Search the Community

This is a very informal topic, but I still find it interesting because it shows how deep learning models such as DALL-E 2 have "learned" what a NIR photo looks like (especially the Wood effect). I tried the same with UV, but only got UVIVF images, which shows how little known reflected UV photography is. These AI models are a reflection of what people know (and what is posted online). Not surprisingly, NIR photography is much more known than the UV counterpart. All images have been entirely generated using DALL-E 2. No edits were done, posted at full resolution (1024x1024). The prompt for all images is "Near infrared photography".

Castle Ennsegg is located in the Austrian city of Enns (https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schloss_Ennsegg, sorry, no English Wiki for this, perhaps this will serve: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enns_(city)). Enns is famous (well, within the country) for two reasons: 1. In Roman times, it was a pretty important town, going by the name of Lauriacum (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lauriacum). 2. It was given city-rights in the year 1212, and the corresponding document is the oldes one of its kind in Austria, making Enns the oldest city of Austria. Due to its particular shape it's not as splendid as other castles, but it's very popular for weddings (as you can see in one of the photos, where the wedding party is seen waiting for the happy couple. The statue in from of it goes by the name "Der Mensch - ein Empfangender" (The Human - a recieving One). All the photos taken with Canon EOS 6D, fixed 700nm, and Canon 17-40mm lens

Recently the 50th anniversary of the release of Pink Floyd's Dark Side Of The Moon was observed. Remember that poster insert that came with the original LP? If you look at the original full size Dark Side poster you can see reddish weeds in the foreground soil which really gives away that it was color IR. (I can't post a hi-res version here because I'm sure it's still copyrighted). I realized at the time it was probably a false-color infrared photo as it looked rather similar to this one I took at White Sands NM on Ektachrome IR with a #21 orange filter in the Spring of 1973. From what I can gather on the internet the poster photo was taken by Storm Thorgerson (PF's longtime graphic arts guy) while visiting the Giza pyramids. What I have never seen is an explanation of of how the image was made. I believe it likely was taken on Kodak Ektachrome Infrared (or Infrared Aerochrome 2443) with an orange or light red filter. Does anyone have any more about this?

Hello, my name is Fedia, I'm 31 and I spend lot of time creating images through digital photography. I'm stoked to be able to join this forum since it has been an incredible ressource without which I couldn't have developed the techniques I use today. I have talked to some of the people of this forum on other platforms, used their advice and want to thank them also. I've been doing photography since 2014 when I entered film school. I got my first full spectrum camera in the fall of 2020. Even before I got into full spectrum photography, the main thread I explored was color, that I achieved through filters or extreme white balance settings on regular cameras. Even today with full spcetrum photography I don't really use softwares. I try to do everything in camera. Therefore I exclusively shoot jpegs and only work contrast in Lightroom. I never opened Photoshop. I am a big technical nerd I guess you could say, but the truth is my relation to technicity has a lot to do with my artistic sensitivity, both are entangled. I have a lot of ideas of subjects to discuss on this forum so I will post about them in the near-future. But for now I figured I will post some of my photos to introduce myself. Every one of the following photos are the result of a different filter combination with no color processing outside of the body of the camera. I will precise the camera and the filters each time. Canon 1000D full spectrum + Lee "CID to Tungsten" Canon 1000D FS + Lee "loving amber" + db850 Canon 1200D FS + DB850 + Lee "Liberty green" Canon 1000D + unknown dark pink gel Canon 1000D + Lee "steel blue" Canon 1200D FS + Lee "peacock blue" + GRB3 Canon 1200D FS + hoya 80A + hoya x(0) + cokin 089 (warm diffuser) Sigma DP1s FS Sigma DP1s FS + Hoya 80C Sigma DP1s FS + GRB3 Bonus : Sigma DP1s FS no filter. If you want to see more I have an instagram : https://www.instagram.com/fedialebarboc/?hl=fr And a tumblr : https://fedialegrill.tumblr.com/ Thanks again, Fedia.

