2009, 09:30:00 PM
There are some filter tools specifically for removing stuck filters, i got some off ebay. But have used a leather belt when out in the field before.

As for the picture being exposed properly, i use the historgram (red channel) but also take a close look at the image on the LCD at 100% to see if its blown out or underexposed.


Rob
Title: Re: Questions and Answers on IR
Post by: pcabot on September 10, 2009, 02:02:16 PM
Allright !
I successfully removed my UV filter and I tried again to take an IR picture with my R72.
I think that the UV filter was the source of my problem! Good to know !

What a difference now:
(http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2617/3905974161_1d76cfe82a.jpg)


But now I have another question:
How is it possible to obtain a photo with white trees AND a blue sky ?
Do we need to do some manual selection in photoshop and process the sky differently ?

Thanks for the feedback,
Philippe
Title: Re: Questions and Answers on IR
Post by: winjeel on September 10, 2009, 02:48:46 PM
That looks great. Good to know that your UV filter really is a UV filter and that it does its job well. :D
Title: Re: Questions and Answers on IR
Post by: Rob aka [minolta mad] on September 10, 2009, 05:24:20 PM
Any chance you could PM me or put up a link to the RAW file, as i just tried to channel swap the colours on the image of yours above, and not alot happened ???
Even with your last image it was difficult to get a great deal of colour from the image, particularly the sky which is unusual, and i cant work out what is going on ???

Here is an image straight from camera
(http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2486/3906508477_442c6f125a.jpg)

and here is one that has been colour swapped
(http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2609/3906508629_9cc64b5db6.jpg)

Not the best image to show off the blue sky that you are after, but i think its what you are trying to achieve ???

A couple of questions.
What did the sky look like when you took the shot, hazy, murky, very clear and dark blue, light blue ???

We will get there in the end.


Rob
Title: Re: Questions and Answers on IR
Post by: groovyone on September 10, 2009, 07:07:12 PM
Allright !
I successfully removed my UV filter and I tried again to take an IR picture with my R72.
I think that the UV filter was the source of my problem! Good to know !

What a difference now:
(http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2617/3905974161_1d76cfe82a.jpg)


But now I have another question:
How is it possible to obtain a photo with white trees AND a blue sky ?
Do we need to do some manual selection in photoshop and process the sky differently ?

Thanks for the feedback,
Philippe

You may want to boost your exposure a little bit more to get the trees more white.  As for the color change, I get the photo where I want in with the white trees, then I use Photoshop Elements 5 to shift the hue until I get it where I want.  Not as good as the color channel swap, but it works if you only have PSE.

In Camera (custom WB):
(http://www.smugmug.com/photos/582864282_8P4Jc-S.jpg)

Hue edits and B&W:
(http://www.smugmug.com/photos/582979308_3ui8q-S.jpg)(http://www.smugmug.com/photos/582861425_yWhmT-S.jpg)(http://www.smugmug.com/photos/583031569_ePDSu-S.jpg)
Title: Re: Infrared Photography using A700 and R72 : cannot get false color result
Post by: groovyone on September 10, 2009, 07:10:32 PM
Wow !
Nice picture groovyone !
This is exactly what I am trying to achieve !

Thanks,
Phil

Thanks!
Title: Re: Questions and Answers on IR
Post by: pcabot on September 11, 2009, 12:26:18 PM
Thanks a lot winjeel, Rob and groovyone !
The blue pictures are *exactly* what I am trying to achieve!

When I took this picture, the sky was light blue (early morning).

Here is the ARW file, if anyone wants to try to turn it into a blue picture, with white trees, that would be great. (this is the raw file of the picture without the UV filter, just with the R72, so in theory it should work):

http://philippecabot.com/infrared2.arw  (15Mb)

I suspect again that my exposure was not right,, may be not, because I was not able to obtain the simultaneous blue/white effect, even when playing with the Hues.

