Infra red photography

[shed driver]

I've got the idea of trying out IR photography, not for any other reason than "why not?"

I've got a 5dMk3 - can I just put IR filters on or do I need to have some form of modification? As it's my main camera some non-permanent solution for what may only be a few pictures would be best.

TIA

SD.

[DibblyDobbler]

To do it properly you need to have your body converted - easiest solution may be to pick up a converted body on eBay, could probably get something like a 450 or 500D for a couple of hundred or less.

[Mutts]

I've done some IR photography using a 720nm filter on a Panasonic GF1. The GF1 sensor works well using just an IR filter, my old Nikons had a filter in front of the sensor which made them useless for shooting IR using a filter.

[Simpo Two]

The Nikon D70 was known for IR photography after suitable modification (in-built filter removed IIRC). As the body is probably <£100 now it's worth a google.

[DavidY]

For a trial, just try a Hoya R72 filter, this limits the wavelength of light going into the IR spectrum, but.....

Most unmodified camera sensors are less sensitive at the IR end of the spectrum, so exposure times will be longer, you will need to use a tripod in most situations, unless you bump the ISO (a lot). This is because most consumer cameras have some level of IR blocking

A lot of zoom lenses (and other lenses) have IR hotspots, search the web with your lens model and IR hotspot to find out if any of your lenses are ok.

[Mud_]

There are a few of mine here, nothing stellar: https://www.flickr.com/search/?user_id=34093651%40...

Taken with a Fuji IS Pro UVIR (basically an S5 IIRC). I really like IR photography as you can do interesting things between golden hours, but never got around to converting a nicer body (D700 at the time seemed not a good candidate).

[shed driver]

Cheers for the answers. I wasn't looking to get a new camera (SWMBO would not be impressed). Maybe I'll get one on the sly and just say "what? this old thing - had it years!

SD.

[karma mechanic]

Using a filter will give you a good idea of what it will be like, as long as you don't mind the exposure times. I like IR photography so much that I hardly ever do any other sort, it gives a very definite look to everything but especially skies:

https://500px.com/richardgaddphotography

I'm happy to answer questions on it, and I'd second the recommendation to go for a converted body if you take to it.

[DibblyDobbler]

karma mechanic said:

https://500px.com/richardgaddphotography

These are great Richard

How close to that kind of effect would a filter get do you think?

[Magic919]

I didn't realise Simon Marsden had died. He was a great IR photographer and a good guy too.

[karma mechanic]

DibblyDobbler said:

These are great Richard

How close to that kind of effect would a filter get do you think?

An external filter would work for most of those, although nothing that's moving due to the long exposures required.

I just dug out a document I created a few years ago, it outlines the general principles. Here's a link to it:
http://server132.clik.com/richardgadd/clik_media/P...

Generally older cameras have less IR-blocking, so can give results with an external filter.

[DibblyDobbler]

Thanks again Richard - which filter of the two mentioned would you go for? Or not much difference?

Quite fancy giving this a go now

[DavidY]

DibblyDobbler said:

Thanks again Richard - which filter of the two mentioned would you go for? Or not much difference?

Quite fancy giving this a go now

Mike, with an unmodified camera you will on the whole be better with the Hoya R72 (720nm) rather than anything with longer wavelength (eg 830,850) as the manufacturers IR cut filters on the sensor will reduce csensitvity at longer wavelengths. Your Fuji should work well with the R72, I had some good results with an X-E2 which is essentially the same sensor, but I now have a modified X-E1 (830nm).

The only issue with Fuji is that many of the lenses have hotspots, the 14mm and 18-135mm are the best lenses to use for IR.

Assortment of IR pictures https://www.flickr.com/photos/89667368@N05/albums/...

Hope that helps.

[DibblyDobbler]

DavidY said:

Mike, with an unmodified camera you will on the whole be better with the Hoya R72 (720nm) rather than anything with longer wavelength (eg 830,850) as the manufacturers IR cut filters on the sensor will reduce csensitvity at longer wavelengths. Your Fuji should work well with the R72, I had some good results with an X-E2 which is essentially the same sensor, but I now have a modified X-E1 (830nm).

The only issue with Fuji is that many of the lenses have hotspots, the 14mm and 18-135mm are the best lenses to use for IR.

Assortment of IR pictures https://www.flickr.com/photos/89667368@N05/albums/...

Hope that helps.

Excellent, didn't think a filter would give such good results. I have the 18-135 so will pick up a Hoya R72 for that

Thanks very much

[DavidY]

DibblyDobbler said:

Excellent, didn't think a filter would give such good results. I have the 18-135 so will pick up a Hoya R72 for that

Thanks very much

Take your tripod, and expect to see odd colours in the EVF unless you do a custom white balance or set the camera to Monochrome. You can sort out the colour balance in post processing.

You can do well with the R72 (even if this was on a Nikon J1 and not on a Fuji!!)


150609 Hartlepool Old Cemetry sm by Mr Perceptive X100, on Flickr

[DibblyDobbler]

I'd be delighted to get anything anywhere near as good as that!

[Simpo Two]

You can get a pseudo-IR effect (dark sky/light grass) by playing around in the Channel Mixer of Photoshop.

[DibblyDobbler]

Filter ordered

[C&C]

After reading this thread, I ordered a Hoya R72 filter 52mm for the EOS-M just to give it a go.

Went out at lunchtime and took around 10 shots in total.

The camera won't focus as it's too dark, so basically manually focussed, carefully attached the filter then rested the camera on a wall and guessed at where to point it.

ISO was set at 800 and aperture f8 and f11. Exposure times between around 8 and 25 seconds.
Lens was the kit 18-55, mainly at 18mm. Shooting in Raw.

Although a bit blurry and and far from sharp, the following were the results.
Looking forward to doing a lot more with a proper tripod.

As I understand it, if you do get a body converted, then the IR light isn't blocked by the camera's filter so should allow faster exposures and enable AF on the camera?

Processing was via Photoshop (varied colour temp to around 2000 and tint to around -50 in camera Raw), then messed with channel mixer and also used Nik Silver Efex Pro plugin after reading a tutorial where the writer uses it. Was pleasantly surprised to find the Google Nik suite is available to download free of charge. Used Silver Efex Pro 2.0 to convert to B&W and also increase contrast and "structure" control.

IR_River1 by conradsphotos, on Flickr

IR_Garden1 by conradsphotos, on Flickr

IR_Tower1 by conradsphotos, on Flickr

IR_Bridge1 by conradsphotos, on Flickr

[Magic919]

Lenses used to have an IR dot for this purpose.