DSLRUsers.com

I have just come back from spending 3 nights up in the Blue Mountains (yes I will eventually move up there). But this trip I restricted my self to a very small kit, which in some ways proved to work against me. I only took with me:
-Nikon D80IR (720nm)
-Nikon FM2N (Fuji Neopan Super Presto 1600)
-Voigtlander Color Skopar 20mm f/3.5 SL II
-Voigtlander Nokton 58mm f/1.4 SL II
-Tamron SP AF 90mm f/2.8 Di Macro

Due to the 58mm hot-spotting horribly on the D80IR the 20mm became the most used lens, and I borrowed Katrina's 18-55 a few times as well. The FM2N didnt see to much usage, I guess I just should have left it at home.

Here are some of the images from the trip, any tips (Composition, processing etc) would be greatly appreciated. These have been channel swapped using Capture NX2.

The bright patches on the foreground cliffs in the first one bother me. Yes I know it is IR and those girls have been baking in the afternoon sun, but nonetheless...

I really like #4. I particularly like the way you have used the flare to advantage here.

Love #4 - I could see it on the front of a greeting card.

I also like #1, but in a sci-fi sort of fashion.

I think the leaning building in #3 is unfortunate.

Hi Cam,

I can't say I'm a fan of the first two

I like the foliage (mostly the front right) in the third but I'm not really a fan of the rest

#4 however is ace - I love what you've done with the flare - I think I kinda even like the power lines - they fortunately head in the right direction, etc.

Cameron
IR landscapes are passe mostly unless there is some element that lifts them beyond the pale. Your landscapes would have worked just as well using visible light. For something special in IR try this...find a beautiful (or not) model and dress her in silk. Use soft windowlight and IR for something special. Skintones will glow. The image will take on a soft luminance that will be a joy to see. IR is not just for landscapes.

Matt. K wrote:IR is not just for landscapes.

As someone who used to shoot IR colour film I don't think I'd agree with that - and there's always B&W infrared landscapes for that matter which is probably a more established genre.

The images need to be strong in their composition, the infrared needs to lift them and they either need to go beyond the expectations of an infrared shot or do it so well it doesn't matter. Otherwise it just becomes a technical exercise that doesn't go anywhere. Even if you do that, some people will probably dismiss them just because they are infrared but that's their problem, not yours.

I think that probably none of these images are strong enough to carry infrared well.

The first two don't hit you over the head with a gleaming silver shovel like the third one does to some extent. They need more contrast, luminosity and saturation and even then, more drama in the composition.

The third one needs more separation between the building and the sky by changing the colour and maybe tonality of one or the other. Perhaps it would have helped to have taken a normal image on the camera to combine tortured elements of both. Perhaps some perspective correction on the building may help also.

I don't think the alien antennae or maybe they're power lines help in the fourth one. I suspect a much tighter crop might help too.

Keep trying, though. You're closer to hitting the nail on the head to hitting your head on the nail but I think you're not quite there yet.

Hmm, maybe I'm being too harsh. They look a lot better when you click to them to expand them. Perhaps you uploaded them at 800x600. They appear less sharp than they are and that makes them seem less convincing. Expanded to a smaller size (maybe that's the problem too) they look a lot better and the extra detail changes the effective composition.

Revised comments, then:

#1 I think would help to have more luminosity in the foliage as well as more colour and possible tonal separation between the rocks and the sky.

#2 Nice sky but the shadows don't help bring out tonal gradations in the landscape. Just maybe, add the sky from this one to number one (if that can work).

#3 It's good but I think there's still room for improvement. Previous comments stand.

#4 It looks much better sharper. I suggest try cloning out the power lines, crop in from the right to the centre of the vertical branch and adjust left and bottom border in slightly to balance.

BAH!!! I wrote a very long reply to all of your comments...it seems that it didnt post.

I thank you all for the comments and critique, Murray you are not too harsh (refer to the bye line for this board!). I am taking it all onboard and will def be trying to work with all your tips next time I am using the IR camera.

Murray

As someone who used to shoot IR colour film I don't think I'd agree with that

I'm confused....you don't agree that IR is not just for landscapes or you don't agree with IR being a bit passe unless they contain elements that lift them to a higher level (beyond the pale)?

Sorry, I misread your comment as "IR is not for landscapes".

Whoops.