Also, correct me if I am wrong, but I don't need to set the white balance in my camera before taking the picture ? Right ? The entire goal of shooting RAW is to be able to adjust the WB after the fact. I read somewhere on the web that if you adjust your white balance before taking the shot, the information captured in the RAW might be different ? Is that true ? I don't think so...

Thanks again for all your time and feedback.
I really like to learn from the pros, and also to share my experiments !
Philippe

Title: Re: Infrared Photography using A700 and R72 : cannot get false color result
Post by: groovyone on September 11, 2009, 04:42:09 PM
Great shots- grovyone! Just a quick one- you do have a converted IR camera? Any reason why you shot this with a filter on the A700??? I have just sent my A100 off for IR conversion as I don't need this camera body for anything else. Which gives the better results: the converted camera or the A700 with filter???
Stef.

Sorry, I had missed this post.  I shot this before I had my IR converted A100.  I think they give slightly different results.  The converted is much easier to use but you seem to get a little less "drama".  The A700 got more reds which would be deeper than I have gotten with some of my converted camera shots.

pcabot -
On the blues, I like them for pure nature/landscape shots, but they are TERRIBLE for people.  It tends to make skintones a sickly green.  Sometimes buildings will look better with the warmer tones too.
Title: Re: Questions and Answers on IR
Post by: Rob aka [minolta mad] on September 11, 2009, 04:59:01 PM
Also, correct me if I am wrong, but I don't need to set the white balance in my camera before taking the picture ? Right ? The entire goal of shooting RAW is to be able to adjust the WB after the fact. I read somewhere on the web that if you adjust your white balance before taking the shot, the information captured in the RAW might be different ? Is that true ? I don't think so...

I have heard and read debates about this before, there is a possibility that the information captures would be better if the white balance was set in camera (never came to a conclusive decision on all the stuff i read) perhaps Stef could give us a more technical answer ???

The one thing i did find with having an in camera white balance was that it was easier to check for correct exposure.

Have downloaded your image, and will have a look at it later.


Rob
Title: Re: Questions and Answers on IR
Post by: Stef. on September 11, 2009, 10:44:22 PM
Also, correct me if I am wrong, but I don't need to set the white balance in my camera before taking the picture ? Right ? The entire goal of shooting RAW is to be able to adjust the WB after the fact. I read somewhere on the web that if you adjust your white balance before taking the shot, the information captured in the RAW might be different ? Is that true ? I don't think so...

I have heard and read debates about this before, there is a possibility that the information captures would be better if the white balance was set in camera (never came to a conclusive decision on all the stuff i read) perhaps Stef could give us a more technical answer ???

The one thing i did find with having an in camera white balance was that it was easier to check for correct exposure.

Have downloaded your image, and will have a look at it later.


Rob

Yes. It is better to get the white balance in camera correctly as if you correct it later on you will have a difference in exposure. It is jsut a slight difference but sometimes critical. In a nutshell: the more you get in camera correctly the better it is as you need to do less post-processing. I am not speaking about a time saver here but more about image quality.
Stef.
Title: Re: Questions and Answers on IR
Post by: Rob aka [minolta mad] on September 12, 2009, 09:09:36 PM
Have had a play with your image, and when trying to colour swap the whole image goes blue, and doesnt come out at all like i would expect.
With your Raw file, its not as deep red as i would expect either, and i sort of think that the levels of IR light around arent at their best, and that the  sky isnt absorbing the IR light allowning for it to be turned blue with the trees white like you are trying to achieve.
I have experienced weird effects before where images just would not come out at all, while shooting early morning at the seaside.
All the shots i took just produced a pink foggy haze, and no matter what i tried i couldnt cure it. This was also early in the morning, and once the sun came up the images were fine.

One thing i will say though is that your exposures need to be longer, as to get what id regard as the right exposure i had to increase it by nearly 2 full stops, probably another 8-10 seconds in real terms (though this is always dependednt on what IR light is present)

Try taking an image around midday with the sun behind you, varying exposures and then let us know how you get on.
Could be worth trying them with an in camera white balance as well.


