Search the Community

I've been doing some microscopy recently, and a few days ago took a look at a camera sensor I had. This one had been partially converted to monochrome and was damaged, so regions of the sensor has different degrees of removal of the microlenses and Bayer filters. There's a full write-up here showing images with different stages of removal of the filer and lens layers - https://jmcscientifi...-camera-sensor/ Here's a couple of images from the writeup. Firstly, part of the sensor which had not been touched (microlenses and Bayer filter still present). And now part which had had the microlenses and Bayer filter removed.

Here are some images, taken recently and less recently of my sunflowers. Filters: UV: ZWB2 (2 mm) + chinese BG39 (2 mm) VIS: chinese BG39 (2 mm) + polycarbonate goggles IR: Hoya R72 UV. F-stop: f/2.8, ISO 1600, 1/8 s exposure. UV. F-stop: f/2.8, ISO 1600, 1/8 s exposure. UV. F-stop: f/2.8, ISO 1600, 1/8 s exposure. VIS. F-stop: f/7.1, ISO 200, 1/640 s exposure. IR. F-stop: f/7.1, ISO 200, 1/800 s exposure. IR. F-stop: f/7.1, ISO 400, 1/640 s exposure. The above is just a quick shot to give an idea on how tall this things are. I measured the tallest one some days ago, and it was 3.19 m (about 10 ft 5 in) tall. I still have a little leak in the UV images. Yesterday my camera lens got stuck because glue from the filters I attach entered inside (I never put tape on the lens directly). I managed to fix it, but I slightly damaged the lens. The last photo was taken after this, so the camera still works. I will need an upgrade in the future, maybe years from now, but this camera will not live forever.

I have had occasion to notice that a number of flowers start to show colors again in SWIR, and it turns out that the tiny flowers (florets?? I don't have the vocabulary down, although I'm sure Birna could help) on Queen Anne's Lace have dark centers at 1500nm. The darkening starts before then and is visible also in the longer wavelength parts of NIR. Using the TriWave (which has a germanium-on-silicon sensor with range 350-1600nm), I made the following "true color" IR image from two Omega bandpass filters and a Thorlabs longpass (but effectively a bandpass since it's at the end of my sensor's range of 1600nm). - 1500nm hard coated premium edgepass from Thorlabs (blocked OD5+ through 200nm, which is rather important with the Triwave since it's much more sensitive in visible than at 1500nm+). - 1064BP25 Omega - 780BP30 Omega These were placed in the R, G, and B channels respectively to produce the following image: The image has been processed by registration of the channels, contrast adjustment, noise reduction, sharpening, and boosting saturation. Original images: 1500nm-1600nm (but probably mostly 1500-1550nm because the TriWave's gain falls quickly in that range): 1064nm: 780nm: This result is startling given that in visible and in UV, the flower shows a uniform light or dark appearance, with the flower centers undistinguished from the petals. VIsible: UV (S8612 1.75mm + UG11 2mm): -- Edited to add a large pano of the whole head at 1500nm. 58 images.

As you may know, I just finished high school. In our classroom, we had the statue of a horse that we called "Rodolfa". She was found on the roof of our school, in the first year, since we were working on a project to imagine how to change the school. I have no idea how and why she went there. Initially she, or it, as you prefer, was completely white. Then a classmate took her home, and his brother painted her "rainbowy". After a bit of time, he brough her in our classroom again, and we kept her for five years. Everytime we changed our classroom, we also took her to the new one. Just after my exam, I had the opportunity to take her. And so, now, she is in my bedroom. I photographed her in UV, visible and IR light. Note: I am sorry if the photos are not perfect, but it's the fifth attempt and I'm done with it. The first time the camera moved; The second time I had a light leak in my UV image; The third time the sun went in and out, since it was a bit cloudy; The fourth time the camera didn't properly focus; And the fifth time the images were good enough. I have a limited hardware, I had to tape my tripod to the ground, white balance each shot in camera with a paper tissue, change the ISO and exposure for the UV image, use a pair of polycarbonate goggles to cut UV in the visible image (UV is a bit visible, it makes the sky pinkish), all with handmade filters using paper rolls and tape, and I have to rely on the autofocus, since I can't manually focus. So... Camera: Full spectrum Panasonic DMC-F3. UV: ZWB2 (2 mm) + chinese BG39 (2 mm) VIS: chinese BG39 (2 mm) + polycarbonate goggles IR: Hoya R72 UV: F-stop: f/2.8, ISO 400, 1/8 s exposure. VIS: F-stop: f/7.1, ISO 200, 1/800 s exposure. IR: F-stop: f/7.1, ISO 200, 1/1000 s exposure. UV: F-stop: f/2.8, ISO 400, 1/8 s exposure. VIS: F-stop: f/7.1, ISO 200, 1/800 s exposure. IR: F-stop: f/7.1, ISO 200, 1/800 s exposure. UV: F-stop: f/2.8, ISO 400, 1/8 s exposure. VIS: F-stop: f/7.1, ISO 200, 1/1000 s exposure. IR: F-stop: f/7.1, ISO 200, 1/1000 s exposure. UV: F-stop: f/2.8, ISO 400, 1/8 s exposure. VIS: F-stop: f/7.1, ISO 200, 1/800 s exposure. IR: F-stop: f/7.1, ISO 200, 1/1000 s exposure. Note: the leg was already broken.

