Some UV pictures of flora taken this afternoon, in visible light the first flower is translucent yellow, the second is white.
lev29
Loc: Born and living in MA.
smf85 wrote:
Some UV pictures of flora taken this afternoon, in visible light the first flower is translucent yellow, the second is white.
smf85,
These are potentially interesting photos! This hedge on my part is probably due to my own, possibly idiosyncratic, bias, as I like to know WHAT aspect(s) of an image are derived from what is not evident on just a visible light-only photograph of the same object or scene from a similar perspective.
Yes, I’m aware of your conveying a
description of what each object looks like in color, but to me, that’s TELLING, not SHOWING.
So, can you help me out in that regard? Do you have any visible light-only correlative photographs of these subjects under the same lighting conditions, in color, B&W, or both? 🤔
😎
Visible light photos of the Daffodils.
Ultraviolet Images:
Nikon D850M 105mm UV Nikkor Baader UV Filter
Visible Light Images:
D850 105mm UV Nikkor no filter
All photos were taken in daylight
Tulips in Ultraviolet and Visible Light
A flowering tree - in VL & UV
Nikon D850M Nikkor 50mm f1.4 AF D
UV - With Baader UV filter
VL - No filter
Pictures were taken minutes apart.
lev29
Loc: Born and living in MA.
smf85 wrote:
A flowering tree - in VL & UV
Nikon D850M Nikkor 50mm f1.4 AF D
UV - With Baader UV filter
VL - No filter
Pictures were taken minutes apart.
Good comparable views, though the UV counterpart looks like an underexposed silhouette. Compare to my examples of an IR vs. a B&W version of a VL photograph.
If you want to reply, then
register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.