Rob
Title: Re: Questions and Answers on IR
Post by: pcabot on September 12, 2009, 11:43:06 PM
Hi Rob,

Thanks for trying to convert the image.

I took other pictures this afternoon.
I tried to set up  the white balance in my a700 with the R72 filter on, and the WB value becomes 6600K G9 ? Is this normal ? In all case, I was still able to process the image in photoshop normally.
(http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2506/3913065097_364a91ee6c.jpg)

I also tried to use longer exposure (around 1 minute), and still no differences: I cannot get any colors in post processing :
(http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2566/3913889520_d38694b749.jpg)
Here is the histogram of the RAW file before processing :
(http://philippecabot.com/infrared/histogram)

Is it the expected histogram ?
What should the histogram look like for a photo that can be converted successfully in color (blue/white) ?

I still need to try at noon, to see if the IR is stronger. But, I start to wonder if my Hoya R72 filter is a "real" one....

Did anyone else experienced the same problem ?
By the way, is there any setting on the A700 that could cause the problem ? I have dynamic range set to normal, but again, if I shoot RAW, it should have no effect according to me...

Thanks again for the feedback,
Philippe
Title: Re: Questions and Answers on IR
Post by: Rob aka [minolta mad] on September 13, 2009, 07:08:18 PM
As long as the DRO is turned off, then any other settings wouldnt make too much difference.
As for the historgram, id say it was under exposed, as it is clipping the shadow (right) and a more even one from left to right would be better.
This is the historgram taken of the RAW file for the image above
(http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2656/3915815669_af96ffd3cf_o.jpg)

As for the Custom WB i always seem to remember mine being around 2200k - 2450k G9 ???

Interesting that you mention about the Hoya filter as it was one thing that i ruled out, knowing that it was a Hoya R72 (is it a genuine Hoya filter ???) there are some copy's of the hoya filters, but id not heard of the IR ones being copied.

Could be worth checking carefully to see if it a genuine one.


Rob
Title: Re: Questions and Answers on IR
Post by: groovyone on September 14, 2009, 03:03:47 AM
Mine is 2800K G9 on my modded A100, which works great with my 24-70Z, but I have a blue color shift with my 24/2.8. 28/8 and 50/1.4, so I need to work on a new one for those lenses.
Title: Re: Questions and Answers on IR
Post by: pcabot on September 14, 2009, 02:03:56 PM
Does anyone know how do I check if a Hoya R72 filter is a genuine one ?

I bought it online from this vendor (through amazon):
http://www.videocameracenter.com/ 
by doing a search for "hoya r72".

It looks genuine to me....but what do I know ?
I could contact them, but I doubt that will say it is a fake :)

Apart from that, I will try shooting with the white balance setting that you mentionned ( 2200k - 2450k G9  ), and also I would try disabling the DRO completely...

Thanks,
Philippe
Title: Re: Questions and Answers on IR
Post by: winjeel on September 14, 2009, 03:23:16 PM
I wish I could help you. I have no idea. The only things I ever buy from the net come via Amazon.
Title: Re: Questions and Answers on IR
Post by: Rob aka [minolta mad] on September 14, 2009, 04:25:33 PM
The packaging and case give the appearance of being genuine.
Its just strange why the colours are not coming out as id expect.

I really dont know what else to suggest ???


Rob
Title: Re: Questions and Answers on IR
Post by: Rob aka [minolta mad] on September 14, 2009, 04:54:01 PM
I was just looking at the raw files again, and i see that the Saturation is set to High, and the Sharpness is set to hard.
Im sure the shrpness wont have an effect, but not sure about the saturation ???
Id leave everything on standard and make sure the DRO is off, as this will affect the exposure when reviewing the histogram.


Rob
Title: Re: Questions and Answers on IR
Post by: Stef. on September 14, 2009, 05:36:19 PM
Hehe- waiting for my A100 to come back from groovyone's recommended place in the US. Should be here next week! Can't wait...
Stef.
Title: Re: Questions and Answers on IR
Post by: Rob aka [minolta mad] on September 14, 2009, 07:59:48 PM
Hehe- waiting for my A100 to come back from groovyone's recommended place in the US. Should be here next week! Can't wait...
Stef.

