Experiment - IR Closeups


Status
Not open for further replies.

Velectron

New Member
Dec 1, 2005
1,857
0
0
Admiralty
The majority of the IR works I have seen down here seem to focus on landscapes, so I thought...why not try IR at closeup and seen what are the effects?

This seem to be more difficult than I thought. Landscapes tend to be easier to shoot, with lots of contrast between foliage, sky and the ground/water. But at closeup, its kind of difficult to find enough contrast to make the picture stand out. Flowers and foliage are all white and its kind of difficult to frame them against a contrasty background...for e.g. a flower appears white among the white foliage... (at least this is what I feel).

Anyway, this is what I managed to get. Not that good IMHO, and I would appreciate it if the seniors here can give advice on how to take better closeup IRs, and what are the things to look out for.

#1 Small flowers



#2 Heliconia flower



#3 Succulents



#4 Baby Orchids



#5 Underside of leaf

*Can't seem to make the veins stand out - argh*

 

ark19

Senior Member
Jan 17, 2002
3,111
0
0
42
SG
Most of the times, flowers and grasses turn white in IR.
If you are interested in flower macro, maybe can try UV photography?
But the equipment involved is not as cheap as IR photography.
 

Velectron

New Member
Dec 1, 2005
1,857
0
0
Admiralty
Understand that...thats why I think IR macro is quite a challenge.

UV will definitely give a very unusual look to flowers as most of them have UV markings to guide pollinators. Have access to a UV filter in my lab, but haven't really got the time to try out. ;)

Think it is easier to shoot macro IR if the subject is near the ground. Can use the ground to provide contrast. Thats what I gathered so far. ;p

Any inputs from the others?
 

blaze

New Member
Dec 17, 2005
14
0
0
djblaze.deviantart.com
what about macro's of things other than foilage, insects etc.... maybe it would be a real problem if you needed long exposure times to get shots of them.. just another avenue..

:D
 

Pablo

Senior Member
Sep 1, 2004
1,854
0
0
Blue/Green Planet
Hi Velectron,

I realy like photos 1,2,3 (though 2 and 3, I would prefer different PS colouring with).

I have tried some macro IR before myself, but, as you say, "it is not easy !"

Good work
Take it further .... I look forward to your shots!

:)
 

Velectron

New Member
Dec 1, 2005
1,857
0
0
Admiralty
Thanks for the kind comments. I will work harder upon it ;)

What doesn't move around and let you get real close to them...other than plants and small insects...something to ponder about. :think:
 

deadpixel

New Member
Apr 14, 2004
1,251
0
0
East
www.pbase.com
Velectron said:
Thanks for the kind comments. I will work harder upon it ;)

What doesn't move around and let you get real close to them...other than plants and small insects...something to ponder about. :think:
You might wish to try your hands at still life IR macro, taking shots of small objects from unusual angles. Here's a couple of examples:

http://www.pbase.com/deadpixel/ir_macros__abstracts

Cheers,
Matt
 

Velectron

New Member
Dec 1, 2005
1,857
0
0
Admiralty
Thanks deadpixels. Those are interesting pictures. Just wondering...how did you manage to get enough IR light for some of the photos? I presume you are shooting indoors for the 1st few pictures. Did you use some IR lamp or something?

This is my latest photo...still plants though...hehe ;p

 

deadpixel

New Member
Apr 14, 2004
1,251
0
0
East
www.pbase.com
Velectron said:
Thanks deadpixels. Those are interesting pictures. Just wondering...how did you manage to get enough IR light for some of the photos? I presume you are shooting indoors for the 1st few pictures. Did you use some IR lamp or something?

This is my latest photo...still plants though...hehe ;p
Just use your flash ;)

Or use sunlight streaming in from a window :cool:

BTW - nice shots!!

Cheers,
Matt
 

Pablo

Senior Member
Sep 1, 2004
1,854
0
0
Blue/Green Planet
Velectron said:
Thanks deadpixels. Those are interesting pictures. Just wondering...how did you manage to get enough IR light for some of the photos? I presume you are shooting indoors for the 1st few pictures. Did you use some IR lamp or something?

This is my latest photo...still plants though...hehe ;p


Hi Velectron,

I rather like this photo.

I am not an expert at this, but to me, a little more depth of field would have been excellent.
Especially if you were anle to keep the background as it was.

I mean... like the whole plant was in sharp focus , but the right side of the picture came in darker toward the middle ???

Very nice photo :thumbsup:
 

Velectron

New Member
Dec 1, 2005
1,857
0
0
Admiralty
Many thanks for the nice comments Pablo.

The problem with my camera (I am using Sony's F-707 on nightshot mode) is that I cannot control the aperture when using nightshot mode. It automatically opens to the widest at F2, or 2.4 at the end of the tele. Thats kind of big to give a good DOF. :sweat:

I can control the aperture in normal mode using Manual, but somehow, I couldn't quite get a good focus. Seems like the light is too weak (or the hot mirror is too good :p )

As a result, most of my shots are "handicapped" shots, but the advantage I get is that I can shoot handheld without tripod! :bsmilie:
 

KCLow

New Member
Nov 14, 2004
369
0
0
Do you guys think the IR lamps that are used for muscle cramps etc will help to iluminate in this case? If yes, go buy the Philips ones from Cash Convertors at S$15.
 

Velectron

New Member
Dec 1, 2005
1,857
0
0
Admiralty
I have thought of that before, but never really tried it. The IR wavelength that is responsible for a heating effect belongs to the far-IR, the same type that is emitted by body heat. Camera CCDs can only see near-IR, which is very close to red.

So if that Phillip lamp emits only far-IR, then it would be of no use to IR photography. But of course, if it produces a wide spectrum of wavelengths, then it might be usable.

Anyone wants to try? :bsmilie:
 

KCLow

New Member
Nov 14, 2004
369
0
0
Velectron said:
I have thought of that before, but never really tried it. The IR wavelength that is responsible for a heating effect belongs to the far-IR, the same type that is emitted by body heat. Camera CCDs can only see near-IR, which is very close to red.

So if that Phillip lamp emits only far-IR, then it would be of no use to IR photography. But of course, if it produces a wide spectrum of wavelengths, then it might be usable.

Anyone wants to try? :bsmilie:
Ok, tested with the lamp. Although I have not done custom WB and PS, this image does show it works right? BTW this shot is taken at night in complete darkness.
 

Velectron

New Member
Dec 1, 2005
1,857
0
0
Admiralty
Thanks for posting this! It definitely works...wonderful! :D

Maybe I will go and buy one too! ;)

Can the intensity of the lamp be set? Kind of too bright in the center...:bsmilie:
 

tomcat

Senior Member
Nov 7, 2003
5,518
11
38
65
Visit site
It is not that it's too bright in the centre. That looked more like it was caused by a hotspot problem.

The Philips IR heat lamp will work. Here's a couple of shots taken in the dark illuminated only by the IR from the heat lamp.


Taken with the E-300 and ZD 50mm Macro lens


Taken with a Nikon Coolpix 950
 

ark19

Senior Member
Jan 17, 2002
3,111
0
0
42
SG
tomcat said:

Taken with the E-300 and ZD 50mm Macro lens
This looks like an alley cat waiting at a corner to jump at it's prey :bsmilie:
 

GreenEggs_n_Ham

New Member
Apr 29, 2003
383
0
0
38
hi! i like the closeup photos! must have taken a bit of effort to focus on the object huh?

i suppose with IR photography, the background shld be clear of anything that's of the same colour? i like #1 and #4.

sam
-----------
wah haven't been back here in years.
 

Status
Not open for further replies.