IR-ish stuff

[chrisk]

From a recent trip to currarong. had a great time and managed to take the IR cam out for a quick spin. unfortunately i took an incorrect WB reading so there isnt the lovely vivid blues i was hoping for. i took a WB reading of green in direct sunlight rather than in the shade so i lost alot of the IR rays...nevermind...live and learn !


Untitled by .Chris.K, on Flickr


Untitled by .Chris.K, on Flickr

Had a couple of cracks at this tree. i like both but dont love either. i think a better eye was needed cos i just couldn't find the right shot although i knew it was there somewhere.


Untitled by .Chris.K, on Flickr


Untitled by .Chris.K, on Flickr

[CraigVTR]

Good timing on #1, floating on air.
I prefer the first of the two tree shots because it just shows the tree and none of the surburban cluter in the background. Would like to see it with a correct wb.

Who said we can't have a white Christmas in Australia?

[biggerry]

Had a couple of cracks at this tree. i like both but dont love either. i think a better eye was needed cos i just couldn't find the right shot although i knew it was there somewhere.

I reckon the second image (ie teh last image) is by far the better one, however the tree does feel a bit too central within the frame which may be where you are getting the feeling of it being not quite there.

Possibly pushing more space onto either the left or right hand sides may have helped? apart from that, the processing and IR capture is pretty sweet from my end.

[Remorhaz]

I like both the third and fourth - the processing and colours on these are very nice. Probably the composition of the third but I'd much rather there wasn't that grass chopping the tree at the bottom. In the fourth I actually like seeing the houses and such (in their strange mysterious look) in the shot. Gerry may have a point with the last (he sometimes (cough - often...) does ) - perhaps moving to the right and turning the camera more to the left to get the trunk more on the right hand side?

[chrisk]

thanks for the feedback. i could have taken that tree shot a hundred times and not got it right. i just dont have the eye for this shit. i have fun doing it but it doesnt come naturally to me at all.

[aim54x]

WOW....these are amazing...did you get a 665nm filter in your D60?

[chrisk]

not sure cam. i got whatever is the standard one.

[aim54x]

not sure cam. i got whatever is the standard one.

That would be a 720nm unit.....but this looks like your getting a lot more colour in your images than I am. Maybe i will have to set my WB again and give it another go now that the sun is out! BTW which lens are you using? I am finding a variance in the IR transmission in my lenses

[PiroStitch]

I don't mind the composition of the third image, the only thing that kills it is the grass (or weeds) that are in the foreground. Apart from the weed, I think it has the strongest composition out of the 4.

[chrisk]

not sure cam. i got whatever is the standard one.

That would be a 720nm unit.....but this looks like your getting a lot more colour in your images than I am. Maybe i will have to set my WB again and give it another go now that the sun is out! BTW which lens are you using? I am finding a variance in the IR transmission in my lenses

I use the 16-35.

[aim54x]

I use the 16-35.

Of course it is one that I dont have in my arsenal.....dammit! These look like your getting a great amount of transmission hence my question

[chrisk]

I use the 16-35.

Of course it is one that I dont have in my arsenal.....dammit! These look like your getting a great amount of transmission hence my question

you can borrow it anytime cam.

[aim54x]

you can borrow it anytime cam.

Thanks for the offer, I am poised to pick up a 17-35mm f/2.8 in the new year.....hopefully that will be good in the IR spectrum, it fits into my kit due to the non-G nature of this lens (I can use it on my FM2N!). I can confirm that the 24-70 is nice in IR, as is the 18-55 (non VR). Do you have an 18-55VR? I would like to hear any comments about its IR performance if you have tested it.

[chrisk]

Cam, the standard 18-55vr that came with the d60 is tricky for IR. hotspots all over.

[aim54x]

Cam, the standard 18-55vr that came with the d60 is tricky for IR. hotspots all over.

Noted....I guess there was some change in the optical design between the 18-55 II, which is great for IR I have found, and the 18-55VR (lost the ED elements).

Thanks from saving me from searching one of these out only to be disappointed.