ShopDreamUp AI ArtDreamUp
Deviation Actions
Description
A bit more obviously urban shot, but this is a long exposure where I worked at defeating the cameras internal IR filter by only allowing IR light to pass and allowing it to pass long enough to achieve exposure. Given that this is around sunset, the camera is pointed just barely off of west, so there is a LOT of sunlight in the image, which means an absolute assload of IR light. To get the exposure to look this well, I had to expose for 30 seconds, and then boost exposure in post. This is under what would be pratically optimum exposure conditions for IR. So for those worried about the filters inside their own cameras being inadequate? Don't.
Image size
7360x4912px 17.52 MB
Make
NIKON CORPORATION
Model
NIKON D800
Shutter Speed
30/1 second
Aperture
F/9.0
Focal Length
50 mm
ISO Speed
125
Date Taken
Mar 16, 2013, 4:50:48 PM
© 2013 - 2024 UltraSonicUSA
Comments2
Join the community to add your comment. Already a deviant? Log In
I'll put this in comments because I object to the star rating system in the Critique feature.
There is much more IR available at mid-day, versus sunset. When you shoot an angle near the light source - i.e. west at sunset - you get oblique lighting, which means the majority of your subject is in shadow, which severely reduces your “assload” of infrared. Notice how the strongest sources of reflected IR - the trees - show only a stripe of highlight down one side.
I often shoot IR where the light is oblique, and conditions are less than ideal, so I don’t criticize that choice aesthetically. I actually like the way IR can open up shadow areas, accepting the cost of low contrast. With the right subject it can be really nice.
This photo appears to be a test shot. There is no clear subject and no elements that suggest a thought out composition.
I would suggest using an aperture more open than F 9. For a scene on this scale you could even open up all the way, which would allow much shorter exposure time.
What specific filter are you using? Is it the Hoya R72, or a knock off? It has been my experience that the no name filters really can’t be used for false color IR, because the roll-off slope is too long. You may want to convert your shots to B&W.
I am an Infrared addict (here is my IR gallery [link] ), so I look forward to seeing your future efforts.
There is much more IR available at mid-day, versus sunset. When you shoot an angle near the light source - i.e. west at sunset - you get oblique lighting, which means the majority of your subject is in shadow, which severely reduces your “assload” of infrared. Notice how the strongest sources of reflected IR - the trees - show only a stripe of highlight down one side.
I often shoot IR where the light is oblique, and conditions are less than ideal, so I don’t criticize that choice aesthetically. I actually like the way IR can open up shadow areas, accepting the cost of low contrast. With the right subject it can be really nice.
This photo appears to be a test shot. There is no clear subject and no elements that suggest a thought out composition.
I would suggest using an aperture more open than F 9. For a scene on this scale you could even open up all the way, which would allow much shorter exposure time.
What specific filter are you using? Is it the Hoya R72, or a knock off? It has been my experience that the no name filters really can’t be used for false color IR, because the roll-off slope is too long. You may want to convert your shots to B&W.
I am an Infrared addict (here is my IR gallery [link] ), so I look forward to seeing your future efforts.