The GetDPI Photography Forum

Great to see you here. Join our insightful photographic forum today and start tapping into a huge wealth of photographic knowledge. Completing our simple registration process will allow you to gain access to exclusive content, add your own topics and posts, share your work and connect with other members through your own private inbox! And don’t forget to say hi!

"Capturing Infrared"

V

Vivek

Guest
It has been 10 years (or more) since I found the Novoflex Noflexar 35/3.5 to be suitable for UV photography and since then things opened up quite a bit with many finding other suitable candidates. See here an article by Alex H.

Ultraviolet Light Photography - Dyxum

Before my hiatus from here, I agreed with Jack that I will write a piece on UV for getdpi. One of these days, I will get to it. FWIW, I am equipped and practice UV photography from tiny format (m43) to large formats (film). Constantly learning and upgrading (me more than the gear).

For now, let us leave it here (PM me if you have any specific queries) and continue with IR.
 

iiiNelson

Well-known member
It has been 10 years (or more) since I found the Novoflex Noflexar 35/3.5 to be suitable for UV photography and since then things opened up quite a bit with many finding other suitable candidates. See here an article by Alex H.

Ultraviolet Light Photography - Dyxum

Before my hiatus from here, I agreed with Jack that I will write a piece on UV for getdpi. One of these days, I will get to it. FWIW, I am equipped and practice UV photography from tiny format (m43) to large formats (film). Constantly learning and upgrading (me more than the gear).

For now, let us leave it here (PM me if you have any specific queries) and continue with IR.
Cool. Thanks... I did see your name floating around on quite a bit on multiple sites related to UV Photography (white papers for testing I assume.)
 

Cindy Flood

Super Moderator
Originally posted by HiredArm...

I saw there was also a lot of filter talk... Any filter recommendations from personal experience since some time has gone by since the last comments were made? I looked at the Kolari's earlier today and they seem to be decently priced but are there any systems that will prevent me from having to buy the same filers in multiple sizes? I'm most interested initially in the 550-590nm, the 800nm+ wavelengths, and the ability to take normal pictures as well. My lenses vary between 49mm, 67mm, 72mm,and 77mm.

On a side note this is a great thread that perhaps it gets lost in the "nether realm" between the camera boards and the Buy/Sell section. Does anyone think it would be a good idea to move it near the camera talk or have it in the alternative board or make an alternative EM spectrum location for those that do IR/UV/Astrophotography/forensics?
I use only MaxMax CC1 filters for regular photography. For IR, I have several brands, but mostly Kolari. MaxMax and Kolari are similar in price, so if you are ordering the CC1 from MaxMax, then I'd probably order all from them. Shipping costs always add up.

To start, I'd go big with 77mm and use step-up or step-down rings. That causes havoc with hoods and the size is awkward on smaller lenses, so you will eventually want more sizes. I have now settled on 52mm for my whole set (so that I can adapt to smaller Leica/Voigtlander lenses), and the big filter for the rest of my lenses.

BTW, I don't presently use C1, but I think that the white balance camera profile should be able to be loaded into C1.


I will pass your forum request onto the powers that be.
 
V

Vivek

Guest
There are only two major manufacturers of IR filters: Schott and Hoya.

The rest are resellers with fancy names like Kolari , etc.

Buy it from PRC (China). They use the same glass and it is far cheaper.
 

Don Libby

Well-known member
I do have a question though for you Don since you are specifically using an A7R. How's the noise and response on the A7R for near IR or UV compared to visible light? Are you seeing that you are shooting at lower ISO or higher shutter speed in comparison?


I now use the 7r to shoot full spectrum, full color, 590, 665, 720 and 830nm. The first conversion was in 665 and I used the 720 and 830 then a couple months later I had the camera re-converted to full spectrum and use the color filter, 590, 720 and 830. Long winded explanation to get to the answer but please bear with me.

The only filter I routinely use "Auto-ISO" on is the 830. In most cases the camera will select 100 however it will go much higher due to the shooting conditions. When using the other filters I normally will shoot at 50 ISO however I have gone to Auto. I also routinely shoot in Manual mode which allows me the flexibility to choose shutter and aperture.

Regarding noise and overall responsiveness - I've seen little noise (of course it's there if I shoot indoors at extreme ISO and faster shutter speeds but clears up opening the lens, slowing down the shutter and bracing the camera on tripod. My goal with this camera is getting away from tripod as much as possible so I'l careful what/where I shoot. Responsiveness can be arbitrary - for me - I have had no problems with the camera. I've been extremely pleased with the files it produces - so long as I do my job. I think the relationship between camera and operator is a partnership - the camera is only as good as the person operating it and occasionally I'll screw up and get a terrible file; then again if I keep my head the camera works well.

On why I decided to go FS. I wanted a camera that was capable of shooting all types of color and IR and going FS fits that bill. FS is "nice" while adding a filter for color is outstanding. Shooting 590, 720 and 830 all offer great files and allows me to carry one camera yet have the ability to use it anyway I want without any loss of functions.