Last Sunday it was more cloudy so I returned to Borgeby Slott and it's surroundings. I had two objectives for the trip. One, to test yet another lens for IR. Two, to get some photos of the castle in a less contrasty illumination. Down by the river there were more activity by the canoe rental shed and out on the water. I saw people on SUP-boards, in sea kayaks and canoes. Camera: FS-converted Sony A7III, Filters Zomei 850nm, on the Irix lenses rear putty mounted filter glass rounds from 37mm filter rings, else front mounted filters. Irix 15mm f/8 By the Canoe rental shed I got some interesting photos. Irix 11mm at f/6.3 Irix 11mm at f/6.3 The innermost canoe was blue while the rest were green causing the difference in brightness. I wanted these two images to be darkish to enhance the dramatic feeling of the clash between man made objects and the naturalistic surroundings of the dark river, the trees and clouds. I have always had a soft spot for wide angle lenses. The Irix 11mm is my most extreme one and I am very happy that I got it. I was inspired to buy it by Birnas photo of the Camaro wreck here on the forum. I know that you have to compose very carefully to avoid too much of the stretching effect of a rectilinear super wide angle lens. It was easier than I expected. When down by the river I took some new photos of the river alone: Irix 15mm at f/8 Canon TS-E 24mm at f/10

Yesterday I went to revisit the site for the image "Gated community", to see how it turned out in 850nm NIR in the summer: https://www.ultravioletphotography.com/content/index.php?/topic/5650-gated-community/#comment-60102 A new topic will come later about that. On my way home I spotted an interesting shape of what I thought was a dead tree that I hoped would give some interesting images. It turned out that the tree was not completely dead and had sprouted a rather long think branch at one side. Most of the three-top and branches are dead. I think that the tree lost some big branches in a big storm many years ago. A few tens of meters down the road there is another oak of the same size that looks to be of the same age. I used my Irix 15mm lens at f/9 with a rear putty-mounted 850nm filter and on my FS-converted Sony A7III for these images. Images are reduced in size to fit the forum pages. The original 6024 x 4024 pixel images has a lot of small interesting details. The lens is very sharp

Yesterday I went to revisit the site for the image "Gated community", to see how it turned out in 850nm NIR in the summer: https://www.ultravioletphotography.com/content/index.php?/topic/5650-gated-community/#comment-60102 When I arrived the sky had cleared up without any clouds in sight. That led to very contrasty images with a pitch black sky, as normal for some NIR 850nm images. Maybe I could return later for less contrasty images when the sky is slightly veiled. This time I could not bring out the magic of the scene I got in November due to the light. I think I have found the same camera position ans lens settings as the first image. The low contrast of the stems of the trees in the background is not due to any hotspot. I have not seen any problems with this lens with hotspots. I think it is due to a very diffuse reflected illumination by the very IR-bright foliage around the trees. However, with the Irix 15mm lens at f/11 I got a rather nice picture of the garden and house, just beyond the gate: The elderly pair living in the house with their dog are very nice people. A bit down the road I found another interesting motif, a dam with water lilies: To me it gives a sense of calmness. Camera FS-converted Sony A7III. IR Filters Zomei 850nm. Lenses, first image Canon TS-E 24mm shifted upwards, Image 2 and 3 Irix 15/2.8 at f/10 All images can be magnified a bit by clicking on them and then click again to magnify.

Hello. How are you. Hi. Just a video guy who dilly dabbles around in all creative things. Ended up here because I was searching for how a 550 filter works on an unmodified camera. (Need to look at what I just shot to find out, lol). I currently work in infrared with an unmodified GFX50sII and a Hoya R72. I have an eos M awaiting full spectrum modification overseas. Can't wait to see what fun things I can learn by digging around and reading through some stuff. Just the sampling I saw trying to get in was pretty wild. Enclosed are some recent shots with the 50sII and the R72. Sorry if the images are too big. How do I make them less huge?

