Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2007/02/05
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]
On 05/02/2007, at 15:53, Robert Rose wrote:
> Some more IR images, from the Getty Museum in Los Angeles.
>
> http://gallery.leica-users.org/v/rjrose/IR/L1000407.jpg.html
> http://gallery.leica-users.org/v/rjrose/IR/L1000412.jpg.html
> http://gallery.leica-users.org/v/rjrose/IR/L1000421.jpg.html
>
> There are two non-IR images in the same album, to compare. Which
> do you think works better?
>
> The amount of exposure necessary really varies throughout the day.
> The A setting does a good job on exposure. At times really high
> ISO is needed, but the noise ("grain") reminds me of the grain from
> Kodak High Speed Infrared.
>
> A red filter doesn't seem to work well.
>
> Some of the images (not these) are fuzzy. I am pretty sure that it
> is not focus shift; perhaps it is a cousin to blooming that occurs
> in IR film. Sharpening helps, as does slight underexposure.
>
> I am using Adobe Camera Raw to open the DNG file. I turn on the
> clipping warnings, and then adjust the Temperature and tint to
> minimize clipping. Then I use Nik Color Efex Pro; BW Conversion
> Tonal Enhancer to convert to BW, and then do a final adjustment
> using Levels. Bringing the middle slider up seems to make the
> image more dramatic.
>
> Lots of fun research ahead.
>
> Cheers,
> Bob Rose
Well, it seems there is a whole world of IR images about to
"explode". IR has always had uses, but carrying and using the film is
hard: this looks like a great alternative: thanks for researching it ;-)
Cheers