Hello. I do have APC-C full spectrum modified mirrorless camera I use for photography but I not like it for several reasons. DSLR/mirrorless camera‘s are bulky and heavy, require more expensive and larger lens and filters, are limited to factory software which gets eventually outdated. Sure bigger sensor/pixels and fast aperture lens camera‘s will still rival over phones especially in low light conditions as well for having viewfinders, screw in filters and hoods but I can‘t just carry bulky camera everywhere I go, when for example exercising, hiking and traveling. Somewhere I saw good quote: best camera is which you have available when it‘s needed. And there are rare, unpredictable moments to take that amazing shot. I researched many currently released phone camera‘s to find out which of them have biggest sensor/individual pixel sizes, fastest lens, fitting color filter arrays or monochrome sensors, wide range of ISO settings, as well quite recent technology such as pixel binning, multiple camera combination for higher dynamic range and sentivity or great optical zoom, PDAF/laser focus. Also display quality and overall hardare quality, operating system was important factor. If someone would be interested I could send you list of phone camera specs I made in 2019, currently there are of course new improoved phones camera‘s released. Of all of them Huawei P20 PRO to my mind is most interesting due to these reasons: 1) It has tripple camera system: main one 40 MP, f/1.8, 27mm (wide), sensor size 1/1.78" and pixel size 1.55μm, second 8MP 80mm telephoto f/2.4, sensor 1/4" and third one 20MP monochrome f/1.6, 27 mm, sensor size 1/2.7", pixel size: 1 μm. 2) Monochrome sensor is much more sensitive to visible light and significantly to shorter UV rays, IR sensitivity is also a bit better since green/blue filters block some of the NIR spectrum. 3) Pixel binning. When using pixel binning resolution is reduced by four. Although I have seen reports that low resolution sensors are still more sensitive than high resolution binned sensors due to photodetector deeper wells which able to capture more energy (as well there were reports deeper wells allow to detect longer IR wavelengths, can A7S do it?). There are camera’s that can combine even more pixels like for example Samsung Galaxy 20 Ultra which can use even 9 pixels but since it has ridiculously high 108MP resolution pixels are only 0.8 μm big. 4) Lens are pretty fast however later Huawei P30 PRO phone main camera has even faster f/1.6 lens. Honor 20 PRO has fastest known phone lens with record aperture of f/1.4 what it makes interesting to use it for modification of Huawei camera. Lens are made by German Leica company which probably produces sharpest and highest quality lens in the world. Although they are made not from glass but plastic which spectral transmission is unknown to me. AR coatings and optical cement might also block UV but to know for sure tests must be done. 5) ISO ranges from 50 to whooping 102400 what is useful for low light imaging when there is no time for long exposures. I want to turn this phone into night vision device to work with my powerful 830-850nm LED lamp so high ISO noise is not so much an issue. There are Apps which can overdrive sensitivity even to higher levels. I’m curious if it would be possible cool phone camera sensor for better signal to noise ratio? 6) Android is most popular OS and has highest diversity of Apps available. Also wide selection external USB devices and cameras can be connected to phone via micro USB port. I saw there was even full frame camera that could be connected to phone but it’s expensive, maybe someone can recommend big sensor low cost USB camera? I noticed also phone LWIR thermal camera’s with great specs are less costly. 7) High resolution, contrast and brightness OLED 90hz display. Phone display can be turned into viewfinder with VR glasses or monocular adapter. 8) Huawei P20 Pro is premium phone but over time it’s price had dropped significantly. Also camera modules are easy to access without risking breaking OLED display and are cheap to replace in case of failed modification. Sure there also other good phone camera‘s. Sony Xperia XZ2 Premium has biggest and fastest lens monochrome camera, as well highest video ISO. Panasonic Lumix Smart Camera CM1 and Nokia 808 pure view have biggest sensors among the phones but they use not backlit BSI CMOS or are outdated. HTC phones known for biggest pixels but have low resolution. Nokia 9 PureView went in different path by using unique 5 camera design where three of them are monochrome. And lastly Samsung Galaxy S20 Ultra and Huawei P40 Pro have biggest sensors of all modern phones, too bad they lack B/W camera. Huawei P40 Pro has 1/1.28" size sensor and 2.44µm pixel size what makes it most sensitive phone camera to date. In theory it’s possible to remove CFA from sensor but from my experience its very risky operation and microlens would be lost (if they are still used), I could not remove Bayer filter from some sensors at all although I might try using stronger solvents. Any idea if it would be possible to do such modifications with Huawei P40 Pro? Modifications I want to do are to change hot mirror in monochrome camera to UV pass/IR cut filter since it‘s best suited for UV photography. Main p20 PRO camera would be used for VIS/IR photography with sliding IR-cut filter. I also want to change lens in main camera and maybe monochrome also to Leica f/1.4 what would significantly increase light gathering. I‘m not sure what field this lens actually covers and if it would produce vignetting on 1/1.78" (14.27mm) sensor, it‘s designed for 1/2" or 12.7mm sensor but I think there might be little room left to avoid edge blur/vignette. I had idea to add external mount for M12 lens which apertures can go as wide as f/0.95 but I prefer to use quality Leica lens which hopefully could fit inside phone and provide autofocus. Most phones today use plastic lens however LG V30 phone is exception that uses f/1.6 glass lens which might have better UV transmission but I have no any idea of their transmission capabilities. Some incredible engineering went into squizing as large as possible sensors and wide aperture as well great zoom lens to maximize versatility of camera‘s in such thin phone design. In near future novel technology might be used such as graphene based CMOS sensors reported to be 10 times more sensitive than current silicon sensors with super broad spectral response from visible, infrared and reaching even terahertz range. Lens could be made as thin as 600 nm and flat with entirelly different metalens which focus whole spectrum into one spot thus having no chromatic abberation and requiring less lens elements. Such technology could even make traditional photocamera‘s obsolete at least for most users.

