Jump to content
UltravioletPhotography

Atlantic Waves IR


Recommended Posts

D300-mod + Nikon 18-105mm f/3.5-5.6G AF IF-E @ 35mm + B+W092 Infrared-Pass Filter

f/8 for 1/1000" @ ISO-400

 

Atlantic Waves at Sandy Hook National Recreation Area, New Jersey

2010.09.02

 

atlantic_ir092_sun_20100902sandyHookNraNJ_16636.jpg

 

 

Can't decide which version. This 2nd frame is supposed to be a bit sharper, but does not look so when posted here. Oh well.

atlantic_ir092_sun_20100902sandyHookNraNJ_16636V2.jpg

Link to comment
Andy Perrin

Pretty! I think it would be better if you removed the color noise, though? 2nd frame does look sharper to me.

 

Also, do you have some hot-spotting going on there?

Link to comment

There was such a heavy atmosphere that day. It was extremely humid and hot with one of those glaring scrims of cloud/fog. Added to this was a certain amount of glop floating over from New York City. (In spite of being so near the City, we actually do not have that many days at Sandy Hook where everything piles up and creates this foggy/smoggy mess.)

 

Interestingly, all that produced a rather unusual false colour in place of the typical blue/rose or cyan/magenta we usually see from a Red+IR pass filter, depending on whether you click-white or channel swap. Anyway, I did try various color noise removal tricks, but could not totally get rid of the color noise. I think that it is not always possible for such heavy atmospherics. (Have seen this kind of thing before in ocean work.) The line of the waves and the line of the beach surf together with the odd false colours pleased me, so I decided to post it anyway. B)

 

I don't notice any hotspots on this retina screen. There are some serious vertical reflections going on with the white froth of the breaking waves. This has created some vertical light/dark striations all along under the incoming wave. There is one larger wave reflection in the center. Would that be the area you are referring to? I will try to go look on another monitor to see if that changes anything.

 

Added: And the old D300 was rather noisy. But I don't want to blame it too much because it was a really great UV/IR cam if you stayed around ISO-200. It had a nice way with color. I don't quite know how to describe what I saw in its color, but it was delicious.

Link to comment
Andy Perrin
don't notice any hotspots on this retina screen. There are some serious vertical reflections going on with the white froth of the breaking waves. This has created some vertical light/dark striations all along under the incoming wave. There is one larger wave reflection in the center. Would that be the area you are referring to? I will try to go look on another monitor to see if that changes anything.

Nah, I meant the fact that the color of the sky and ground noticeably changes in the corners of the image? Gets much more red to my eye, although as we know, I'm not great at color detection, so it might look green to someone else? But hue definitely changes.

 

Regarding the noise, Neat Image did this?

post-94-0-40913400-1523410625.jpg

Link to comment

Yes, that's much better than anything I have! So thanks for this demo. :)

 

There is a good global de-noise in the Capture NX2 development section, but it can't be brushed in over the sky area. And for reasons known only to the NX2 developers (from years and years ago), the other de-noise tool in the Edit steps (which can be selectively brushed in) is not as good.

 

Can Neat Image be applied locally (selectively)? Or is it a global tool?

Link to comment
Andy Perrin
All photoshop filters can be applied locally by selecting with the lasso. This was a global edit, though!
Link to comment

It seemed to do a good job on just the noise without softening too much other detail. Nice.

 

I should look into getting Neat Image because a lot of the (as yet unedited!) older D200 and D300 UV/IR work is rather noisy. Things improved noise-wise with the move to D600 and later D610. But UV tends to be prone to noise because it's so hard to get sufficient UV illumination for short exposures. ISO gets cranked up for UV and/or exposures are long. Then the white-balance step, when used, brings out the more noisy blue.

 

A certain amount of noise, both color and luminance, "disappears" in print or when the photo is downsized. But not always, of course. And I don't mind small amounts of grainy noise because it makes the photo look more like a photo. Too smooth and you get a watercolor feel which I don't like.

 

Ok, enough rambling on here by me...... B)

Link to comment

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...