usnret Loc: Woodhull Il

Has anyone here ventured into the world of infrared photography? From watching several u-tube videos it looks to be quite challenging but at the same time a rewarding endeavor.

NMGal Loc: NE NM

Try doing a search with “infrared” or “IR”. There are several posts.

iamimdoc

Can be fun. Allows to shoot middle of day. Must process the output. Tons of videos on YouTube.

Converted camera easiest to use but can be issues with hotspot with some lenses so check in advance

dpullum Loc: Tampa Florida

Give a look at: https://www.uglyhedgehog.com/t-608767-1.html

I converted a low-cost older camera it is a simple task as described in:
https://www.uglyhedgehog.com/t-547605-1.html

The virtue of the DYS conversion of an older camera is you get your toe in the IR water before converting an expensive camera thru one of the services. Also, the smaller camera allows you to buy small filters ror the full spectra conversion. Full spectra is more fun than the typical 720 um restriction of "pure" IR.

jerryc41 Loc: Catskill Mts of NY

Digital IR is so much easier than film. You can buy a used camera on eBay or have one converted by LifePixel. First, make sure it's worth converting - check with them. Also, check with them about what kind of conversion to have done.

Once you start shooting IR, you'll find quite a bit of leeway in processing. There are lots of tutorials online about processing IR.

joehel2 Loc: Cherry Hill, NJ

I recently started with a full spectrum converted Fujifilm X100S and was hooked. This is one of my early images. I like the B&W renderings.

https://www.uglyhedgehog.com/t-729967-1.html

I recently purchased a full spectrum Canon 5D full spectrum conversion from a fellow forum member. I wanted to have something with lens interchangeability. I have some photos to post. With the IR camera, I find I concentrate more on composition than settings.

Linda From Maine Loc: Yakima, Washington

The search function of UHH ain't no Google It keys on topic titles, which are often irrelevant to the subject. Try Google Advanced Search, which allows you to add the website, along with key words. I found a lot for UHH here, though they are not new.

However, there are about four in topcat's recent topics:
https://www.uglyhedgehog.com/user-topic-list?usernum=42710

.

JBRIII

Lifepixel has quite a lot of info, including photos, on their website. Kolari is another company that does this. Conversions are ~ $300 + camera depending on exact details. Maxmax is a third company, they also do monochrome conversions, much more expensive.

47greyfox Loc: on the edge of the Colorado front range

LifePixel lists compatible cameras, both P&S and others, that are candidates. However, it’s worth your time to contact them directly and ask about any concerns they have. Some may be converted but are susceptible to flare. Case in point, I tested the water with a Canon S100 when LifePixel ran a special a few years ago. I still enjoy using it but do experience flares quite often. When I first contacted LifePixel, they seemed genuinely surprised but weren’t (if that makes sense) and offered to reverse the conversation. I kept it converted and still occasionally shoot. My point is, if you venture over to their website and see your candidate camera listed, it’s still worth a call to discuss the merits and potential issues of converting it.

jcboy3

I converted a Panasonic TZ-10 to play around. It was fun, so I had LifePizel convert an EPL-6 to 520nm and I use a 14-42 or 9-18 on it with a few other IR filters if I want to change the look.

LifePixel will sell you a converted camera, check their web site.

My thoughts on this were to not do a full spectrum conversion because then I would need a filter for every lens, and a separate filter for every lens if I wanted to do visible. The number of filters gets out of control quickly.

Also, I wanted a small camera/lens combo so it would be easy to bring the camera along when I travel. I still don't bring it many times, but I can drop it in a slot in my backpack as long as I have room.

And luckily, the EPL-6 uses the same batteries as my E-M5 mk III. That's a real plus.

One application I have for IR is when taking pictures of statues in parks. In visible light, the statue is dark, the trees are dark, and it's hard to distinguish. In IR, the statue is dark, but the trees are light. Great contrast really shows the statues off.

dbrugger25 Loc: Raleigh, NC

I bought a Singh-Ray 690 IR filter and used it in bright mid-day sunlight. I was disappointed.

My camera was a Canon R5 with an f:2.8 70-200 Canon lens. I was hoping for a more enhanced contrast between warm and cool objects.

They make a model called the 830 that blocks even more visible light. I didn't know enough about IR photography when I bought the 690 to make an informed decision.

jerryc41 Loc: Catskill Mts of NY

Right. "Question" "Problem" "Suggestions" Search doesn't help much with topics like that.

JBRIII

Sorry if I'm missing something here, but it does not seem like you are using a converted camera. As is, cameras have a filter which blocks most radiation above 630 nm. The reason is IR is read as red and camera sensors are much more sensitive to red, including IR out to 1100 nm, than the human eye. Some cameras almost certainly block more than others. Second, you mention hot and cold, IR as mentioned here measures reflection (green leaves, etc.) vs. absorption.
So once converted in PS you get a stark white vs. black which many like.

For heat contrasts you need a thermal IR camera (8000-14,000) nm which measures heat in the range of rt to 500 or so C. Animals show up as red in the night time. Can differences in temp of different parts of human body. These cameras are available for a few hundred dollars for cell phones, but contain only 20,000 pixels, for a camera of 500,000 pixels your talking several thousand dollars and it runs off a PC. There are cameras which fuse a low res thermal image with a RGB image for less than a $1000. FLIR and SEEK are two companies to check.

burkphoto Loc: High Point, NC

I used a bit of Ektachrome Infrared Slide Film back in the mid-1970s. It was a popular special application film. You were supposed to use it with a KODAK WRATTEN Gelatin Filter No. 12, which is deep yellow, but interesting results could be obtained with a #25A Red filter as well.

Here are a couple of images from 1975-'76. The second image is from an abandoned fort near Charleston, SC. It was probably the creepiest place I've ever seen. The nauseating colors of this slide reflect my paranoia of that moment.

That film was expensive, had to be kept frozen until three hours before use, and processed in E4 as soon as possible after. It was very difficult to work with. It was slow — about ISO 100 with a #12 filter or ISO 200 with no filter. You could not rely on the focusing system of the SLR OR the markings on the lens. You had to use a smallish aperture for depth of field forgiveness, and offset the focus by using the IR index etched on certain lenses.

Despite the challenges, it was a lot of fun. The results definitely had a 1960s-'70s vibe. View the downloads for best results.

Taken with 25A red filter

(Download)

Taken without a filter

(Download)

rmalarz Loc: Tempe, Arizona

I've done several, with different cameras. It's an interesting experience.
--Bob