This topic will be about generating, detecting and imaging with THz waves. Regarding generating EM waves in the radio spectrum, this are the Italian laws: -LPD (Low Power Device): operating at 433 MHz, maximum power 10 mW, they can be used freely; now obsolete, they should be replaced by SRD (Short Range Device); -PMR 446: operating at 446 MHz, maximum power 500 mW, they require a declaration of use and the payment of 12 €/year; -CB (Citizen’s band): same as above, 27 MHz and maximum power 4.5 W; -To be an amateur radio operator (“ham”) you also need a license, that you obtain by passing a written exam. Hopefully, THz frequencies are outside those ranges, and so they can be generated without authorizations. They can only travel a few meters in air and can not go through walls. But anyway I am more interested in detecting them, not generating them. I was inspired by this series of videos; The easiest thing is making the antenna: very thin, very long (to have high gain), and it shouldn’t be too difficult (even if the diameter would need to be about 0.3 mm). At THz frequencies everything becomes messy, and a couple of pF of parasitic capacitance is enough to ruin everything. It isn’t easy.

Some ideas that I accumulated since I started following this website, before becoming a member. I will try them too if I can. For the people who can shoot in UVB (and below) Can you photograph silver at 310 nm (and compare it to other metals)? It should become black. Have you ever tried to stack the Invisible Vision 308 nm filter with an Hoya U-340 4 mm thick filter? It should block all visible leakage (it wasn’t a problem) and strongly reduce the IR leakage (which was the problem). It should raise the OD in the near infrared by at least 2. Have you tried UVB and UVC LEDs? They are weak and inefficient, but they exist. What about excimer lamps? According to Wikipedia they can go as low as 108 nm. I know that air starts to absorb UV strongly below 200 nm, mainly by oxygen, but in a nitrogen atmosphere it can propagate at shorter wavelengths. For the people who want to try SWIR or already can shoot in SWIR Can you do it by “erasing” phosphorescence? Not many people know this, but if you shine light on a phosphorescent material with a per-photon energy lower than the energy required to activate it (for example red or infrared light), you can “erase” the glow. It will look brighter at first, and then darker. What happens is that you are giving energy to electrons in the metastable state to go to a slightly higher energy state from which they can return to the ground state, emitting a photon. Basically you discharge the material faster. I tried it and it requires a lot of light, but it works. Maybe using long-lasting phosphorescent materials and a lot of exposure an image can be formed. Never tried SWIR LEDs? As deep UV LEDs, deep IR LEDs exist and they are weak and inefficient, but probably nice to have. For the people who can shoot in LWIR Can reflected LWIR photography be done? The problem is that at those wavelengths basically everything is incandescent, and this masks shadows and illumination. Maybe by subtracting two images, one “normal” and another one illuminated by, for example, a hot piece of metal can show shadows. But a shadow doesn’t necessarily mean a real, “optical” shadow, it can also mean that some areas have been heated up when illuminated. A carbon dioxide laser emits at 10.6 μm, in the range visible by LWIR cameras. At very low power (they can be extremely powerful), can they be seen like a normal laser pointer? For everyone Never tried 340 nm LEDs? Can Terahertz waves be “seen” with an antenna? The frequency is crazy high and semiconductors basically stop working, but can a signal be detected? It can surely be done with longer wavelengths, such as millimeter or centimeter waves. Can a sound camera be built? Imagine something similar to a pinhole camera, an “illuminator” which uses ultrasound at MHz frequencies (the higher the frequency the lower the diffraction and the higher the resolution), and a sensor made with a matrix of microphones. I know that neither the speaker nor the microphones are designed to be responsive at that frequency, and very high frequency sounds travel short distances in air, but can this be done for short distances (~30 cm)? The only problem would be cavitation, which can damages tissues. Have someone tried (legally and very carefully) X-rays? If you really want to experiment with them, be extremely careful. Never expose yourself intentionally, use lead shielding, and power the tube far away. Also make sure that nobody is around. Ever tried violet photography (~400-430 nm)? Hopefully this is all new and nobody already tried it on this website, hope most can be done.

