Wellington in Infrared

[robo git]

Starting to get the hang of IR, still need a lot of work though :D

http://dl-client.getdropbox.com/u/32357/Forum%20Pic%20Share/IR/Wellington/IMG_0002.jpg

http://dl-client.getdropbox.com/u/32357/Forum%20Pic%20Share/IR/Wellington/IMG_0006.jpg

http://dl-client.getdropbox.com/u/32357/Forum%20Pic%20Share/IR/Wellington/IMG_0022.jpg

http://dl-client.getdropbox.com/u/32357/Forum%20Pic%20Share/IR/Wellington/IMG_0032.jpg

http://dl-client.getdropbox.com/u/32357/Forum%20Pic%20Share/IR/Wellington/IMG_0015.jpg http://dl-client.getdropbox.com/u/32357/Forum%20Pic%20Share/IR/Wellington/IMG_0060.jpg

http://dl-client.getdropbox.com/u/32357/Forum%20Pic%20Share/IR/Wellington/IMG_0063.jpg http://dl-client.getdropbox.com/u/32357/Forum%20Pic%20Share/IR/Wellington/IMG_0066.jpg

http://dl-client.getdropbox.com/u/32357/Forum%20Pic%20Share/IR/Wellington/IMG_0067.jpg

http://dl-client.getdropbox.com/u/32357/Forum%20Pic%20Share/IR/Wellington/IMG_0071.jpg

---------- Post added at 07:33 PM ---------- Previous post was at 07:32 PM ----------

Any suggestions gratefully received

---------- Post added at 07:37 PM ---------- Previous post was at 07:33 PM ----------

Oops! Should have posted this in the Cityscape section.

[Haim]

the first and the last are my TRUE favourites.... i would have loved to give you suggetion/tips but i dont have any experience with IR photography... but like i said i DO like both first and last....

[Bigelboe]

OK city shots but you may aswell have made them in Colour and then greyscaled them, apart from a very small amount of foliage in one shot you havn't really used the unique characteristics of IR photography to your advantage.

The strongest shots using infrared I have seen are usually landscapes and occasionally portraits. Google infrared phototography for examples. Maybe rock up a track in upper hutt like the birchville dam one or something and see if you can spot a unique way to look at a scene in IR.

[robo git]

OK city shots but you may aswell have made them in Colour and then greyscaled themFair call. Hmm... Will have to think on this one. Like your suggestion about taking a track.

[Moppie]

OK city shots but you may aswell have made them in Colour and then greyscaled them, apart from a very small amount of foliage in one shot you havn't really used the unique characteristics of IR photography to your advantage.



I think you will find that had he shot in visable light, and simply converted to greyscale they would look very different.

[thirdkid]

the first and the last are my TRUE favourites.... i would have loved to give you suggetion/tips but i dont have any experience with IR photography... but like i said i DO like both first and last....
x2..1st and last are O for awesome

[robo git]

I think you will find that had he shot in visable light, and simply converted to greyscale they would look very different.Different, yes - depth of field would have been much greater as would have needed to stop down a lot (Didn't have my filters in convenient reach) and yes the heat-profile would have rendered differently to the visible-light, but not hugely, which is what I think Bigelboe was getting at. Thanks though ;)

Cheers for the positive & helpful comments - these were all shot going to/from work over the last week.

[talan]

First one's the best! Good old vintage feel, I like!

[El Zorro]

first one, 7th one and last one are great. I think you have given these images a completely different feel with IR. The sky is great (even tho you have a dirty sensor). Well done for being adventurous. Nice graphic quality in 7th.

(I need to mention I am enduring this on dial-up and that was quite a marathon download!!)

[Cory Varcoe]

The second last one is mint! And Would lens were you using? by the looks the first shot to produce a hot spot/flare in the centre? It would be a cracked if it werent for hotspot
Can you bracket your shots with the 350D? Eg -2,0,+2 ? That would help with the skies. Also help demonstrate the IR effect. If not find a cheap cokin grad filter on trademe.
I know from shooting IR with a filter that i get better results if i shot with the sun eg photographing what the sun is shining on with the sun at my back. Helps with the skies aswel :p

[robo git]

Looks like the 2nd-to-last was shot with my 24-105 F4L @ 35mmf4

First shot was 30mm F1.4 @ F16.