I have considered getting an A100 and getting it converted, but i like the long exposure effect that you dont get with converted camera's.
Cant wait to see some of your images with it Stef.


Rob
Title: Re: Questions and Answers on IR
Post by: groovyone on September 15, 2009, 04:46:59 PM
Hehe- waiting for my A100 to come back from groovyone's recommended place in the US. Should be here next week! Can't wait...
Stef.

Sweet!  I am interested to see how well it works in the hands of someone with actual talent!

I dunno Rob, that sounds like an excuse...

hahah
Title: Re: Questions and Answers on IR
Post by: Stef. on September 15, 2009, 06:18:36 PM
Rob- on the other hand the long exposure effect can be a pain particularly when shooting landscapes as trees and bushes usually don't stand still long enough. This is actually the main reason for me to get the camera converted. i don't mind the pain to attach a filter but I do mind the 1 min exposure times that occur regularly.
Let's wait and see. On the other hand instead of getting a camera converted for a couple of hundred pounds/dollars you might as well buy a second hand samsung camera and remove the IR filter yourself as it is easy to do. I actually think you might come cheaper buying one of those plus lens than investing in an A100 and getting it converted. I might be wrong though... ???
Stef.
Title: Re: Questions and Answers on IR
Post by: groovyone on September 15, 2009, 07:10:52 PM
I have a full spectrum F828 that can soot RAW.  The nice thing about that vs a converted SLR is you can see the IR effect on the EVF or LCD, and you can do some interesting shots with a full spectrum camera, but it has an effect closer to the full modded camera than the filter method.
Title: Re: Questions and Answers on IR
Post by: pcabot on September 16, 2009, 02:26:55 PM
Hi Rob,

Here is an attempt with the camera settings set to :
 - DRO off
 - sharpness, saturation, = normal
 - exposure: 80 sec
 - F8
 - ISO200

http://philippecabot.com/infrared/infraredv13.arw  (13MB)

The histogram looks a lot better on this image, but I still cannot get the colors out of the image....
The sky seems a bit more colored though...

I contacted Hoya by email to ask them how to test their filter, but I doubt I will receive an answer... :(
I think I will contact my vendor to see what I can do to exchange the filter.

One last thing: you are using the latest firmware (v4), right ? I am just trying to see what could be different in your settings compared to mine...
Could it be the SAL16105 lens ??? I doubt it...

Do you recommend another filter (cokin?) that I can use to do infrared with false colors ?
I *really* want to do infrared (without any modding) ...

Thanks again
Philippe
Title: Re: Questions and Answers on IR
Post by: groovyone on September 16, 2009, 03:30:44 PM
Philippe,

I am looking at your RAW and you won't be able to get much with that.  I see very little if any IR effect.  My normal settings with the filter were ISO 200, f/7.1-f/8 and 25-30 seconds.  You should see some obvious IR effect in the trees.  Was there a lot of direct sunlight when you shot this?  Do you have another lens you could try?

This is how mine look coming out of the camera:
A700, 16-80 Zeiss, R72 filter, f/5.6, 30s exp, ISO200
(http://www.smugmug.com/photos/356730697_zQrB2-L.jpg)

I took a quick crack at it with IDC (click photos for full size):
As is:
(http://www.smugmug.com/photos/651422112_uMV4y-L.jpg) (http://www.smugmug.com/photos/651422112_uMV4y-O.jpg)

WB off the brightest tree, +1Ev, +60 Contrast, stretched the histogram to fill the range:
(http://www.smugmug.com/photos/651422058_odTd7-L.jpg) (http://www.smugmug.com/photos/651422058_odTd7-O.jpg)

WB off the brightest tree, +1Ev, +45 Contrast, -100 Sat (B&W), stretched the histogram to fill the range:
(http://www.smugmug.com/photos/651422086_hxVGb-L.jpg) (http://www.smugmug.com/photos/651422086_hxVGb-O.jpg)
Title: Re: Questions and Answers on IR
Post by: Rob aka [minolta mad] on September 16, 2009, 08:36:18 PM
Having had a look at the RAW file, i am now conviced of a couple of things.