Does anyone have data on the transmission of IR for the Nikon EL 80mm (old metal version) beyound 700nm? I'd like to do some multispectral imaging with this lens but can't really find any spectral data beyound 700nm. I assume that it doesn't just cut sharply at 700nm :-).

Hi, hopefully no one already posted this. I casually found a sensor which should be able to detect from visible light up to soft X-Rays (maybe even some hard X-Rays, since it goes up to 30 KeV). I don’t know how expensive it is (probably a lot) but just know that it exists. https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&cd=11&ved=2ahUKEwiGiczR-p7oAhXo-SoKHcDNDbEQFjAKegQIBhAC&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.princetoninstruments.com%2Fproducts%2FSOPHIA-XO-xray-cameras&usg=AOvVaw0tNCCjkuY0hr0vfGBNXKFs Look at the purple line. (I think that the image will be huge, I’m trying to upload from my iPad).

I took this a while ago, but never posted. Image is the top of an orange pepper and yellow pepper in the back. Top of an English cucumber, then tops of a yellow carrot, orange carrot and purple carrot Radish top, turnip and radish bottom. Visible: UVIVF (Using SD15 UV/IR block filter): UVIIRF (Using 720 LP filter): Reduced UVIIRF as the cucumber is bright as a Kiwi fruit. UVIVIRF (Using just a 2A filter to catch both Visible induced and IR induced) UV/Visible (Using just a 2mm S8612 filter with 365nm lights): UV (Baader Venus U with 365nm lights) UV-A (Baader Venus U with 2 UVB lights) UV-B (313bp25 stacked with U330WB80 improved filter):

A classic sunflower. The SWIR is the major contribution here, because many sunflowers have been imaged before on this forum. I made a 530 image panorama to get adequate resolution, and the results look nice. It took all night to stitch the images, and I went through 5 software packages before I found one that didn't get bogged down by the sheer number of images involved. Most stitching programs are geared toward a small number of images with a large number of pixels, rather than the opposite situation, which is what I have with the TriWave! Vis sunshine Resolve 60mm lens, F8 iso640 0.04" (DB850+S8612 1.75mm) UV sunshine Resolve 60mm lens, F8 iso2500 2" Vis sunshine Resolve 60mm lens, F8 iso640 0.04" (DB850+S8612 1.75mm) UV sunshine Resolve 60mm lens, F8 iso2500 2" UVIVF ConvoyS2+ Sony FE 55mm lens, F8 iso1000 30" IRG sunshine Resolve 60mm lens, F8 iso400 0.005" (DB850+Tiffen #12) Near infrared (830-870nm) sunshine Resolve 60mm lens, F8 iso400 0.05" (DB850+Hoya R72) SWIR (1500-1600nm) halogen Thorlabs 50mm achromatic doublet, F10-ish, not sure how to quantify the rest of the exposure info. Thorlabs 1500nm long pass filter. 534 image panorama stitched with Panorama Stitcher, a Mac app available in the Mac App Store. This was the program that finally worked after trying Hugin, PTGui, Photoshop CS6, Panoweaver, and Autopano Giga. Autopano Giga's free trial actually worked, but when I went to buy it, I discovered that Kolor, the company that made it, had been bought by GOPro, which then discontinued the product! With no way to unlock the software, I had to find another program. Due to stitching errors near the edges, I was forced to crop this more than I would have liked. The results are still pretty nice, though, and I found that the sunflower (as with other members of the aster family) has a dark center in the SWIR 1500-1600nm band, despite being pretty uniformly white in the 850nm NIR range.

