Jump to content
UltravioletPhotography

[Filter Test] Schott UG5 + S8612 Stack with and without UV-flash


Andrea B.

Recommended Posts

I find a difference using this UG5 + S8612 stack under sunlight illumination versus SB14-mod UV flash illumination.

 

This is not a particular surprise, but if using this stack for Bee Vision (BV), then please be aware of the potential illumination differences.

 

This is an Oxeye Daisy (Leucanthemum vulgare), ubiquitous in Maine during the summer. The white, UV-absorbing rays would stimulate a Bee's blue and green receptors for a possible cyan colour. The yellow, UV-absorbing disk flowers would stimulate a Bee's green receptors.

 

D600-broadband + 105/4.5 UV-Nikkor + SB14-mod + UG5/S8612 Filter Stack

Simulated Bee Vision [f/16 for 1.6" @ ISO-200]

Darn it, the EXIF is incorrect on this one because it was in a Photoshop Stack when I saved it. Sorry about that.

The info in brackets is correct.

With the UV-flash, the flower rays in this foto seem too blue compared to the next version made in natural light.

600_8420pnPs.jpg

 

 

 

D600-broadband + 105/4.5 UV-Nikkor + Sun + UG5/S8612 Filter Stack

Simulated Bee Vision [f/15 for 15" @ ISO-200]

600_8422pnPs.jpg

Link to comment

Here is the 3rd version.

 

D600-broadband + 105/4.5 UV-Nikkor + On-board Flash + UG5/S8612 Filter Stack

Simulated Bee Vision [f/16 for 5" @ ISO-200]

With the on-board flash the expected cyan rays become a bit greener.

leucanthemumVulgare_ug5s8612Flash_20150725shoreCottageME_36469pn01.jpg

Link to comment

I'm not sure if there is a conclusion to this test. I suppose it would be that if you want a good simulation of Bee Vision, then photograph your subject in natural sunlight. That is, of course, the light in which the Bees see. :) However, the preceding fotos only represent a BV model. We are just "guessing" how the Bees really see.

 

 

***************

 

D600-broadband + 105/4.5 UV-Nikkor + On-board Flash + BaaderU UV-Pass Filter

Ultraviolet Light [f/16 for 20" @ ISO-200]

The long exposure enabled 3 UV-flashes.

In UV light the Oxeye Daisy is very UV-absorbing.

leucanthemumVulgare_uvBaadSB14_20150725shoreCottageME_3642801.jpg

 

 

D600-broadband + 105/4.5 UV-Nikkor + On-board Flash + Baader UV/IR-Cut Filter

Visible Light [f/16 for 1/5" @ ISO-200]

leucanthemumVulgare_visFlash_20150725shoreCottageME_36386pn01.jpg

Link to comment
I think you should experiment with the w/b and input light profile on these photos. After all, the flash and the sun are spectrally different.
Link to comment

These were profiled. What am I doing wrong I wonder??

Perhaps I should try a Visible CC Passport profile. Maybe not enough UV passes this combo?

Link to comment

Here are the rawest of the raw versions from Raw Digger.

Left to Right: Sun - Flash - SB14.

Expand browser to see 750px-wide row.

The Sun & Flash versions are certainly closer than the SB14 version and are similar in tone.

When the SB14 is used, more of the UV signature comes out as seen in the darker tones of the rays.

That cannot be brought closer to the Sun or Flash version by profiling.

leucanthemumVulgare_ug5s8612Sun_20150725shoreCottageME_36443_nef.jpgleucanthemumVulgare_ug5s8612Flash_20150725shoreCottageME_36469_nef.jpgleucanthemumVulgare_ug5s8612sb14_20150725shoreCottageME_36441_nef2.jpg

 

 

Here is Raw Digger's version of auto white balance.

Left to Right: Sun - Flash - SB14.

Expand browser to see 750px-wide row.

leucanthemumVulgare_ug5s8612Sun_20150725shoreCottageME_36443_nefautowb.jpgleucanthemumVulgare_ug5s8612Flash_20150725shoreCottageME_36469_nefautowb.jpgleucanthemumVulgare_ug5s8612sb14_20150725shoreCottageME_36441_nefautowb.jpg

Link to comment

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...