Regarding WB. I used to shoot with an in-camera custom WB however now that I have more than 3-filters to choose from I needed a better way. My main landscape camera for many years has been a technical camera where I'm used to shooting an LCC for each lens on site. This LCC got me thinking of using that with IR work and began testing the effects that a LCC plate or disk would produce. Will a custom WB shot as an LCC be the same as in-camera; the answer is yes. It's also much easier in post as all I have to do is bring up the LCC performing a WB on it and using that for each file shot with that filter; this works equally well in C1-Pro and Adobe Bridge. This eliminates the need to "wash" the files in Sony software. In the end we all have our own workflow and we need to find the one that fits us the most.

Returning to filters...

I had a long conversation with Life Pixel when I had the 7r converted to FS on which filter to get for color; they recommended MaxMax CC1 filters. I went to MaxMax and brought 3-CC1 filters (one for each lens). They work however I found I wasn't totally pleased with the quality and quickly replaced one filter (thread concerns) with a Kolari filter. I was so pleased with the overall quality of the Kolori filter that I ordered the 590 from them. The 720 and 830 filters are a mixture of B&W and Hoya.

I now use a combination of Sony FE 16-35, 24-70 as well as the Mitakon 50mm f/0.95 and a medium format Hartblei 45mm Super Rotator lens. I can capture in the wave lengths using the same type filters. I've found 590 and 830 both work very well for black and white (right now the 830 is edging out the 590 however the 590 is a new filter for me). I've found FS and 720 and 590 produce interesting types of false color and the color filter produces outstanding color files (using both the MaxMax and Kolari filters).

Long winded response to several inquires.

don

I forgot to add one downside in doing the WB as I'm currently doing. While it makes my processing life so much easier it leaves a lot to be desired while shooting. If you shoot with an in-camera set WB the camera (at least the 7r) shows exactly what the sensor sees which is the color of the filter used. Shooting the way I do the sensor sees the filter as red with the overall scene as red. Not a major problem once you get used to what the filter produces in the end however it can take some getting used to.

Based on the above I'd recommend for first time users to go slow. Shoot with the WB set in camera so you'll be able to judge the results as you shoot knowing that you'll add an extra step in processing with another software package.

 
Last edited:

iiiNelson

Well-known member
I now use the 7r to shoot full spectrum, full color, 590, 665, 720 and 830nm. The first conversion was in 665 and I used the 720 and 830 then a couple months later I had the camera re-converted to full spectrum and use the color filter, 590, 720 and 830. Long winded explanation to get to the answer but please bear with me.

The only filter I routinely use "Auto-ISO" on is the 830. In most cases the camera will select 100 however it will go much higher due to the shooting conditions. When using the other filters I normally will shoot at 50 ISO however I have gone to Auto. I also routinely shoot in Manual mode which allows me the flexibility to choose shutter and aperture.

Regarding noise and overall responsiveness - I've seen little noise (of course it's there if I shoot indoors at extreme ISO and faster shutter speeds but clears up opening the lens, slowing down the shutter and bracing the camera on tripod. My goal with this camera is getting away from tripod as much as possible so I'l careful what/where I shoot. Responsiveness can be arbitrary - for me - I have had no problems with the camera. I've been extremely pleased with the files it produces - so long as I do my job. I think the relationship between camera and operator is a partnership - the camera is only as good as the person operating it and occasionally I'll screw up and get a terrible file; then again if I keep my head the camera works well.

On why I decided to go FS. I wanted a camera that was capable of shooting all types of color and IR and going FS fits that bill. FS is "nice" while adding a filter for color is outstanding. Shooting 590, 720 and 830 all offer great files and allows me to carry one camera yet have the ability to use it anyway I want without any loss of functions.

Regarding WB. I used to shoot with an in-camera custom WB however now that I have more than 3-filters to choose from I needed a better way. My main landscape camera for many years has been a technical camera where I'm used to shooting an LCC for each lens on site. This LCC got me thinking of using that with IR work and began testing the effects that a LCC plate or disk would produce. Will a custom WB shot as an LCC be the same as in-camera; the answer is yes. It's also much easier in post as all I have to do is bring up the LCC performing a WB on it and using that for each file shot with that filter; this works equally well in C1-Pro and Adobe Bridge. This eliminates the need to "wash" the files in Sony software. In the end we all have our own workflow and we need to find the one that fits us the most.

Returning to filters...

I had a long conversation with Life Pixel when I had the 7r converted to FS on which filter to get for color; they recommended MaxMax CC1 filters. I went to MaxMax and brought 3-CC1 filters (one for each lens). They work however I found I wasn't totally pleased with the quality and quickly replaced one filter (thread concerns) with a Kolari filter. I was so pleased with the overall quality of the Kolori filter that I ordered the 590 from them. The 720 and 830 filters are a mixture of B&W and Hoya.

I now use a combination of Sony FE 16-35, 24-70 as well as the Mitakon 50mm f/0.95 and a medium format Hartblei 45mm Super Rotator lens. I can capture in the wave lengths using the same type filters. I've found 590 and 830 both work very well for black and white (right now the 830 is edging out the 590 however the 590 is a new filter for me). I've found FS and 720 and 590 produce interesting types of false color and the color filter produces outstanding color files (using both the MaxMax and Kolari filters).