Hi, back in September (when leaves and flowers were still abundant), I took some UV, VIS and IR photos of this flower (and other flowers). It is the "visible yellow, UV false yellow" flower type (like Rudbeckia hirta, dandelions, sunflowers, etc.). I never obtain strong colors in UV, and the colors are stronger in videos than in photos, for some strange reason. Also the IR shots are not very good, but I will post them anyway. I would like to know what flowers it is, so I can buy it since it has some really nice nectar guides. Also, it isn't really noticeable in the visible photos, but I could tell with my naked eyes that this flower had nectar guides. Usually, if you see yellow flowers that are slightly orange in the center it means that they have a dark center in UV. This was a great example. To my eyes this flower was yellow with a light orange ring, right where the black pattern starts. It was a ring, not a filled circle, though. Cameras and filters: Samsung Galaxy A5 2016 rear camera (SM-A510F), unmodified, for visible and IR. Full spectrum Panasonic DMC-F3 with ZWB2 (2 mm) + chinese BG39 (2 mm) for UV. I call it "chinese BG39", how should I call it? Black pen ink filter for IR. "big area" shots: UV, f-stop: f/2.8, ISO 1600, 1/15 s exposure VIS, f-stop: f/1.9, ISO 40, 1/1241 s exposure. Overexposed, I know. IR, f-stop: f/1.9, ISO 200, 1/8 s exposure close-ups: UV, f-stop: f/2.8, ISO 1600, 1/25 s exposure VIS, f-stop: f/1.9, ISO 40, 1/4310 s exposure. IR, f-stop: f/1.9, ISO 80, 1/10 s exposure. I tried 8 times, but the phone couldn't focus.

Bernard: This old thread seemed the most appropriate to add my post to without starting up yet another one ... Editor: It is quite OK to start new topics. Your IR Overlay with Channel Swap is interesting in its own right. So I have split it off into its own topic. I have to say I am not an Aerochrome enthusiast: I find the subject quite interesting from a technical viewpoint and enjoy seeing the images posted on the forum, but it seems a one-trick pony to me. But then I don't get abstract or "modern" art either, so this probably says more about my philistinism quotient than anything else. Anyway I was interested in trying something out. The original Aerochrome/EIR, when used with a yellow (minus blue) filter resulted in IR showing as red, visible red as green, and visible green as blue - with visible blue being lost altogether. So one standard way to simulate this very closely is to overlay an IR image on a visible image and use channel swapping to achieve the Aerochrome effect. This is done in the 2nd image below (the 1st is a normal visible shot). For the IR shot I used a Midwest Optical BP850 - partly to go a bit deeper into the IR than the R72 would go, and because, having bought the BP850 in error, I needed to find a purpose for it to save face. So far, this is all standard stuff. But what about the point that Aerochrome with a yellow filter completely ignores the visible blue region. How about changing the channel swapping such that IR goes to red, red and green each contribute 50% to the green channel, and blue goes to blue? The third shot below tries this out. And finally (and I know this is drifting off topic), what if a similar thing is done with UV? So UV goes to blue, blue and green each contribute 50% to green, and red goes to red? The result of that is in the fourth shot below. (Baader U used for UV; all lighting by flash.) And finally just to round the whole thing off - a pan-spectral image with UV providing the blue channel, visible the green, and IR the red. This is the last shot below - and takes us part of the way back towards Aerochromism. Visible IR-->Red, R/2+G/2-->Green, Blue-->Blue Red-->Red, B/2+G/2-->Green, UV-->Blue IR-->Red, Visible-->Green, UV-->Blue

