Ugly Hedgehog - Photography Forum
Home Active Topics Newest Pictures Search Login Register
For Your Consideration
Color Infrared in Filtered Sunlight
Page 1 of 2 next>
Jan 15, 2020 21:48:57   #
JohnSwanda Loc: San Francisco
 
I had a couple days to shoot infrared in Golden Gate Park the last couple days with my favorite IR conditions - sunlight showing through clouds. I like to see very light diffuse shadows, and I sometimes had to wait for that in between overcast and full sun. The first one is a tree I had tried to shoot several times and failed. The tree on the left in the second photo is the back side of that tree.



















Reply
Jan 16, 2020 06:40:48   #
dpullum Loc: Tampa Florida
 
Phantasmagorical indeed. What nanometer filter [if any] and what approach to enhancing the color?

Reply
Jan 16, 2020 07:45:45   #
NJFrank Loc: New Jersey
 
Well I never took LSD back in the 60’s but these images seem to be a result of how a user would see the world. LOL. Very nice series.

Reply
 
 
Jan 16, 2020 08:10:24   #
JohnSwanda Loc: San Francisco
 
dpullum wrote:
Phantasmagorical indeed. What nanometer filter [if any] and what approach to enhancing the color?


I had my old Nikon D2X converted with Lifepixel's enhance color filter, which is 665. I do the red/blue channel swap and then tweak the contrast on each individual color channel. and use curves to enhance contrast.

Reply
Jan 16, 2020 08:11:48   #
JohnSwanda Loc: San Francisco
 
NJFrank wrote:
Well I never took LSD back in the 60’s but these images seem to be a result of how a user would see the world. LOL. Very nice series.


Actually, I did do magic mushrooms for a time in the '60s and early '70s, and I do consider that an influence on my work today.

Reply
Jan 16, 2020 19:19:47   #
User ID
 
Your stuff is a fine break from the usual
IR cliches. Other than the first two, the
rest remind me so much of underwater
shots ... but better, cuz the feeling of
space is more natural. UW stuff usually
has a very cramped perspective [for a
good reason, but thaz OT]. Yup, you do
have a lotta Lucy in the Sky there. Not
a pun, I mean the images could almost
illustrate that song :-)

Reply
Jan 16, 2020 19:50:22   #
DeanS Loc: Capital City area of North Carolina
 
I’m still practicing - haven’t gotten where you are just yet!

Reply
 
 
Jan 16, 2020 20:17:16   #
JohnSwanda Loc: San Francisco
 
DeanS wrote:
I’m still practicing - haven’t gotten where you are just yet!


I've been doing color IR for 12 years, and am on my second converted camera, so I've had plenty of practice.

Reply
Jan 16, 2020 22:29:46   #
DeanS Loc: Capital City area of North Carolina
 
JohnSwanda wrote:
I've been doing color IR for 12 years, and am on my second converted camera, so I've had plenty of practice.


It clearly shows.

Reply
Jan 18, 2020 14:06:02   #
ebrunner Loc: New Jersey Shore
 
JohnSwanda wrote:
I had a couple days to shoot infrared in Golden Gate Park the last couple days with my favorite IR conditions - sunlight showing through clouds. I like to see very light diffuse shadows, and I sometimes had to wait for that in between overcast and full sun. The first one is a tree I had tried to shoot several times and failed. The tree on the left in the second photo is the back side of that tree.


These are really vivid and pretty spectacular. Maybe I should convert one of my old bodies? Hmmm.
Erich

Reply
May 10, 2020 14:19:13   #
lev29 Loc: Born and living in MA.
 
JohnSwanda wrote:
I had my old Nikon D2X converted with Lifepixel's enhance color filter, which is 665. I do the red/blue channel swap and then tweak the contrast on each individual color channel. and use curves to enhance contrast.
Would you be able to, assuming you’re willing to take the time, please, to provide for each of these processed images you presented the original SOOC version? I currently shoot only SOOC with my FS camera employing a variety of filters but have found FEW, if any (besides those on one Lifepixel webpage,) examples of SOOC compared side-by-side with swapped channel versions.
😉

Reply
 
 
May 10, 2020 15:01:20   #
JohnSwanda Loc: San Francisco
 
lev29 wrote:
Would you be able to, assuming you’re willing to take the time, please, to provide for each of these processed images you presented the original SOOC version? I currently shoot only SOOC with my FS camera employing a variety of filters but have found FEW, if any (besides those on one Lifepixel webpage,) examples of SOOC compared side-by-side with swapped channel versions.
😉


I picked out three of the photos for comparison. The SOOC samples include the processing of the RAW file into a JPEG. After I do the channel swap, I selectively enhance the colors using hue/saturation and curves. You might notice in the first photo I removed the sidewalk.













Reply
May 10, 2020 20:22:49   #
lev29 Loc: Born and living in MA.
 
JohnSwanda wrote:
I picked out three of the photos for comparison. The SOOC samples include the processing of the RAW file into a JPEG. After I do the channel swap, I selectively enhance the colors using hue/saturation and curves. You might notice in the first photo I removed the sidewalk.
Thank you so much, John! This is useful to me.
😎

Reply
May 12, 2020 19:10:38   #
Uuglypher Loc: South Dakota (East River)
 
John,
The effect of those peyote hits so long ago is absolutely marvelous!
Wonderful, literal, surreality !

Dave

Reply
May 18, 2020 09:18:47   #
lev29 Loc: Born and living in MA.
 
JohnSwanda wrote:
I picked out three of the photos for comparison. The SOOC samples include the processing of the RAW file into a JPEG. After I do the channel swap, I selectively enhance the colors using hue/saturation and curves. You might notice in the first photo I removed the sidewalk.
John, I have another question for you, pertaining to your SOOC samples. To my eye, in comparison with my SOOC JPEGs that I obtain directly from both my 650 nm-converted Sony dSLR and my Full Spectrum-converted Sony mirrorless (with various external filters attached,) the dynamic range of yours appear relatively flat.

You wrote that your samples "include the processing of the RAW file into a JPEG." Is that all? And is there more than one kind of "standard" JPEG that can be generated from the RAW file of each photograph? Or is it that you intentionally overexpose them to begin with? Please understand that my question is purely about technique and not a criticism as to the resultant artistic value.

Below are a couple of examples from my collection. The first was obtained with my 650 nm-converted Sony dSLR while the second was done with a 665 nm filter attached to my Full Spectrum-converted Sony mirrorless camera. The ONLY post-processing I did was merely to crop the second in order to facilitate comparison with the first. Yes, these were taken at different times of both the day and year.

Thank you.





Reply
Page 1 of 2 next>
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.
For Your Consideration
UglyHedgehog.com - Forum
Copyright 2011-2024 Ugly Hedgehog, Inc.