1: The filter is either a duff/fake and will not allow full IR

2: The lens is producing a massive 'hot spot' and not allowing for IR
(the reason i say this is in the last RAW file, there is what looks like a slight colour differance, centrally, but covering most of the image. Almost like a hazy effect) and checking the other images, its much the same.


Id go so far as to say that ist the lens !
As for other filters, i'd be inclined to try another lens first.
If you really want to do lots of IR, then id gor for the minolta 35-70 f/4
They can be picked up for around £15 in the UK, and then get a adapter ring so that you can use the filter on the minolta lens.

If it had been any camera other than the A700, id have said that it was the camera preventing it, but the A700 is great for IR.


Rob
Title: Re: Questions and Answers on IR
Post by: pcabot on September 17, 2009, 05:38:17 AM
Hi Groovyone and Rob,

Wow. You guys are great.
Thanks for doing all the conversion tests and investigation ! I really appreciate...

I think you are right: I am also suspicious about the SAL16105 lens for the big hopspot.

Yes I have another lens: the sony 50mm F1.4 (filter 55mm). What a jewel !
How can I put the 62mm filter on this lens ? I guess I simply need to buy a step up ring like this one ?
http://cgi.ebay.com/55mm-62mm-55-62-mm-Step-Up-Filter-Ring-Stepping-Adapter_W0QQitemZ230361975541QQcmdZViewItemQQptZLH_DefaultDomain_0?hash=item35a2a4caf5&_trksid=p3286.c0.m14 (http://cgi.ebay.com/55mm-62mm-55-62-mm-Step-Up-Filter-Ring-Stepping-Adapter_W0QQitemZ230361975541QQcmdZViewItemQQptZLH_DefaultDomain_0?hash=item35a2a4caf5&_trksid=p3286.c0.m14) 
Can I try without

Perhaps this lens has more chances to work because it has a fixed focal length...
Once I know that the filter works with that lens, I will buy the recommend lens from Rob: the Minolta 35-70 F4. I looked on ebay, and the prices are quite high though (99$?) http://cgi.ebay.com/Minolta-35-70-AF-f4-MINI-beercan-lens-for-all-sony_W0QQitemZ250496536411QQcmdZViewItemQQptZUK_CamerasPhoto_CameraAccessories_CameraLensesFilters_JN?hash=item3a52c1cf5b&_trksid=p3286.c0.m14 (http://cgi.ebay.com/Minolta-35-70-AF-f4-MINI-beercan-lens-for-all-sony_W0QQitemZ250496536411QQcmdZViewItemQQptZUK_CamerasPhoto_CameraAccessories_CameraLensesFilters_JN?hash=item3a52c1cf5b&_trksid=p3286.c0.m14)

If you know good deals on other used minoltas for doing IR, let me know ! I am seriously looking in doing IR with my a700 ! :)

I can't wait to try the filter on my other lens, to see if I get the same effect or not.
I will keep you posted with the results...

Thanks again for the followup,
Phil from Montreal


Title: Re: Questions and Answers on IR
Post by: groovyone on September 17, 2009, 02:57:40 PM
Hi Groovyone and Rob,

Wow. You guys are great.
Thanks for doing all the conversion tests and investigation ! I really appreciate...

I think you are right: I am also suspicious about the SAL16105 lens for the big hopspot.