Hi, I didn't know were to post this, hope this is the most appropriate section. Otherwise a relocation would be a good idea. Anyway, nothing "serious" here, just some images made by me with Paint. It took me 3 days to make them. If this image doesn't make you realise how LITTLE we see, I don't know what else will do. A version with some information LED "regions" red region = 210-265 nm yellow region = 265-365 nm and 1050-1650 nm green region = 365-1050 nm NOTES: Some borders are not well-defined. For example, X-Rays and Gamma rays overlap by some definitions. Everything has been calculated. All the lines have been calculated using log base 10. Nothing has been done "by hand". In the visible spectrum, the violet (a bit more than 400 nm), cyan (500 nm) and orange (600 nm) lines colors have been "found" by observing a ~405 nm, 503 nm and 600 nm LED. Then I adjusted the brightness (eyeballing it this time) to make a "gaussian" brightness rainbow, to simulate the human eye sensitivity curve. I had to design every letter, made with circle quarters and straight lines. I didn't draw them "by hand", again. While I included very long-wave radio waves, I didn't include Very-high-energy and Ultra-high-energy gamma rays. Wikipedia's definition of SWIR is basically from red (700 nm) to 1400 nm. I instead defined the IR region as follows: NIR 700-1100 nm SWIR 1100-3000 nm MWIR 3000-8000 nm LWIR 8000-15000 nm FIR 15000 nm-1 mm For the LED range image, I used Thorlabs LEDs and I didn't include the quasi-CW (quasi-constant-wattage) ones. LEDs can sometimes have efficiencies above 40%, and I think that the most efficient ones are about 60% efficient. Still almost half of the input energy is wasted as heat. Do you want to use this image for other reasons? Do it if you want.

Hi, my name is Stefano, I am 18 years old, I live in Italy and I have been photographing outside the visible spectrum since I was 16. It all started "randomly". My phone has a normal camera with an IR-block filter, but it is weak enough that a significant amount of IR light can pass through it. So, out of curiosity, I started playing with a TV remote, and I managed to use it for illumination. I also discovered that I can see a remote LED, if I stare directly at it in the dark. Probably my first photo made using only IR light was one showing a book, and I also shot a visible version of it, for comparison. I took it on April 27th, 2018. First NIR photograph "with illumination" (without filters). Camera: SM-A510F (Samsung Galaxy A5 2016 rear camera), f/1.9, ISO 800, 1/8 s exposure, 4 mm focal length. Illumination source: TV remote LED (probably at 940 nm). Visible version, f/1.9, ISO 125, 1/476 s exposure, 4 mm focal length. Then, experimenting with stuff, I accidentaly discovered that the black ink of a marker pen was completely transparent in the NIR. I wanted to see how different colors of marker pen ink looked like in the infrared, and I couldn't see anything. They were invisible. So I made a very "raw" filter with a plastic container, water and black ink. It wasn't perfect at all, the images were a bit distorted because the container wasn't flat, but it worked. I now could shoot infrared outside, just 3 days after I shot my first infrared photo. First NIR photograph of the external world. Camera: SM-A510F (same as before), f/1.9, ISO 125, 1/8 s exposure, 4 mm focal length. Black ink filter. Of course this is not the best photo I have, it is simply the wery first I took. UV came 9 months later. Since I didn't have a source of UV radiation, I bought a filtered 365 nm UV torch. I was amazed by the fact that the light emitted was barely visible, and that we can make LEDs with a high enough bandgap (3.4 eV in this case) that they can generate true UV light. I didn't have any filter, so the first photos I took were made without them, but they weren't polluted too much. I simply had to avoid strongly fluorescent subjects. The first one shows a pair of polycarbonate goggles, which looks black. This time I used a USB webcam, with the hot mirror removed from the lens. I was 17 when I took it. First UV photograph. Camera: Kevler KP-109. Unknown settings, probably the exposure time was around half a second. If I wanted to shoot outside, I needed filters. So I bought a ZWB2 and a chinese BG39, both 2 mm thick. I know that with better glass (S8612 and Hoya U-340, for example) I can make a better filter, but this stack does work well too. I managed to break the BG39 five minutes after opening the package, by dropping it from like 40 cm (15 in), and I was lucky that two of the five pieces it broke into were large enough to completely cover my camera's field of view. First UV photograph of the external world. Camera: Kevler KP-109. Unknown settings. Filter: ZWB2 (2 mm) + BG39 (2 mm). Later I successfully modified the rear camera of my old smartphone, and that made things a lot easier: the sensitivity to UV was significantly higher, and I didn't have to bring a laptop with me. Now I use a modified Panasonic DMC-F3. I modified it with a friend, and we didn't replace the hot mirror with anything, but since the lens are not removable the sensor is sealed inside. Surprisingly, the autofocus still works well (not always but most of the times). That's all for now. Hope everything is correct and all loads up properly.

