Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2006/11/15
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Thanks for both posts. This is really in depth and very informative. Philippe Op 15-nov-06, om 19:45 heeft MARK DAVISON het volgende geschreven: > I have been conducting some experiments to understand the issue of > IR contamination and filtration in digital cameras. I have posted > some results at > > http://gallery.leica-users.org/v/MarkEDavison/M8infrared/ > > to show some comparative examples of IR filtration. I have > included a Leica M8 shot where the filtration was done by applying > a modified Phase One profile which is supposed to correct blacks > under tungsten light. My conclusion is that the software filtration > works surprising well on the blacks that are IR contaminated, but > hardly affects the other contaminated colors at all, but you should > look and come to your own conclusion. > > (Note: this is a cross post. There is an on-going discussion of > software profile methods for IR filtration at > http://www.leica-camera-user.com/digital-forum/9178-magenta-work- > around-capture-one-workflow.html > > or > > http://tinyurl.com/y6cjx2 > > which gives more detail on the origins of the modified profile I > used on the Leica M8 image.) > > Here's a description of the shots: > > The scene was shot with incandescent illumination from ordinary > lightbulbs. The camera white balances were set to 2800 K except > for the Epson R-D1, which was set to incandescent. (The Epson R-D1 > does not allow you to set white balance in Kelvin.) > > The first example is the D200, which is very insensitive to IR. The > colors in the first D200 photograph are a very accurate rendition > of the way the scene appears to my eye. Take special note of the > maroon and green pile blankets, the black Leica M lens, and the > black pile jacket at the bottom of the photograph. The second > photograph shows the D200 with IR cut filtration (via a Tiffen > standard hot mirror filter). There is hardly any visible change in > the colors. The third photograph is with the D200 and the IR pass > filter (a Hoya R72), taken at the same exposure as the first two > photographs. There is no visble IR at all at this exposure. > > The photographs continue in sequence for 3 more cameras: the Leica > M8, the Epson R-D1 and the Nikon D2h. For each camera I show an > image with no filtration, with IR cut, and IR pass, all at the same > exposure. Note how much IR is recorded by the M8--it is the most IR > sensitive of all the cameras. Note also how the IR contamination > has completely bleached the green out of the green pile blanket, > how the maroon blanket has shifted color, how there is a purple > sheen on the barrel of the Leica lens, and how the black pile > jacket has turned dark purple. The shot with IR cut filtration > knocks down the purple sheen on the lens barrel, improves color > saturation and contrast overall, but doesn't quite return the green > pile blanket to the correct color. Note also that there was a > glowing IR reflection from the "black" pile jacket on the bottom of > the apple which is taken out by the IR filtration. > > Similar comments apply to the Nikon D2h, but the infrared > sensitivity is weaker and the corrections with the IR cut filter > look better to my eye. > > The Leica M8 shot which has been filtered by application of the > profile Jamie Roberts supplied does have better blacks in the > anodized aluminum objects, but the green of the pile blanket at the > top has not been restored, and in general the colors of the pile > fabrics look faded. More subtly, the IR reflection on the bottom > of the apple has not been removed. > > My point is that IR contamination doesn't just affect synthetic > black objects and dark anodized aluminum--it contaminates > practially all synthetic pile fabrics that I can find in my house. > So you can't just hunt down dark purple things and change their > color. (By the way, if you shoot social events and students in > classrooms in Seattle in the winter, you are going to encounter a > lot of pile jackets and incandescent light, so this is not some > obscure rare combination, at least for my use.) > > The Tiffen hot mirror filter which I used in these experiments is > obviously too weak to restore all the colors (especially for the > green pile fabric), so I have a better UV/IR cut filter on order--a > Heliopan 8152. > > Some philosophical notes: > > I have been using these other cameras for some time now, and I > always had more trouble getting indoor shots from the R-D1 and D2h > to look "right". There was some indescernible purpleness about > these photographs that reminded me of faded advertising posters. In > comparison the D200 photographs looked rich and vibrant. Now I > understand the source of the problem. I'll be using the IR cut > filters on the other cameras when the situation warrants. I have > also noticed that foliage never looks right in the IR sensitive > cameras--it's always a funny spring green. I will wager anything > that this comes from high IR reflections in plant leaves, even > under daylight. > > One huge difference between a film and digital camera is that the > spectral sensitivity functions of the digital camera R, G, and B > channels are fixed forever. You can't change the spectral > sensitivities by simply loading a different brand or type of film. > Since this is the case, I think it would make life easier for > serious photographers if digital camera manufacturers would measure > the spectral sensitivity functions of their cameras and publish > them, just as Kodak does with their films. With such a graph you > can tell at a glance if the camera has significant IR or UV > sensitivity, and you can pick your lens filters accordingly. > > > > > > > Mark Davison > > > > _______________________________________________ > Leica Users Group. > See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information >