Digital IR

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jim Noel

I understand the camera image, but how was it converted?
Thanks

---

Jim, If it was one of my images, here is a short description.

Use an in-camera custom white balance for the 720nm IR filter.
Expose, creating a RAW image file.
Load RAW file into Photoshop CC.
In Adobe Camera Raw, load the IR camera profile for the D810.
Make any adjustments you want in ACR.
In Photoshop, duplicate the initial background layer (name it Action).
I then run an action I got from LifePixel that does a lot of magic but is titled 'IR Channel Swap w/ White Foliage'.
Although the above does a bunch of levels, etc. I then do the following.
I add a levels layer and adjust to taste.
I add a brightness/contrast layer and adjust to taste.

That is about it.

The action from LifePixel comes from their free class, that is offered when you convert a camera.

I just tried putting a Hoya RM72 filter on a lens on my Nikon Z9. The Z9 has a mode, starlight, that amps up the view through the finder, and it makes it possible to autofocus in extremely low light. I"m told it allows one to focus on a star on a moonless night. Anyway, through the filter the viewfinder did get grainy, but I could see everything clearly. Autofocus worked.....sometimes. Manual focus with peaking worked great. The camera also allows shutter speeds up to 900 seconds. Once the weather gets nicer, it'll be fun to give it a try. I was thinking of getting my D850 converted, but now I'm considering selling it, as I can still get what I paid for it, and putting the money towards some Z lenses.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Peter De Smidt

I just tried putting a Hoya RM72 filter on a lens on my Nikon Z9. The Z9 has a mode, starlight, that amps up the view through the finder, and it makes it possible to autofocus in extremely low light. I"m told it allows one to focus on a star on a moonless night. Anyway, through the filter the viewfinder did get grainy, but I could see everything clearly. Autofocus worked.....sometimes. Manual focus with peaking worked great. The camera also allows shutter speeds up to 900 seconds. Once the weather gets nicer, it'll be fun to give it a try. I was thinking of getting my D850 converted, but now I'm considering selling it, as I can still get what I paid for it, and putting the money towards some Z lenses.

---

Wow! You bought the Z9! You lucky guy! Show us how it works with IR!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jon.oman

Wow! You bought the Z9! You lucky guy! Show us how it works with IR!

---

I am lucky! Everything just came together....It better work out for me, 'cause I won't be buying any other photo gear for a very long time. The weather is really crappy here, though. We just got 2 inches of snow yesterday, and we're more than a month away from leaves on the trees, but soon....

Nice camera, Peter. Use it in good health!
I also have a new camera. An older GFX 50r that I had converted to 720nm.
My first shots with it, taken this morning at my usual testing grounds:

https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/...cc1be150_b.jpg

And the B&W conversion

https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/...fc1aff4d_b.jpg

Thanks, Ari. That image looks great. Good job on the BW conversion. That should be a really outstanding camera for IR! If I were starting from scratch, I'd be really tempted by the Fuji system. My Ebay moniker is: fujinon. :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Peter De Smidt

Thanks, Ari. That image looks great. Good job on the BW conversion. That should be a really outstanding camera for IR! If I were starting from scratch, I'd be really tempted by the Fuji system. My Ebay moniker is: fujinon. :)

---

The GFX is certainly worth a hard look, Peter. Lots of pros on the GFX groups decided to sell off their R5 and Z9 cameras to fund a GFX.
I've done away with everything else except 8x10, and it's all the fault of the Fuji.

GFX, 35-70, IR720, ND5.0

https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/...ab9a93b2_b.jpg

Ari, some nice images!

Great stuff, Ari!

Jere a quick test:
https://www.dropbox.com/s/c65t9jlaye...Pine.jpg?raw=1

Z9, 60mm, RM72, ISO64, F/8, 1 minute.

In starlight mode, the camera autofocused successfully, although it took about 1 second. Not having to cover the eyepiece is a huge relief. Even with a custom white balance, the image is still very red. Maybe I can fix that. Obviously, one has to learn to live with subject motion.

https://www.dropbox.com/s/cqiwjfbgan...eash.jpg?raw=1

https://www.dropbox.com/s/9ns4a9jc0w...ling.jpg?raw=1

Thanks, guys.
Peter, very smoooooth image. Well done.