Yes I have another lens: the sony 50mm F1.4 (filter 55mm). What a jewel !
How can I put the 62mm filter on this lens ? I guess I simply need to buy a step up ring like this one ?
http://cgi.ebay.com/55mm-62mm-55-62-mm-Step-Up-Filter-Ring-Stepping-Adapter_W0QQitemZ230361975541QQcmdZViewItemQQptZLH_DefaultDomain_0?hash=item35a2a4caf5&_trksid=p3286.c0.m14 (http://cgi.ebay.com/55mm-62mm-55-62-mm-Step-Up-Filter-Ring-Stepping-Adapter_W0QQitemZ230361975541QQcmdZViewItemQQptZLH_DefaultDomain_0?hash=item35a2a4caf5&_trksid=p3286.c0.m14) 
Can I try without

My 50 f/1.4 did pretty well for IR, so give that one a shot.  For now, you could try just taping it to the lens at first.  That lens has a pretty flat front surface on the lens body, so you may be able to carefully hold it in front too.

50mm f/1.4 - this is on my modified A100, but you should get good results on the non-modified camera too.
(http://www.smugmug.com/photos/628907566_KjbT9-L.jpg)
Title: Re: Questions and Answers on IR
Post by: pcabot on September 17, 2009, 03:00:16 PM
Thanks for the tip.

This morning I decided that I need to go all the way if I want to do some good IR: I just bought on Adorama a used minolta 35-70 f4 with a 49mm Hoya R72 filter, jus to be on the safe side.
I want to do some good IR ! :)

I will keep you posted when I receive the gear... can't wait!

Thanks,
Phil
Title: Re: Questions and Answers on IR
Post by: Rob aka [minolta mad] on September 17, 2009, 04:18:05 PM
Look forward to seeing the results when you get the lens.


Rob
Title: Re: Questions and Answers on IR
Post by: hopeless on September 17, 2009, 09:28:28 PM
For inspiration / jealousy, you might enjoy this article:

20 Stunning Infrared Photographs (http://digital-photography-school.com/20-stunning-infrared-photographs)
Title: Re: Questions and Answers on IR
Post by: groovyone on September 18, 2009, 05:24:57 PM
Some very cool shots.
Title: Re: Questions and Answers on IR
Post by: Stef. on September 18, 2009, 05:29:32 PM
Some really stunning shots but than I have a love-hate relationship with colour IR and hdr. For black and white I do love the effect but when it comes to colour I always wonder why one wants to have these strange colour images???
Stef.
Title: Re: Questions and Answers on IR
Post by: Rob aka [minolta mad] on September 18, 2009, 05:33:07 PM
Some very nice images, but i prefer B/W IR images to colour.


Rob
Title: Re: Questions and Answers on IR
Post by: pcabot on September 22, 2009, 03:16:35 AM
Hi,

I finally got my Minolta 35-70 F4 with the new Hoya R72 49mm filter!
Wow...!! I am really happy to have it !

I took my first shot quickly today as soon as I received it:
f8, 25s, no saturation, no DRO
(http://philippecabot.com/infrared/infraredv14.jpg)
Here is the ARW file associated to it:
http://philippecabot.com/infrared/infraredv14.arw (http://philippecabot.com/infrared/infraredv14.arw)

After a few actions in photoshop, I got this:
(http://philippecabot.com/infrared/infraredv14-processed.jpg)

I am not totally satisfied with the "false color" result.
You can try playing with the ARW above to see if you can succeed obtaining

But I think I know why: I used the auto white balance feature of the camera.... :(
When I saw the result, I remembered that changing the white balance before the shot is necessary in  order to achieve the false color effect.


Next time I go outside, I will try to set it.
BTW, to set the custom WB, here are the steps that I am planning to do:
 0. Set the camera to manual focus
 1. Put the R72 filter on
 2. From the custom white balance menu, select "Custom setup"
 3. Aim at green foliage
 4. That's it.

Last time I try do that, I got "Custom WB error", with the value 6600k G9 ?
Is this normal ? Is this the process you are using to set the WB ?

Thanks for the feedback !
Philippe

PS: btw this 35-70 lens is great for macro shots!! (This is my first macro lens!)
Title: Re: Questions and Answers on IR
Post by: groovyone on September 22, 2009, 04:09:20 AM
When I tried custom WB on mine I'd get an error, but then I just set it to that same value manually.  Mine is usually 2900 G9 I think.  I posted it earlier.