Lately I have been exploring NIR-photography with 850nm-filters and Tilt-shift lenses. Here is a result from my very first day, some weeks ago, checking out a used Canon TS-E 90mm lens with a Zomei 850nm filter: That day the view of the glittering water felt very inspiring. I like the high contrasts in the water against the soft clouds in the sky and how smaller and smaller waves further away give a perception of depth. I am very impressed with the sharpness and low distortion of the lens. The lens aperture was set at f/5 and tilted forward, to try to place the sharp focus wedge along the water. Close by the image is not quite sharp but further away it is. The image is downsampled ca 50% to be manageable in the forum. The black spec at the horizon is not a defect, but a smallish light house 6km away, the Höllviken lighthouse. Here is a crop at 200% of the original image file: : This picture is taken in a SSE direction. Here is a picture of the same lighthouse towards ENE: https://www.pxfuel.com/en/free-photo-jduvp

Having used the S3 both in UV and visible, I was curious to see what it might do on the other end of the spectrum; but there were some challenges to overcome. The first order of business was to improvise a filter, but I could not easily have a mount modified the way I did for the UV filter. I obtained a small R72 disk from Edmund of approximately the right diameter. I photographed some of my existing filters in the IR to see which blocked IR the least and selected the best candidate. Without destructively modifying the filter, I placed the R72 disk on top of the existing glass and sealed it in position with Blu-Tack putty, which gave me a filter assembly of the right type without undue lateral leakage, for which I tested. Next I selected film. There are as far as I know only two films currently available (other than old discontinued products) that have IR sensitivity: the Rollei IR400 and the Film Photography Project Infrapan. The second of these is a bit of an enigma, as the FPP which sells this offers almost no documentation, leaving the user largely guessing about such things as speed, filtration, and processing--what is this stuff, anyway? Some inquiry online led to the conclusion that it may be repurposed Agfa Aviphot 400, an extended-red aerial photography film with an infrared tail on its response curve. It is odd-looking stuff, with a yellowish dye in the raw emulsion and no frame numbers or other margin markings of any sort. In the end, I decided that I would shoot these films with a working ISO of 6 and process them together in Microphen, which I had already tried for the first film. I shot a test roll of the Rollei, using the camera's faster exposure range and more open apertures, but I immediately ran into a focus-shift problem, and apparently a wrong-way shift at that. Shooting only at the minimum aperture (f/16) was the only way to work around this, which fortunately made the problem largely go away; but I was stuck with using the camera's slow speed range and exposure times from 1/8 second to 1 second. One has to take care, as even the slightest tap on the tripod during a slow exposure can create smear bars and spoil the image. Some sample frames with the Rollei film follow. The alert observer will note that I still struggle with a light leak on the left margin at times--a trip to the shop failed to resolve the issue completely. The FPP film was the second to be tested: The FPP proved a bit faster than the Rollei under the circumstances, and the negatives were a bit overexposed; a working ISO of 12 or 25 might have been a better match with this processing. Both of these films are contrasty, without tremendous exposure latitude. The FPP might be a bit more contrasty than the Rollei. Both of these films also struggle to produce a really clean Wood effect, even with favorable filtration; foliage often comes out various shades of dirty grey rather than the snowy white so easily seen with digital sensors (or with older IR films that had deeper IR reach.) I have tried to work around this somewhat in post-processing, but the truth is that digital sensors are responsive to a wider range of IR than any film ever was, rendering the absorption tail of chlorophyll in the 710-730 nm range much less important. The present films probably have relatively little response beyond 760 nm, although some sensitivity out to 820 is claimed. Unfortunately for the film photographer, the days of HIE or Efke 820 are gone forever. Indifferent quality control is yet another issue: emulsion pinholes and other apparent defects are far more common than would have been tolerated 40 or even 20 years ago. So is there really any point to this? Undoubtedly, if one took a modern (converted) mirrorless digital camera, and equipped it with, say, a Laowa 9mm lens with the suitable IR filter, that rig would almost certainly outperform what we see here by almost any metric (and the cylindrical projection naturally produced by the film camera could be easily duplicated from a rectilinear original via software.) So if one has such equipment or can afford that for panoramic photography, the answer would have to be no. If, on the other hand, one wishes to dabble in panoramic IR without spending thousands on gear, (or, for that matter, if you are one of the film diehards for whom anything digital is anathema) this might be a way to do it. It should be emphasized that these considerations do not apply to UV photography, as lenses such as the Laowa would not be expected to do well in UV.

