 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
| PhotoKB HomeDiscussion Groups Digital Photography Digital PhotoDSLR CamerasZLR CamerasPoint & Shoot CamerasFilm Photography 35 mmLarge FormatMedium formatDarkroomFilm and LabsOther EquipmentPhoto Technique Nature PhotographyPeople PhotographyTechnique GeneralGeneral Photo Topics General TopicsAustralian PhotographyUK PhotographyDirectoryPhoto Clubs |
Photo Forum / General Photo Topics / General Topics / June 2007Planes, Trains and Infrared Photography
Hi All, I've uploaded a new article with images I shot with my camera converted on infrared photography to: http://www.dimagemaker.com/article.php?articleID=1035 Cheers, Wayne  SignatureWayne J. Cosshall Publisher, The Digital ImageMaker, http://www.dimagemaker.com/ Blog http://www.digitalimagemakerworld.com/ Publisher, Experimental Digital Photography http://www.experimentaldigitalphotography.com Personal art site http://www.cosshall.com/ > Hi All, > [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > > Wayne Those are great. I enjoyed your work. Thanks for posting. Regards. Jon. > Hi All, > [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > Publisher, Experimental Digital Photographyhttp://www.experimentaldigitalphotography.com > Personal art sitehttp://www.cosshall.com/ Very nice pictures! | Hi All, | | I've uploaded a new article with images I shot with my camera converted | on infrared photography to: | http://www.dimagemaker.com/article.php?articleID=1035 just a thought.. The shooting I've done with Kodak and Konica IR cut through haze like a knife. There were shots I made in the canadian Rockies where I could barely see the next mountain, yet after deving the film I could see to the horizon. I notice your IR converted camera tends to show the haze rather than cutting through it - have you done any tests to see what the relative sensitivity of the snesor is at various wavelengths? karl Hi Karl, No I haven't but it's been on my list of things to do for awhile. It may not be so obvious from these shots but I have found my converted 350D does cut through the haze, at least a lot. Cheers, Wayne Wayne J. Cosshall Publisher, The Digital ImageMaker, http://www.dimagemaker.com/ Blog http://www.digitalimagemakerworld.com/ Publisher, Experimental Digital Photography http://www.experimentaldigitalphotography.com Personal art site http://www.cosshall.com/ > | Hi All, > | [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > > karl In article <467f91c8$0$12845$5a62ac22@per-qv1-newsreader- 01.iinet.net.au>, fellafel@PING.com says... > I notice your IR converted camera tends to show the haze rather than cutting > through it - have you done any tests to see what the relative sensitivity of > the snesor is at various wavelengths? I've tried various filtration with my Fuji IS-1, from 720nm to 950nm. Haze penetration is definitely better with deeper filtration, but quite good even at 720nm. http://www.flickr.com/photos/jputnam/518759534/ is one example, a view of Mt Rainier from 40+ miles away. Signaturejosh@phred.org is Joshua Putnam <http://www.phred.org/~josh/> Updated Infrared Photography Gallery: <http://www.phred.org/~josh/photo/ir.html> > Hi All, > [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > Publisher, Experimental Digital Photographyhttp://www.experimentaldigitalphotography.com > Personal art sitehttp://www.cosshall.com/ What is more sensitive to IR, a converted CMOS camera or a CCD-based camera? I had heard that the Nikon D40 was the most IR-sensitive unmodified (aside from Leica's "mistake" with the M8) DSLR. |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2008 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.