I didn't even think about using my ND4Grad Cokin for IR - for some reason I thought it would just be like sunglasses - almost totally transparent to IR - will definitely be giving that a go, cheers! :)

Oh, and yes, the 350D supports bracketing, but it's a PITA as unless you keep shooting bracketed shots it switches the bracketing off after a while :(

[Cory Varcoe]

Yeah I use mine all the time, sometimes i need to use it to hold back the foreground :D

Oh haha that could be fustrating when you get home and find you've got 3 photos the same :p

[robo git]

Yeah, usually if I'm wanting to bracket for a composite shot I calculate the f-stops manually and use M, go for +/- 3, +/- 1.5 and neutral. Problem is half the time I forget that my plan was a composite shot and I delete half the photos as under/over exposed before.... :D

[Cory Varcoe]

Lmao i've done that before! :D

[welly]

Just out of interest, what are you using for IR? A converted camera or an IR filter? If so, which filter? I'm interested in doing some IR photography but not sure whether to invest in something like a D70 and get it converted or just get a filter.

[robo git]

Gidday welly, using a converted Canon 350D - converted here in Wellington :D

Check this thread (http://www.photographersonline.co.nz/showthread.php?t=195) for details.

As for getting converted camera vs filters? Bear in mind that your camera is equipped with an IR filter to REMOVE IR light from your picture, so any shot you need to take you're going to get issues like:
* All shots need to be taken manually (probably bulb mode)
* Won't be able to focus through viewfinder unless you focus, lock the focus, then attach the IR filter
* Motion blur of subjects due to need for 30sec or longer exposure times

IMO if you're going to bother with IR photography, using a filter on a regular camera is a bad idea unless you're deliberately wanting extended exposure times and don't want to be able to take shots on the go. Of course if you're just wanting to dabble a little, then you may not be able to justify the cost of another body + conversion.

[Cory Varcoe]

Gidday welly, using a converted Canon 350D - converted here in Wellington :D

Check this thread (http://www.photographersonline.co.nz/showthread.php?t=195) for details.

As for getting converted camera vs filters? Bear in mind that your camera is equipped with an IR filter to REMOVE IR light from your picture, so any shot you need to take you're going to get issues like:
* All shots need to be taken manually (probably bulb mode)
* Won't be able to focus through viewfinder unless you focus, lock the focus, then attach the IR filter
* Motion blur of subjects due to need for 30sec or longer exposure times

IMO if you're going to bother with IR photography, using a filter on a regular camera is a bad idea unless you're deliberately wanting extended exposure times and don't want to be able to take shots on the go. Of course if you're just wanting to dabble a little, then you may not be able to justify the cost of another body + conversion.

Agreed! (Y) on the other hand, having a converted camera you can still do long exposures using filters etc if that is the effect you are after

[robo git]

Agreed! (Y) on the other hand, having a converted camera you can still do long exposures using filters etc if that is the effect you are afterIndeed - I thought that was implied, though you may need to drop sensitivity / smaller aperture / use filters to partially block IR depending on the exposure effect you're after.

[Cory Varcoe]

Indeed - I thought that was implied, though you may need to drop sensitivity / smaller aperture / use filters to partially block IR depending on the exposure effect you're after.

Just call me Captain Obvious then :D

[robo git]

Nothing wrong with spelling things out ;)

[StanW]

I can't help feeling that working in infrared is a whole lot simpler with film. I don't see that you've achieved a great deal in any of those pictures - no IR effect in vegetation, no contrast between sky and clouds.

[robo git]

This would probably be more your speed then:http://dl.getdropbox.com/u/32357/Forum%20Pic%20Share/CabbageFarm.jpg

Those pictures were basically among the first ones I took with my IR-converted camera, and I freely admit I didn't know what would give the most dramatic effect: I was having a play, and while you could have achieved very similar results in B&W, I was not unhappy with how it turned out.

Anyway: If I only do shots that everyone else is doing, how am I supposed to develop a distinct style?

[StanW]

Yes, I'm happier with that one. I think that you've used the abilities of IR film to better effect.