I broke a carton of eggs. So thought why not boil a couple still mostly intact eggs and see if I can see if there is a UV-C threshold. In that protein will absorb at 280nm, but backbone will absorb at 230nm. So if I can see below 230nm with my new filter, I am hoping for it to look all black. Using single Germicidal 15W bulb with KSS 60mm f4 lens and UV imager. 193bp20 filter: 253bp25 filter: Using two UVB 200 Exoterra 26 W bulbs with KSS 60mm f4 lens and UV imager. 303bp10 with 2mm U340 filter to cut down back reflection (UVB Exoterra bulb emits 302nm Mercury line only for first 12 minutes after turning on): 313bp25: 335bp10: 370bp15: 390bp25 405bp10 Visible reference image: Using my full spectrum converted EM1 I took the following using the two ExoTerra 200 26W bulbs 313bp25 with 330WB80 improved filter: Baader venus filter: Switching lights to two 365nm LED bulbs with 1.9mm ZWB1 filters to block all visible leak (these do work, no 405nm line detected) Baader Venus U Filter: UV/Visible with just a 2mm S8612: UV induced visible fluorescence with Sigma SD15 block filter on camera lens: UV induced visible and UV Induced IR fluorescence with just Tiffen 2A filter on camera lens: UV induced IR fluorescence with LP 720 filter on camera: 405nm induced IR fluorescence with LP 720 filter on camera: 2.2mm BG39 on White LED bulb induced IR fluorescence with LP 720 filter on camera: Hallogen bulb used for IR with LP 720 filter on camera:

I have thousands of photos, so I will have a lot to post for a lot of time. This time I will focus on some of the spectrums that I have been able to capture, in various ranges. For all shots the camera was a modified Panasonic DMC-F3, which doesn't have anything above the sensor except the lens (and filters). The focal length is always (apparently) 5 mm. I always WB in camera. The source of illumination for the first photographs was a 12 V, 5 W tungsten bulb (used for cars, the 5 W/21 W type), ran at 24 V. I usually intentionally overload incandescent sources, to make them emit light with a spectrum more similar to sunlight. Of course using it like this dramatically shorts its lifespan, and a few minutes were enough to deposit tungsten on the inner surface of the glass envelope. Full spectrum (no filters), f-stop: f/7.1, ISO 80, 1/1000 s exposure. "Sunny" WB. You can easily see the infrared region, but the ultraviolet one is just obscured. Tungsten lamps, although very inefficiently, do emit usable amounts of UV, I even used them for reflected ultraviolet photography. Then, infrared only. I still don't have a proper IR longpass filter, and I used one that I made with black pen ink (not the "liquid" one, made with a black marker, of my first IR photos). The quality is what it is, at the moment is the best filter I have. Infrared (black pen ink filter), f-stop: f/2.8, ISO 400, 1/500 s exposure, 5 mm focal length. Same WB as before. And now the infrared white balanced version, f/2.8, ISO 400, 1/800 s exposure. We can already note two things. First, when white balanced, the shorter IR wavelengths look yellow, and the longer ones look blue. By coincidence, it is the same in UV. And then there is a mysterious absorption line, roughly at something like 960 nm, and I cannot explain it. It is typical of gases an vapours to absorb at a specific, narrow line, but in this case the only gases are inside the bulb and in the air. Taking a photo at the spectrum from a 940 nm LED, we see the same thing. I estimated the wavelength knowing that, from a previous experimental measurement, this LED peaks at 946 nm. 940 nm LED spectrum, f-stop: f/2.8, ISO 80, 1/8 s exposure. This one, instead, is just very strange. Underexposing (in camera, not digitally) an image similar to the third one (white balanced infrared) I obtained a rainbow. f-stop: f/2.8, ISO 100, 1/640 s exposure. The next ones were shot with sunlight. Since I don't have a PTFE target, I used a paper tissue instead. It is one of the closest thing there is, together with snow (in my opinion) to a flat reflectance object. In the next image there are the two 1st order diffraction "rainbows" of the sun, in UV. This is a proof of how narrow and limited the spectrum visible with a UV camera is. f-stop: f/2.8, ISO 80, 1/30 s exposure. Filter: ZWB2 (2 mm) + chinese BG39 (2 mm). Here there is another mystery: beyond the yellow portion there is an orange one. It appears only in some photos and I think that light in that region should appear green, not orange. f-stop: f/6.2, ISO 1600, 1/8 s exposure. Filter: ZWB2 (2 mm) + chinese BG39 (2 mm). And, finally, my best image of the solar spectrum. It came out very well. I think it was a 3rd order diffracion. I left the "clean" version too, so if someone wants to write on it he/she can. f-stop: f/4.4, ISO 80, 1/8 s exposure. Filter: ZWB2 (2 mm) + chinese BG39 (2 mm). The same image, but with the Fraunhofer lines I could identify. from this I can estimate that my camera, with these filter stack, can roughly see from 365 to 400 nm. I know that this post came out pretty long, but I didn't even put everything I had. Anyway, this is the diffraction grating I used.