A month after I shot my first B&W infrared photos I tried a roll of Kodak Ektachrome Infrared color film. It was 50 years ago this month (Sep 1972). Here's a few images from that roll. Kodak recommended using a Wratten #12 deep yellow filter for best results. This first image was taken without a filter. It is interesting that the magenta color of vegetation is similar to that obtained with a modern digital camera converted for infrared and used raw without color-balancing. Kodak Ektachrome Infrared film with a Wratten#8 yellow filter. Kodak Ektachome Infrared film with a Wratten#22 orange filter. Kodak Ektachome Infrared film with a Wratten#25 red filter and polarizer. Kodak Ektachome Infrared film with a Wratten#22 orange filter and polarizer. I used a variety of color filters on this first roll to see the what the different effects would be. Only later did I appreciate the familiar perspective of a blue sky that the yellow filters produced. Well, it's a false-color film anyways so may as well have fun. At the time I actually preferred the dark sky look obtained with red filters. Here's some artifacts from that time including the original Kodak Gelatin filters. Kodak Ektachrome Infrared specsheet & box with Gelatin filters. (Only box I could find is from the 1980s version of the film) Kodak Ektachrome Infrared film couldn't be processed at home as no E-4 processing chemicals were offered for consumer use. In later years when E-6 completely took over none of the local labs would do E-4. It had to be mailed off to Kodak for development until the mid-1990s when they ended support for the E-4 process. About that time Kodak released a new version of color infrared called Aerochrome Infrared that used an AR-5 process but could also be processed at home using E-6 chemicals. I believe Kodak discontinued that film in the mid-2000s. A few similar films from other manufacturers existed until about 2010 but I'm not aware of any IR color film made since that time.

The tilted old fallen tree is shot through a 850nm IR pass filter. I wanted to get a feel of how to use a Canon TS-E 17/4.0 with all tilt and shift operations the lens is capable of. Here I tried to get the entire log sharp by tilting the lens and shooting at f/11. The goal partially failed as the top branches still are a bit fuzzy while the grass along the ground is rather sharp. The image above is reduced to 30% of the original to make it OK to post here. At 100% the image is still quite sharp when in focus. I am impressed by the performance. With a 850nm filter the lens is quite sharp as the wavelength span recorded is rather narrow. I expect that will not be the case if more of the shorter wavelengths are included in the image. Using the lens is a bit challenging with all adjustments and the need for aligning the camera well. In a way that makes it fun to use. To me it looks like there is a small forward leaning grumpy knome, looking to the left, standing under the extended big root, at the bottom of the image. Am I the only one to see that?

