I have been trying to get and take some pictures with my converted D70 to IR. Just after having the conversion done I picked up a D70s for a good price. Then I thought HMMMM. I need to get a second identical lens and be able to mount both on a tripod side-by-side. Amazon the Great came through with the bar I needed. Here are some of the better of my first trial. It is amazing what you can see in one image but not in the other. Hope you enjoy.
karno
Loc: Chico ,California
OlinBost wrote:
I have been trying to get and take some pictures with my converted D70 to IR. Just after having the conversion done I picked up a D70s for a good price. Then I thought HMMMM. I need to get a second identical lens and be able to mount both on a tripod side-by-side. Amazon the Great came through with the bar I needed. Here are some of the better of my first trial. It is amazing what you can see in one image but not in the other. Hope you enjoy.
Congrats on the conversion I would guess 580nm?
I have a d800e Nikon to 580nm and have had a lot of fun with it, it looks like you are shooting mostly in shade and have not flipped the color channels in your infrared?
I like #5 the best. I've always liked infrared because it has a surreal or otherworldly look. I used to shoot some Kodak HIE black & white infrared film. It was the most sensitive to infrared light but also grainy. It had a glow that other infrared films didn't have because it didn't have an anti-halation layer. Here is one I took in Colonial Williamsburg.
karno
Loc: Chico ,California
CO wrote:
I like #5 the best. I've always liked infrared because it has a surreal or otherworldly look. I used to shoot some Kodak HIE black & white infrared film. It was the most sensitive to infrared light but also grainy. It had a glow that other infrared films didn't have because it didn't have an anti-halation layer. Here is one I took in Colonial Williamsburg.
I miss that glowey look of film IR
I'd like to ask the maker what conclusions he has drawn from this excellent test amazingly done.
You can see into shadows with IR but normal color allows you to discriminate better. Perhaps there should be a way to combine both ways of vision for the maximum amount of information. Colorized Infrared?
I am a total novice but eager learner. Thank you all for your comments as there are not cons in this forum. I do not use post editing as I believe in the equipment and the user are the most important. ie: Ansel Adams.
OlinBost wrote:
I have been trying to get and take some pictures with my converted D70 to IR. Just after having the conversion done I picked up a D70s for a good price. Then I thought HMMMM. I need to get a second identical lens and be able to mount both on a tripod side-by-side. Amazon the Great came through with the bar I needed. Here are some of the better of my first trial. It is amazing what you can see in one image but not in the other. Hope you enjoy.
I like the color better in all 3.
karno
Loc: Chico ,California
OlinBost wrote:
I am a total novice but eager learner. Thank you all for your comments as there are not cons in this forum. I do not use post editing as I believe in the equipment and the user are the most important. ie: Ansel Adams.
Ansel Adams did copious amt af post processing, I respect your desire to to avoid post processing, though if your doing IR your images will never look real, and if you don't flip the color channels in photoshop the sky will be orange instead of blue, this orange sky can look cool in some images. I really do not want to try influence your artistic desires, just info we all have different goals. If you have ever done film you would know how much post process goes into it. I am attaching an infrared I took the other that shows the result of color channel flipping.
Good luck and have fun with your conversion.
Just to show how much I do not know, what is color flipping? And I guess I can learn by investigating the term and do more reading. Thanks
Personally I like the color photos here but I do like IR's
The location where I went with a friend was not my choice but I needed to get out and try. Thanks for all of the comments.
Olin, I was OK with this thread until I saw this post. Absolutely incorrect!!! You can believe what you wish with
your processing. However, Ansel Adams was a darkroom genius and processed everything he produced. That is from the initial exposure with the negative's intended final print to the final print, which involved dodging, burning, paper grade, chemistry, etc. Get the point?
--Bob
OlinBost wrote:
I am a total novice but eager learner. Thank you all for your comments as there are not cons in this forum. I do not use post editing as I believe in the equipment and the user are the most important. ie: Ansel Adams.
Got it! Thanks, I did not realize.
If you want to reply, then
register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.