Went looking for the plainest scene I could find, and then tried to make it more interesting by processing it differently than I would normally.
GFX, IR720, TS-E 24mm

https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/...3bd7fc2d_b.jpg

Great job on the processing, Ari!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Peter De Smidt

Great stuff, Ari!

Jere a quick test:
https://www.dropbox.com/s/c65t9jlaye...Pine.jpg?raw=1

Z9, 60mm, RM72, ISO64, F/8, 1 minute.

In starlight mode, the camera autofocused successfully, although it took about 1 second. Not having to cover the eyepiece is a huge relief. Even with a custom white balance, the image is still very red. Maybe I can fix that. Obviously, one has to learn to live with subject motion.

https://www.dropbox.com/s/cqiwjfbgan...eash.jpg?raw=1

https://www.dropbox.com/s/9ns4a9jc0w...ling.jpg?raw=1

---

Nice! It will help to create a camera profile. That will eliminate the red cast. You may have to do it in steps.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Peter De Smidt

Great job on the processing, Ari!

---

I concur!

Thanks, guys. Very kind!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jon.oman

Nice! It will help to create a camera profile. That will eliminate the red cast. You may have to do it in steps.

---

Jon, do you mean a custom white balance, or something else? Unfortunately, the Z9 hasn't let me make a custom white balance with the filter on. It must be out of range. Adjusting the WB manually in both axis gets a less red result, but not a really good one. White balancing in LR does a better job. This isn't a big deal, as I can see the image in the finder well enough even if it's tinted red.

Oh, I know. I could always switch to monochrome. That would get rid of the red cast. I don't really care about seeing the scene in color.

I think Jon meant creating a profile for your IR camera, which isn't difficult. Once done, the profile can be applied in LR or ACR, then you make adjustments and channel swap (if desired).
Here are instructions: https://robertreiser.photography/pro...-in-lightroom/
You need to download DNG Profile Editor first.
Then with the filter on, take a piece of white paper outside in the sun, and use that as your custom WB.

Thanks, Ari. If I understand rightly, that's for getting a color image in LR, right? Since I only do BW photos with IR, I don't think that'd help me. What I'd like is a better view through the viewfinder while I'm photographing. A custom white balance in the camera helps, but it could be better. Switching the picture control to Monochrome removes any cast in the pictures taken, but not the view in the finder before and while a picture is taken. It's a firmware issue. When I click on the I menu, which just brings up an on-screen menu on the camera, and I click 'monochrome,' the image through the finder (and rear screen) turns black and white, but only while the I menu is active, and the menu takes up 1/3 of the screen. As soon as I dismiss the menu, the image through the finder goes back to color, even though the images taken appear as BW using the image review on the camera.

Peter, Ari is correct. And the link he gives is the one I used to create my Adobe D810 camera profile. For in-camera viewing purposes, you can set your 'picture control' to monochrome. But, make sure you output a RAW image file. Then, instead of using the default Adobe camera profile, load the Z9 camera profile you made following the instructions that are in the link Ari gave you. That should eliminate the red cast. You can then set a white balance in ACR. Finally, load into Photoshop and do your channel swap and B&W conversion if that is what you want to end up with.

Hi Peter,
It's for both color and B&W. A side effect of going through the DNG Profiler is that the WB range in your LR/ACR will greatly expand, more in line with what you need for IR.
So it would be a benefit no matter what you shoot.
And your images will look better coming out of the camera, too.
I'm not sure if your other issue is firmware-related, I think many people report the same thing with regards to how the camera previews and renders. But I could be wrong about that.
Either way, if you have all the tools set up properly, you're better armed against what IR will throw at you.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ari

Hi Peter,
It's for both color and B&W. A side effect of going through the DNG Profiler is that the WB range in your LR/ACR will greatly expand, more in line with what you need for IR.
So it would be a benefit no matter what you shoot.
And your images will look better coming out of the camera, too.
I'm not sure if your other issue is firmware-related, I think many people report the same thing with regards to how the camera previews and renders. But I could be wrong about that.
Either way, if you have all the tools set up properly, you're better armed against what IR will throw at you.

---

Hey, we posted at the same time!