I got a Bushnell Trail Camera: B&H Link to set up on the property in order to try to see what lives in the various dens, burrows and holes. My first trial was yesterday and last night. I put the Trail Cam on a tripod and set it out in the back courtyard to see what might show up to visit a ground feeder containing some birdseed. I got some bird photos. And I got a few IR photos of some rodent. Bottom line: the Trail Cam works!!! The Trail Cam shoots Camera (stills), Video and Hybrid (don't know what that is yet). At night it shoots Infrared with "no-glow" illumination choices of Low, Fast Motion and Long Range. Coyotes, Look Out!! I'm gonna see you prowling around!! There are 32 megapixels. Images and video is stored on a typical SD card. Set up is totally easy, but there is a small learning curve for the settings. The examples posted here were made with a Medium image size, Long Range illumination setting, Auto sensor level, 24 Hour mode with 1 sec delay between shots. Given that the Trail Cam is motion triggered, I did get a few shots of nothing which were probably due to breezes or instability? The Medium daylight jpgs are enormous at 7552 x 4248 pixels. The Medium Infrared jpgs are smaller at 3840 x 2160 pixels. Some daylight photos had minor motion blur. The trail cam is usually shown tied to a tree (straps were included). So it probably was slightly unstable on the tripod? I will weight the center next time. I wanted to use it with a tripod because we really do not have many trees around here. (Well, ok, there is obviously one tree in this courtyard. La! But I really want to try to work with a tripod for the Trail Cam.) Photos are date- and time-stamped with a temperature recording. The menu lets you add coordinates too. The photos are very wide-angle with current settings. VISIBLE: Scrub Jay at Feeder Box Afternoon light, no shadows. The sun was hitting the trail cam, so it seems to have recorded a higher temp than it actually was. No edits. 25% downsize to 1888 x 1062. VISIBLE: Scrub Jay in Flight Morning light with shadows. There's another Scrub Jay sitting just behind the feeder box. That's a collared dove to the right. A mated pair visits regularly. Note that the temp is below freezing. No edits. 25% downsize to 1888 x 1062. INFRARED: Nocturnal Rodent I'll show one uncropped so you can see the general appearance. Evening after dark, 6:29:00 PM. No edits. 25% downsize to 1920 x 1080. The other IR evening photos are shown with big crop but no resize. 6:29:04 PM 6:29:19 PM 6:29:30 PM 6:29:52 PM The critter came back the following morning. I think it is the same one ?? 5:31:51 AM 6:18:26 AM See my scary IR-glowing eyes. I am a fierce little guy! 6:21:57 AM These IR photos are, of course, not quite up to our photographic standards. But I'm thrilled anyway to have the Trail Cam with IR night-time capabilities. It will be fascinating to catch a view of the wild creatures which live around here. SIDE NOTE: Identification of Nocturnal Rodent I went out and measured the stone where this Rodent liked to perch. Here is a crop showing that measurement. We can get a fairly reasonable estimation of the Rodent's size. Rodent's tail is probably about as long as its body (excluding head), but not longer. The body plus head seems to be about 5-6" = 12.7-15.3 cm in length. The ears are fairly large in relationship to the head. (See above 6:18:26 PM). Added later: I also estimated the tail to be about 4" = 10 cm in length. Field Guide Reference: Mammals of North America by Kays & Wilson, Princeton Field Guides, Princeton University Press, 2002. I mostly know what this Rodent is not.[*] By process of elimination, my best guess is that the Rodent is some kind of Deermouse because of the relatively large size of the ears compared to the head. WRT the field guide, see N. American Deermouse pg 114, Cactus Dm pg 118, Brush Dm pg 120. [*] The rodent is not a Pack Rat (Woodrat), Kangaroo Rat, Rattus, Shrew, Pocket Mouse, Vole, Jumping Mouse, Cotton Rat, Grasshopper Mouse nor is it any one of the Tiny Mice (House Mouse and others). This leaves the Deermouse types to choose from. But, hey, I could be way wrong!! You can't be afraid to be wrong in this world else you'll have a very boring life and never learn much.

I just published on my web site a few tests of NIR low-pass filters, as well as other filters that potentially may be used in NIR imaging. For details, see https://www.savazzi.net/photography/low-pass-nir-filters.html As a summary, it might be useful to have the normalized transmission spectra here. In addition, I also discussed and tested a "variable NIR filter": https://www.savazzi.net/photography/variable-nir-filter.html Also attached are the normalized transmission spectra of this filter at three settings.

Hi, I just wonder anybody knows a most powerful IR flashlight? I ask because I recently bought visible light flashlight - very powerful with 4 diodes, it cost about $70, weights about 0.5kg and can be charged via USB-C. It has adjustable lens and seems to provide a VERY powerful light output, slightly resembling a laser when I adjust it for maximum range. I wonder if there is any such a flashlight with a similar power (or ideally 10 times more) but with 808nm diodes or 940nm diodes? Can be custom made... maybe just the same host, batteries and then just a different set of diodes? I would like to buy such a flashlight, can be up to $700, but ***NOT*** chinease *sh**it* - all I want is just fair specs, no lies. Anybody knows such? Or a similar visible, most powerful one and then a company which can replace visible diodes, say 10000 lumens with a very similar IR ones?