I am going to take a look at your RAW.  My first guess is it may be a hair underexposed.  Did you have direct sunlight on the trees and bushes?

I played with it a little and I think you ar eprobably 3 stops UNDER exposed.  In similar light try f/5.6 and 30 seconds or so.  If you open your file in IDC, look at your histogram.  You want it to be much further to the right.
Title: Re: Questions and Answers on IR
Post by: groovyone on September 22, 2009, 04:24:14 AM
Quick hack at it.  All I really did was stretched the sliver in the histogram out to fill it in better, and clicked trees with the custom WB dropper until I got a look I liked.  For the B&W I added +30 contrast or so.

(http://www.smugmug.com/photos/657169195_aNzFi-L.jpg)
(http://www.smugmug.com/photos/657168122_AUTpm-L.jpg)

Take a peek at the histogram when you shoot and see where the data falls.  You want it more toward the right side to get the whites from the trees.  You also really benefit from very direct sunlight.  I find the days where light is too harsh for normal shooting are best for IR.
Title: Re: Questions and Answers on IR
Post by: Rob aka [minolta mad] on September 26, 2009, 05:36:20 PM
Quote
But I think I know why: I used the auto white balance feature of the camera.... Sad
When I saw the result, I remembered that changing the white balance before the shot is necessary in  order to achieve the false color effect.

That wont cause any major problems, the image above of Bideford was shot with a Custom WB, and adjuated in PS.

Just one quick question, what time of day was the image taken at ???.

I'll try and have a play with some shots at differant angles to the sun, and at differant times, as the sky still isnt coming out like id expect ???


Rob
Title: Re: Questions and Answers on IR
Post by: pcabot on September 27, 2009, 04:46:30 AM
Hi !

You guys are great !

I finally got the the time to really try the lens, with the proper settings (long exposure and the 2500K G9 white balance).

I am really proud of my first shots !! Thanks for all the help !
(http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2620/3957027387_ec4b468544.jpg)
Here is the original ARW
http://philippecabot.com/infrared/infrared17.arw (http://philippecabot.com/infrared/infrared17.arw)

Here is another example:
(http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2427/3957805766_72cbd3068a.jpg)

But, I think since the sun was behind me that the light entered by my viewfinder... I am not sure. Is this why I get the green colors for the trees ? (after swapping channels in photoshop)

If you can convert the first image differently, let me know !
The steps that I do are:
 1. Open the ARW in Sony IDL
 2. Change the white balance using the picker and select something gray
 3. Save the file in TIFF
 4. Open photoshop
 5. Run the false color v2 action( see http://shawn.ocia.net/photos/falsecolors.zip (http://shawn.ocia.net/photos/falsecolors.zip) )
 6. Tweak the colors a bit
 7. Sharpen

Let me know if you succeed in transforming the image using a different technique...I would be interested...

Thanks!
Philippe
(which is now a really happy IR shooter!!)
Title: Re: Questions and Answers on IR
Post by: Rob aka [minolta mad] on September 27, 2009, 04:27:57 PM
Glad that you have finally got there and are getting the right results.

Quote
But, I think since the sun was behind me that the light entered by my viewfinder... I am not sure. Is this why I get the green colors for the trees ? (after swapping channels in photoshop)

The green tree's are a result of them being evergreen and the channel swapping in PS i would imagine. As evergreen tree's dont reflect IR light.

Will have a play with the RAW and see what i come up with.


Rob
Title: Re: Questions and Answers on IR
Post by: groovyone on October 04, 2009, 03:24:29 AM
Looks good!
Title: Re: Questions and Answers on IR
Post by: groovyone on October 06, 2009, 02:19:20 PM
I shot a few this past week while in Williamsburg, VA.  Not real happy with most of them, but I got a few decent ones.  I think my 100% A900 VF has spoiled me too, since I kept getting junk on the sides of my A100 shots.  Most of these were shot as the sun was setting, thanks to meetings and tehse are quick edits.