Got it, Guys. Thanks! I used to make bi-illuminant profiles with the Adobe profile maker.....Just a note: Nikon View NX software white balances just find with IR photos, but the software is otherwise so bad that Ill never use it. Another way to go is to do as best you can in LR, and then make a mask such that the whole image is selected. This is easy to do by making a gradient outside of the image area. You can add a white balance and hue adjustment to the mask. IF it doesn't go far enough, you can duplicate the mask. Doing this, I got really close the the View NX result. I don't have time to go the profile route tonight any more, but I'll give it a try later in the week. Thanks again.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jon.oman

Peter, Ari is correct. And the link he gives is the one I used to create my Adobe D810 camera profile. For in-camera viewing purposes, you can set your 'picture control' to monochrome. But, make sure you output a RAW image file. Then, instead of using the default Adobe camera profile, load the Z9 camera profile you made following the instructions that are in the link Ari gave you. That should eliminate the red cast. You can then set a white balance in ACR. Finally, load into Photoshop and do your channel swap and B&W conversion if that is what you want to end up with.

---

Peter, I can confirm Jon is also correct. :)
Also, since Nikon is alien gear to me, and Jon knows it very well, I'd take his advice, not mine.

Moving to the topic of filters, for my general polarizer and neutral density filters, I greatly prefer magnetic filters, such as the ones form Kase. I get them in the largest size I need, and then use adapters for smaller diameter lenses. The filters just pop on and off, instead of having to be screwed on. This makes changing filters much easier, especially when the camera is in an awkward position. Today I saw that there's an ICE 760nm magnetic filter: https://www.amazon.com/Infrared-Infr..._t1_B09HQ6FQH1
I ordered one, and I'll report back after I give it a try. They claim to only have a 10 stop reduction in light, which seems odd, as my Hoya R72 is more like 15 stops. If that's really true, it would be very welcome.

Well, I just thought about this, and the filter could really only cut 10 stops, but then the IR blocking filter in the camera could cut more.....Oh, well. I had my hopes up. I'm hoping the exposures aren't much longer than I currently use....

I will have to check out magnetic filters. I always worry about damaging the threads on the lens while putting a filter on it.

I went with the most color-neutral filters I know of, and they're also affordable: Haida's M10 filters.
I only use ND filters: ND1.8, ND3.0 and ND5.0
The M10 II filter holder is nice and works very well, a drop-in holder, and there's a wide range of M10 filters.
You have to buy connecting rings for each thread size, they're made of good aluminum, and also inexpensive.

I agree 100% with what this guy says about the M10 system:

https://youtu.be/-KTXotBYk7c

That looks like a good system, Ari.

Anyway, I did the profile thing, and then I processed out another photo from the other day.

https://www.dropbox.com/s/ttn868ckl7...file.jpg?raw=1

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Peter De Smidt

That looks like a good system, Ari.

Anyway, I did the profile thing, and then I processed out another photo from the other day.

https://www.dropbox.com/s/ttn868ckl7...file.jpg?raw=1

---

More nuanced, better range of tones. It looks a lot more balanced.
What do you think? Any issues in processing?

Like some of the newer filter companies, Haida uses the Schott glass formula (patent expired) to make their filters. Haida's been in the filter business for a long time.
I've used them for several years, and what brings me back to them each time is the color neutrality.
One less thing to deal with, and the filters are clear and sharp.

Thanks, Ari. It was pretty straight forward.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Peter De Smidt

That looks like a good system, Ari.

Anyway, I did the profile thing, and then I processed out another photo from the other day.

https://www.dropbox.com/s/ttn868ckl7...file.jpg?raw=1

---

Overall, I think it looks better.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Peter De Smidt

Thanks, Ari. If I understand rightly, that's for getting a color image in LR, right? Since I only do BW photos with IR, I don't think that'd help me. What I'd like is a better view through the viewfinder while I'm photographing. A custom white balance in the camera helps, but it could be better. Switching the picture control to Monochrome removes any cast in the pictures taken, but not the view in the finder before and while a picture is taken. It's a firmware issue. When I click on the I menu, which just brings up an on-screen menu on the camera, and I click 'monochrome,' the image through the finder (and rear screen) turns black and white, but only while the I menu is active, and the menu takes up 1/3 of the screen. As soon as I dismiss the menu, the image through the finder goes back to color, even though the images taken appear as BW using the image review on the camera.