I did some web search for lenses suitable for IR and found something that might be interesting. My primary source for information is Edward Noble's site: https://www.edwardnoble.com/hotspots All Olympus lenses here get high ratings. They look very promising to use for IR, if they also are sharp. Unfortunately Edd's site is not quite clear about details about other resulting lens aberrations, except in text comments about the very good lenses in his list. There is a Swedish site with a blog written by the founder of a major photo equipment web shop. The Captain's log, where he tests some old lenses very much in detail comments them and show high resolution test images. (if you click on the test pictures for each lens, they open up to the 100% image of the image.) Interestingly he is doing the testing mostly on Fujifilm high resolution big sensor cameras, so the test information is beyond the normal full frame area. https://www-cyberphoto-se.translate.goog/captains-log?_x_tr_sl=ja&_x_tr_tl=en&_x_tr_hl=en&_x_tr_pto=wapp The article list is long and in chronological order, not easy to find a specific lens but if you do a text search for Olympus many of the Olympus lenses in Edd's list can be found. They seam quite good and sharp on big camera sensors too.

Here's a video I shot a few months ago when I first got my Samsung Galaxy Z-Flip3 smartphone. I held up a 760nm cut-on filter over the lens and was surprised how well it turned out. I finally created a Vimeo account to post the occasional video here so this one is my first attempt. I didn't make any adjustments to the camera settings, it automatically pops into night mode when the scene gets dark enough. I only edited the video to reduce the bitrate so the filesize would be better for online. There is a prominent hotspot in the IR portion of the video. If you're wondering why the foreground grass looks dark in IR it's fake grass, some sort of vinyl plastic. Here's a few stills taken at the same location recently using the same smartphone & filter. I monochromed them and reduced to 2000 pixels for posting here. The last one was taken in the shade and could barely be handheld due to a slow exposure of 1/17 second. The quality isn't superb but remember these were taken with a lens smaller than the button on your shirt. The gear. The little 27mm filter is about the right size to allow a wide angle shot from the phonecam's tiny lens. 720 and 760nm filters worked best. 800nm was getting too dark for handheld shots. The IR only works in bright daylight but the little filter makes a nice accessory for this smartphone.

In a recent topic, some suggestions were made (by me and others) about white balancing a Nikon camera when using an IR-pass filter. It had been so long since I made the experiments for such a WB that I thought I should repeat them to refresh my memory. Here is the Visible scene I used for the experiment. D610 + UV-Nikkor + Kolari IR-Blocker f/8 for 1/250" @ ISO-100 For comparison purposes and out of curiosity, I made some WB both with and without the B+W 092 IR-pass filter. All photos are SOOC. They were made with a Neutral picture control so fairly bland looking. 1) WB made "against the scene" with NO filter on the lens. Lots of frosty pink/magenta. 2) WB made against the dark yellow-green juniper bush with NO filter on the lens. Still pink, no surprise. But a bit less intense than the preceding. I think grass is perhaps not as yellow-green as the juniper bush, but I do not have any grass here! 3) WB made against the scene through the B+W 092 IR-pass filter. Clearly this is a useful WB for this IR filter. 4) WB made against the the juniper through the B+W 092 IR-pass filter. This version is pretty much like 3, although the false blue is less intense. In the topic referenced above, there was some discussion about using color displays on a monitor to white balance against. So I experimented with that. 5) WB against a Green Screen with no filter. Doesn't work, obviously. No surprise, as there is no IR. And WB against green pushes the balance towards magenta. 6) WB against a Yellow-Green Screen with no filter. Again, this does not work. A bit more of a blue-pink. (WB against yellow-green pushes color towards blue-magenta.)