(http://www.smugmug.com/photos/670997343_wvemk-M.jpg)

(http://www.smugmug.com/photos/670998710_iadgJ-M.jpg)

(http://www.smugmug.com/photos/670999244_odeaQ-M.jpg)

(http://www.smugmug.com/photos/671004757_UvHUR-M.jpg)

(http://www.smugmug.com/photos/671003513_kDoAB-M.jpg)
Title: Re: Questions and Answers on IR
Post by: balacau on September 29, 2010, 06:13:10 PM
A couple of IR-based questions; even though this thread has pretty much answered everything else I could think of.

1) How does the use of artificial light in lieu of natural work with IR photography?  This is of particular interest as some of the photo shoots that I'm involved in are done in multi-story carparks with cars as the main subject.  These locations are usually very well lit with harsh strip lighting.  It may produce some interesting effects if it works with artificial lighting as well.

2) Has anyone ever tried IR photography by mounting a filter on a macro lens (like maybe the Tamron 90mm or 180mm)?  Even the smaller sized ones like Sony's 30mm?  Are macro lenses suitable for this kind of work or perhaps another kind of lens is a better choice?

Its a bit late in the year now to consider macro photography since most of the days its completely overcast now; but something to think about when little else note-worthy is happening during the late spring/summer (if we get one) next year.

Best regards

Gavin
Title: Re: Questions and Answers on IR
Post by: Rob aka [minolta mad] on September 29, 2010, 08:19:02 PM
Not entirely sure with how artificial light will affect the 'natural' light.
Personally i wouldnt have thought it would have much effect, but thats just an educated guess rather than anything proven.

As long as the macro lens doesnt produce hotspots, then its prefectly suitable. Though it wouldnt be my first choice lens for IR.



Rob
Title: Re: Questions and Answers on IR
Post by: balacau on September 29, 2010, 08:23:54 PM
When I was referring to artificial light, I really meant a picture taken at night with the only light source being of the artificial kind.  I am not sure what that would look like in the IR spectrum although it'd be interesting to find out.

What kind of lens would you most recommend for IR shots?  Primes maybe?  Large aperture, etc?  I did see the Sigma 10-20mm had an issue with hotspots so perhaps super wide angles/fisheyes are unsuitable.

Best regards

Gavin
Title: Re: Questions and Answers on IR
Post by: Rob aka [minolta mad] on September 29, 2010, 08:32:36 PM
Ah, now i see !

Not sure what the results would be like, i expect it would require a very long shutter speed (several minutes) to get an image.
Would be interesting to find out though.
I may try later, just taking an image indoors to see ???

My first choice of lens for IR would be the minolta 35-70/4 or the 24-50/4.


Rob
Title: Re: Questions and Answers on IR
Post by: balacau on September 29, 2010, 08:41:24 PM
Several minutes exposure time eh, wow that'd get you maybe 12 shots per battery charge lol.  I think I've done 30sec exposure before!  I'd have to consult the manual for anything over that!  After that point, the BULB option comes up...

Hmm I have neither of those lenses...the kit lenses aren't good enough quality I guess to get a decent image with an IR filter.  Perhaps an ideal time to try the Tamron 90mm macro.

I'd be interested to see what the IR pictures using artificial light turn out like.  It could be a new twist to the regular carpark pictures.

Best regards

Gavin
Title: Re: Questions and Answers on IR
Post by: Rob aka [minolta mad] on September 29, 2010, 09:14:00 PM
Yes, you will need to use the bulb option and a cable release of some sort and either keep it pressed, or lock it open if its a minolta/sony one.


Rob
Title: Re: Questions and Answers on IR
Post by: balacau on September 29, 2010, 09:16:03 PM
Yes, you will need to use the bulb option and a cable release of some sort and either keep it pressed, or lock it open if its a minolta/sony one.
Rob

Excellent, that answers two questions in one go.  Thanks very much for you help Rob!

Good luck with the "artificial IR" shots.

Best regards

Gavin