---

Hi Peter,

I use IR pretty much only for monochrome images, and only process from RAW files in Camera Raw. However, for actually shooting I select a Camera Effect that allows me to see the image more or less as it may look once I finish processing the RAW file. What I see is of course only a JPEG image that serves only the purpose of allowing me to get a good idea of what I can do in Camera Raw in processing the RAW file. How the image on your camera actually looks is a bit camera specific but the process is similar with both Sony a7r cameras and Fuji GFX.

Once the image file is in Camera Raw I adjust all of the components of the image to create my personal interpretation of the scene. This may look like what I originally imagines, or as I work on the image file it may take creative paths that reveal themselves as the work is in progress. Once I have finalized a close approximation of what I want I sometimes choose to run the image file through some method of HDR as in some cases this can enhance certain tonal values of the image.

At a later stage, if I decide to actually make a print I will usually make a carbon print, and at that stage I choose a specific color or shade that may make the image more interesting than just a plain black and white.

Sandy

Thanks, Sandy. I did the same thing with my D600, i.e. set the picture control to monochrome. The file was still a raw RGB file, but image review was monochrome, which helped making various judgements. I can do the same thing with the Z9. I just wish I could change the real time view through the finder to BW. The camera can do that when the menu for Monochrome is pulled up, but then as soon as a choice is made, it returns to color.

The 760nm filter arrived today. It's getting dark, and the Z9 was able to autofocus once, but it was really slow. I'll have to see what thing are like when it's brighter out. At the moment, it seems like a 720nm or less filter would be much easier to use.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Peter De Smidt

The 760nm filter arrived today. It's getting dark, and the Z9 was able to autofocus once, but it was really slow. I'll have to see what thing are like when it's brighter out. At the moment, it seems like a 720nm or less filter would be much easier to use.

---

I suspect that the best filter for a camera that has not been converted to IR or all spectrum would be a 580 nm filter. This wavelength allows a lot of red light to pass, which should make it easy to focus, but typically a lot of IR will also pass. If you process in Camera Raw you can eliminate the Red to get a true IR look. This filter is also favored by those who plan to swap colors (Red>Blue) as the Red is much stronger than with 720 nm.

Sandy

Thanks Sandy!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sanking

I suspect that the best filter for a camera that has not been converted to IR or all spectrum would be a 580 nm filter. This wavelength allows a lot of red light to pass, which should make it easy to focus, but typically a lot of IR will also pass. If you process in Camera Raw you can eliminate the Red to get a true IR look. This filter is also favored by those who plan to swap colors (Red>Blue) as the Red is much stronger than with 720 nm.

Sandy

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sanking

I suspect that the best filter for a camera that has not been converted to IR or all spectrum would be a 580 nm filter. This wavelength allows a lot of red light to pass, which should make it easy to focus, but typically a lot of IR will also pass. If you process in Camera Raw you can eliminate the Red to get a true IR look. This filter is also favored by those who plan to swap colors (Red>Blue) as the Red is much stronger than with 720 nm.

Sandy

---

The only expensive filter I purchased for my full spectrum D810 from LifePixel was the 'Super Color Infrared' filter. It is 590nm. It has all the advantages you list here.

Here is a comparison provided by LifePixel: https://www.lifepixel.com/infrared-filters-choices

Jon, next SS check will buy that filter

Thank you!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jon.oman

The only expensive filter I purchased for my full spectrum D810 from LifePixel was the 'Super Color Infrared' filter. It is 590nm. It has all the advantages you list here.

Here is a comparison provided by LifePixel: https://www.lifepixel.com/infrared-filters-choices

---

Thanks, Sandy. I expect you're right.

I just tried the 760nm filter in bright sun. The Z9 was able to autofocus through the filter, but it took a couple of seconds. Unfortunately, the exposure indicator stops working at shutters speeds longer than 30 seconds. Yeah, I don't know why. At EI 64, F/8, and 30s, the indicator was off the chart low. I tried 60 seconds just to see. Increasing exposure in LR 3 stops, the file looked pretty good. The dark tones would be ok for a super contrasty look, but.....I don't want 1 minute exposures in bright light. With an R72 filter, I'm usually in the 4-20 second range, which is generally ok for me. I'm going to be on the lookout for a 95mm magnetic filter at 720nw or less, as I want to get a Z14-30 lens. 82mm would work for most things but would likely vignette at 14mm on the lens....but maybe that's ok. I could bite the bullet and get a threaded filter in 95mm for Kolarivision or Lifepixel, but I'd rather not.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Peter De Smidt

Thanks, Sandy. I expect you're right.

