A couple more Infra Red

Mohain · 16 Feb 2006 at 10:03

Both are very good shots Hoodi. I prefer the 1st bridge shot, he looks out of scale on the second one. I think I would like the shot equally well with him cloned out all together.

I find the best way to get rid of flare is a combo of clone and heal tools (assuming you're using PS).

Good stuff,

Mohain

MichaelG · 16 Feb 2006 at 11:53

Yeh, both are great shots hoodmeister.
I might have a look at doing some IR shoots.
Any tips where to start (have a Nikon D70 with kit 18-70 lens and 50m F1.8)

hoodmeister · 16 Feb 2006 at 14:12

@ P_C - it's just a hood. By slapping more glass infront of the lens you can, of course, get flare from it. I get intolerable flare when shooting IR even in overcast conditions, if I don't use it. I still get some even when I do, but it improves the situation immensly. I store the actual filter holder inside the hood, when not in use.

@Mohain - cheers for the tips, will have a play!

@MichaelG - I'm no IR expert by a long shot, but I would recommend picking up a 77mm Hoya R72. The R72 // 89B filters are undoubtedly the best general purpose IR filters. The denser ones will produce a more intense IR effect, but at the cost of exposure and psuedo colour. To begin with, at least, I wouldn't bother using the 50mm 1.8 for IR. Focal length aside, I don't think the speed of the lens will help much. Unless you have tons of light you're still gonna need a tripod, and my personal preference is to rack up the F numbers to increase DoF - focusing on a dSLR is one of the trickier aspects of IR photography. Lenses which sport IR markings are a godsend, although unfortunately they are few and far between.

editty : 67mm, not 77mm... I thought the 18-70 had a 77mm filter thread, for some reason :/

Puz · 16 Feb 2006 at 15:56

cyKey's taken some superb efforts with a 50mm 1.8. And using a tripod is de rigeur with IR tbh. My 2 pennies worth anyhow !

Matt Harper · 16 Feb 2006 at 17:08

MichaelG said:
Yeh, both are great shots hoodmeister.
I might have a look at doing some IR shoots.
Any tips where to start (have a Nikon D70 with kit 18-70 lens and 50m F1.8)

don't use the kit lens, you will get hotspots

Johnny|lucidcomposure · 16 Feb 2006 at 17:13

Puz said:
cyKey's taken some superb efforts with a 50mm 1.8. And using a tripod is de rigeur with IR tbh. My 2 pennies worth anyhow !

Thats because the 10D is a worthy choice when it comes to IR. Produces better results than the 300 series and the 20 series.

I still think that Nikon produce the best colour output though.

Richard T · 16 Feb 2006 at 17:16

not really keen on this IR stuff but the first shot is fantastic

hoodmeister · 16 Feb 2006 at 17:16

Not with the D200 they don't!
The D200 is god awful for IR. you lose about 4 stops more light, and the output is almost entirely in the red channel (this is with custom WB). Also insanely noisy and dirty looking.

MichaelG · 16 Feb 2006 at 17:23

Thanks for the tips.
Idiot question. I've never seen an IR filter. I assume it 'looks' opaque.
If so do you focus without then try to put it on without disturbing too much, or is it much more guess work?

hoodmeister · 16 Feb 2006 at 17:40

well you can guess if you like.. Not so hard if your lens has distance markings.
But otherwise yes, focus > place filter > switch to MF > shoot

Pretty much. Kinda.
Sort of.

Yeah, they're visually opaque. Look through the viewfinder and you see nothing, try to focus and the AF system will go nuts.

Here's the actual process of shooting IR :
Custom WB (only need to do this once, shoot something like grass with the filter on. Focus doesn't matter) > compose > place IR filter > adjust focus (will explain further in a second) > meter & compensate (OR shoot manual) > shoot

focusing is a PITA with IR. Use AF without the filter on to get it roughly right, but then you need to focus a touch closer to shoot IR. Some lenses have markings for this, which make it easier.

Some cameras meter better than others for IR. Most will require exposure compensation to a varying degree depending on the scene. I tend to prefer shooting fully manual though - I find i'm a better meter than the camera

Geffen · 16 Feb 2006 at 20:39

Has anyone tried using a Canon 350d for infra red shots, with the Hoya R72 filter. If so is the kit lense any good for them or should i use the 50mm 1.8 i have.

Johnny|lucidcomposure · 17 Feb 2006 at 01:48

Use the 50mm 1.8. The kit lens produces highly visable hot spots.

the 50mm will require a 52 - 58 mm step up ring though

hoodmeister · 17 Feb 2006 at 02:01

Just goes to show how much I know!

What are these hot spots? And why do some lenses exhibit them and not others?

yer_averagejoe · 17 Feb 2006 at 12:31

I'm hoping to get some infrared photography done on film. Produces better results than digital and you dont have to fork out piles of money for a digital camera!

but i dont want to get a debate started on digital or conventional photography

im sure its caused plently of arguments.

rpstewart · 17 Feb 2006 at 13:24

hoodmeister said:
Just goes to show how much I know!

What are these hot spots? And why do some lenses exhibit them and not others?

The hot spots are basically lens flare of a form. When you're dealing with IR you're outside the wavelength range that the camera is normally used / designed for. IR light can cause some fringing and image degradation during a normal visible spectrum shot so the camera manufacturers counter this with hot filters over sensors and anti IR lens coatings. Now when you stick an IR filter on the camera it blocks almost all visible light so the only stuff going into the lens is IR, which gets bounced off coatings etc and can end up giving hot spots.