Long winded response to several inquires.

don

I forgot to add one downside in doing the WB as I'm currently doing. While it makes my processing life so much easier it leaves a lot to be desired while shooting. If you shoot with an in-camera set WB the camera (at least the 7r) shows exactly what the sensor sees which is the color of the filter used. Shooting the way I do the sensor sees the filter as red with the overall scene as red. Not a major problem once you get used to what the filter produces in the end however it can take some getting used to.

Based on the above I'd recommend for first time users to go slow. Shoot with the WB set in camera so you'll be able to judge the results as you shoot knowing that you'll add an extra step in processing with another software package.

Thanks a lot for the lengthy yet concise explanation. I think I was seeing the same thing as far as slightly improved performance with the Kolari v. the Max Max filters earlier in this thread. It looks like the B+W were bleeding IR contamination through as well.
 

Cindy Flood

Super Moderator
I contacted Jack Flesher with HiredArm's suggestion:
On a side note this is a great thread that perhaps it gets lost in the "nether realm" between the camera boards and the Buy/Sell section. Does anyone think it would be a good idea to move it near the camera talk or have it in the alternative board or make an alternative EM spectrum location for those that do IR/UV/Astrophotography/forensics?
Jack suggested moving this thread to the Alternative Forum. This seems to make more sense to me, since we are discussing our work with cameras, and not just new techniques. Feel free to start new threads here if you delve into UV/Astrophotography/forensics, etc.
 

iiiNelson

Well-known member
I contacted Jack Flesher with HiredArm's suggestion:

Jack suggested moving this thread to the Alternative Forum. This seems to make more sense to me, since we are discussing our work with cameras, and not just new techniques. Feel free to start new threads here if you delve into UV/Astrophotography/forensics, etc.
Thanks. I was just curious about it all. I've periodically followed this thread from a distance and I can say that everyone's included images all had a part in my decision to convert my A7r to a FS camera. So thanks for pushing me to compulsively spend more money... I think. :chug:
 

kdphotography

Well-known member
.... I can say that everyone's included images all had a part in my decision to convert my A7r to a FS camera. So thanks for pushing me to compulsively spend more money... I think. :chug:
If it makes you feel better, I'm sure you're not the only one. I just sent in my IR converted A7r to be converted (again) to full spectrum.

I really enjoy IR converted cameras (still have my IR GF1) and figure converting the A7r to FS would make more sense than buying a second A7r for normal color. I think. :loco: :)

ken

p.s. Just so the record is clear, it was Don Libby's fault. Damn enablers are everywhere on this site.... :ROTFL:
 
Last edited:

Cindy Flood

Super Moderator
Thanks a lot for the lengthy yet concise explanation. I think I was seeing the same thing as far as slightly improved performance with the Kolari v. the Max Max filters earlier in this thread. It looks like the B+W were bleeding IR contamination through as well.
Concerning Kolari vs. MaxMax: My opinion is that it is a lot more about technique, processing, lens and sensor, than the Kolari or MaxMax filter itself. I have some from both. They could possibly be a re-brand of the same filters, but I don't know that. For a full-spectrum camera, the MaxMax CC1 is the filter of choice for me for regular shooting. Both MaxMax and Kolari have good IR filters. Just my 2 cents.
 

Don Libby

Well-known member
Not to flog a dead horse here however I too have both MaxMax and Kolari filters and yes there is little to no difference between the CC1 filters. As far as the glass goes. I've found the MaxMax filters to be very loose in their rings along with the thread to screw them onto the lens to be coarse to the point of cross threading. I brought 3 of the MaxMax CC1 and after a very short while one filter was unusable. I've found the Kolari filters to be very well made and very similar to my B&W filters with them attaching very smoothly. Based on my personal experience I'll stick with Kolari as I plan to replace the MaxMax remaining filters sometime down the road.

don
 

Don Libby

Well-known member



This was shot the other day near the Superstition Mountains in Apache Junction. Sony A7r (converted to FS) with a FE 16-35 and 590nm filter, at 26mm f/8 1/640 ISO 200. The file was opened in C1 to correct the WB and lens correction then over to PS-CC and NIK Software. I was trying for something completely different from this however around the 4th or 5th copy I stumbled on this effect and like it so kept working on it.

don
 

Don Libby

Well-known member
"Hidden"



Sony A7r FE16-35 (16mm) 590nm f/8 1/500 ISO 100. There was a slight hot spot that was easily corrected.
 

Don Libby

Well-known member
not experienced with IR photography. Can you reproduce most of these shots/effects in post?
The answer is a more of a yes and no. Depending on the program used, depending on the amount of time you want to spend on the file, and depending on which effect you're after. In the end it's much easier and better to have it done in-camera rather than attempt to force it in post. Likewise there's at least 2-separate ways to capture IR; one is using a non-converted camera with a lens attached. This method requires extremely long exposure and a very steady position for the camera. The second is shooting from a converted camera. The converted camera allows you fast handheld shutter speeds. You also use additional lens filters on an already converted camera without loss of speed.

Don
 
Top