I just tried the 760nm filter in bright sun. The Z9 was able to autofocus through the filter, but it took a couple of seconds. Unfortunately, the exposure indicator stops working at shutters speeds longer than 30 seconds. Yeah, I don't know why. At EI 64, F/8, and 30s, the indicator was off the chart low. I tried 60 seconds just to see. Increasing exposure in LR 3 stops, the file looked pretty good. The dark tones would be ok for a super contrasty look, but.....I don't want 1 minute exposures in bright light. With an R72 filter, I'm usually in the 4-20 second range, which is generally ok for me. I'm going to be on the lookout for a 95mm magnetic filter at 720nw or less, as I want to get a Z14-30 lens. 82mm would work for most things but would likely vignette at 14mm on the lens....but maybe that's ok. I could bite the bullet and get a threaded filter in 95mm for Kolarivision or Lifepixel, but I'd rather not.

---

Does someone make a threaded to magnetic adaptor?

Hi Jon,

Sure, a bunch of ones do. Kasefilter, Haida, Desmond/ice, and probably others. There are so many new brands.....You have to use an adapter, as the magnetic filters need a steel ring that they can stick to. So, for example, you put a Kase magnetic filter adapter on the lens. You can then use a magnetic lens cap. Take the cap off and simply set the filter in place. What that kind of system, there's no need to thread on filters in the field. For me, threading a filter is often not a problem, but sometimes it is, because the camera is in a difficult position, and it's especially important if I don't want the camera to move at all when I change filters.

Honestly, this was more important with my D600 and a R72 filter than with the Z9. With the D600, I had to take the IR filter off to compose and focus a photo. With the Z9, I don't have to, and so having magnetic filters isn't quite as important....but I already have a bunch of big (and expensive!) ones, and so I'd like to stick to that system.

https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/...b7d43a79_o.jpg
Football by tuco, on Flickr

M9, Voigtländer Nokton 50/1.5, R72 Filter

https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/...074a9fe0_o.jpg
The Press Box by tuco, on Flickr

M9, Zeiss 35/2, R72 Filter

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tuco

https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/...b7d43a79_o.jpg
Football by tuco, on Flickr

M9, Voigtländer Nokton 50/1.5, R72 Filter

---

I like this!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jon.oman

I like this!

---

Me, too! That was really well done, Tuco.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jon.oman

I like this!

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Peter De Smidt

Me, too! That was really well done, Tuco.

---

Thanks you guys.

https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/...c481564b_o.jpg
Clean Air Zone by tuco, on Flickr

M9, Zeiss 35/2, Hoya R72 Filter

I did some quick tests this morning with a Z14-30 lens and a cheap 82mm 720nm filter. There might be a little vignetting from the filter, but it's very minor. Autofocusing through the filter was fine. I used ISOs from 64 - 16,000. Even 16,000 had much less noise than Kodak High Speed Infrared. It might be useful to minimize subject motion, if needed. As you go up in iso, dynamic range goes down, but even on a sunny day, with corresponding deep shadows, the dynamic range of the camera was plenty. A good site to check for these things is: https://www.photonstophotos.net/Charts/PDR.htm
It will tell you if you have a dual gain sensor. For example, with my Z9, if I go higher than ISO100, I might as well go to ISO500, as it has less noise than the intermediate ISOs.

https://www.dropbox.com/s/75u125nlu7...so64.jpg?raw=1

https://www.dropbox.com/s/rsfzyxzed0lxhvp/16K.jpg?raw=1

The first photo is at ISO 64. The second is at ISO 16K.

At 14mm, the lens looked a bit soft in the corners, but there was wind.....I'll have to do a brick wall test when I'm feeling a bit better.

Good news for me

I have a 720 and no chance of Vignetting on my crop frame Z

Now I need to find it!

Peter, Interesting test. That lens is on my wish list. Although I would also like the 14-24!