Seeing the recent discussion of lenses good for IR made me think of some unwanted but amusing lens artifacts I've recorded when using IR film. Not sure what the proper name for these are but I just call them axial internal lens reflections. When viewing the full frame image a line connecting the artifact and it's probable source is bisected by the exact center of the image. These were all taken by a Yashica Electro-35GS rangefinder camera with its Yashinon 45mm f/1.7 lens. I can't find any similar artifacts in straight visible spectrum images taken with this camera & lens. First, the forest faeries. The second one has the eerie effect of appearing to illuminate the ground around it. These were taken north of Flagstaff AZ in the 1970s. I didn't notice the apparitions until I got the film back from Kodak weeks later. Finally, the UFOs. This type of image is often cropped and presented as mystery sky objects. Sky buffs will recognize Scorpio rising in the background.

Beach huts are common by some beaches. In the area by Skanör at the southwestern tip of Skåne they are standardised in shape, 2m x 2m with a small 2 x 1m veranda. Here is one of the images I got when testing my Irix Firefly 15/2.4 lens, with a small putty-mounted 850nm filter disc at the rear. Shrunk to 50% of the original image. Those huts are placed in a safe distance from the sea to avoid being lost during winter storms. That has lately been a rather common problem in this region. Several other huts were saved the very last moments from floating away during a winter storm last winter. I like the dramatic sky and cloud images you can get with wide angle lenses.

Actually the gate was into a house. Could that be called a community? I have always liked old trees with character. Here I found an interestingly shaped group with rough bark. I think they are oaks, but I'm not sure. Their shape becomes more pronounced when they have lost the leafs in the Autumn. Autumn/winter came very quickly here this year and in just a few days the temperature dropped 15°C. This morning it was 4° below freezing and we had a little snow. The image below was taken with a Sony A7 III and a Canon TS-E 24L with a 850nm Zomei filter. Exposure 1/20s f/8.

I really like the works of M. C. Esher and one of my favourites is the Three Worlds lithograph. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Three_Worlds_(Escher) On my way to where I found the place for my "Gated Community" image https://www.ultravioletphotography.com/content/index.php?/topic/5650-gated-community/ I passed a dark pond reflecting the trees at the end and thought of the Tree Worlds. The forest is called Bokskogen in Swedish, in English literally translated, The Beech Forest. All or at least most of the trees seen in the image below are beeches. Today when processing the most promising image from the pond I could not decide the best cropping. Can I please get some opinions about that? Maybe there are alternative ways that are better. The image below was taken with a Sony A7 III and a Canon TS-E 24L with a 850nm Zomei filter. Exposure 1/4s f/8. If someone wants to play with the image I can share the Raw file. Just let me know.

a walk in the hills to see the autumn colors, as the French say "feuillage" All with Sony A7 f.s. and Soligor KA 35mm f 3.5 and Hoya R72 This is my favourite, of two cherry trees, one still with yellow leaves and the other dead, and at the back on the top of the hill a lonely house . . . . . . . .

The current situation with Russia's aggressive invasion of Ukraine made me remember a monument after another war. https://sv-m-wikipedia-org.translate.goog/wiki/Invalidmonumentet?_x_tr_sl=sv&_x_tr_tl=en&_x_tr_hl=en&_x_tr_pto=wapp The eagle at the top crying silently over it's fallen mate. On one side of the stone pillar is inscribed " Longing became their inheritance ". And on the other side, " In memory of the soldiers who on their way home from captivity here found their grave 1915-1918 " On the rear side there is also a bronze plate engraved with the names of the ones that died here, on their way home and where they came from.

I saw someone else do this so it made me want the ZWB3 for an IR filter. Photo taken with a full spectrum Nex 5n, Owltech adapter, ZWB3 filter, Tokina 11-20 @ 16mm and aprox ƒ/5.6 - ISO 200 - 1/80. White balance not entirely worked out but set in camera from a grey piece of plastic then worked on further in photo ninja/photoshop.