Interesting article about the Nikon D850M, by the President of MaxMax: https://petapixel.com/2019/11/29/nikon-d850m-vs-d850-a-comparison-of-monochrome-and-color-dslrs/

I have been modifying my Panasonic 12.5mm F12 lens again as it is not usable in its standard configuration. This is also my first attempt at using the Anaglyph 3D making software. Which I think I may have failed. So I am posting to see if others can see this in 3D using glasses if they have them. I still want to cross my eyes. I am not sure if I have the separation correct. This is the 2mm shimmed split photo: This is the anaglyph 2mm UV photo: This is 1.6mm shimmed split photo: The anaglyph 1.6mm photo: A zoom in section 1:1 from the anaglyph photo: A UV/visible 1.6 mm shimmed split photo: The anaglyph version 1:1 The full anaglyph version:

Davies A. (2019) Ceropegia sandersonii Decne. ex Hook.f. (Apocynaceae) Umbrella Flower. Flowers photographed in ultraviolet reflected, fluorescence and visible light. https://www.ultravio...ia-sandersonii/ Surrey, UK September, 2019 Home grown specimen of wildflower Other Names: Umbrella Plant Fountain Flower Parachute Plant Comment: Some time ago I posted some first images of this fascinating plant: Ceropegia sandersonii. The plant, given to me by a friend, has flowered again giving a better chance of doing both UVR and UVIF images. I'm not sure if the results are botanically useful, but the UVIF, in particular, is really interesting. The UVR does not seem to much variation in its UV signature which is primarily UV-reflective although the spots on top of the umbrella show some UV-absorption. The flower was difficult to photograph given its shape and structure. The flower traps insects for a time during which the they gather pollen for pollination. These are some of the first results with my newly converted Nikon D800 full spectrum camera, and my new Nikon D850 for the UVIF, which is looking very good! Reference: 1. Proctor, M, Yeo, P, and Lack, A. (1996) “The Natural History of Pollination”. Harper Collins New Naturalist. 2. Wikipedia (Nov 2019) Cereopagia sandersonii. Wikimedia Foundation, San Francisco, CA. https://en.wikipedia...gia_sandersonii Equipment: UVF: Nikon D850 with 105mm Micro-Nikkor lens. Light painted with Convoy S2+ UV torch. f/16 for 20sec. UVR: Nikon D800 full spectrum conversion, with 105mm El-Nikkor lens and Baader-U UV-pass filter. 2 full spectrum Metz 45 CT1 flashes. f/16 at ISO-400. From left to right: Visible, UV-induced Visible Fluorescence (UVF), Reflected UV (UVR). From left to right: Visible, UV-induced Visible Fluorescence (UVF), Reflected UV (UVR).

Now that it is Fall, I have been able to image something that I have been curious about for a while. How does the different color of Maple leaves affect the UV and IR? Maple leaves are great in that they turn Green to yellow to orange to Red to black. So I was curious what this looks like in the different wavelengths. The biggest change seems to be in the UV induced fluorescence and not in the direct reflected wavelength. All images captured with Full spectrum converted Olympus EM1mk1 with Pentax UAT 85mm quartz lens. Visible (White LED with no filter): UV-B (Captured using 313bp25 with 330WB80 filters and 2 UVB bulbs): UV-A (Captured using Baader Venus U Filter and 2 UVB bulbs): UV-A (Captured using Baader Venus U filter and 2 365nm LED bulbs with ZWB1 filters): IR (Captured using LP 720nm filter with two UVB bulbs): IR Chrome (Caputered using Lee 729 filter and KG3 2mm filter with two UVB bulbs): UVIVF (2A and 2mm S8612 filter using two 365nm LED bulbs with ZWB1 filters): UVIVIRF (2A only filter using two 365nm LED bulbs with ZWB1 filters): UVIIRF (720nm LP filter using two 365nm LED bulbs with ZWB1 filters):

Hello to Administrator, Thank you for signing me up to the forum promptly despite the fact that we are on opposite site of the earth. I have just started my journey to UV IR and multispectral photography. Converted a Canon 60D to wide spectrrum. Got myself a couple of UV bandpass filter and took some photos. Now am trying to figure out if what I have captured are correctly done. Hope to be able to use the technique for my work in heritage conservation, particularly building and artifacts related. Looking forward to share some photos and any advise related to the matter is welcome. Anyone know of any good training program for this technique? regards Chin Peng

The summer is over, here. We had frost the night between Saturday and Sunday and I did not suspect to find much more interesting flowers this year. To my surprise I found a flower that I only had seen in books before. I found the plant on a road-bank among other wild flowers and weed, rather far from any garden. Next to the plant there was a st-John's wort, with it's very last flowers for the year. I think this is a Pilosella aurantiaca even if it is very of season: The descriptions I find in my Nordic Flora fits very closely, except for the blooming period, that is supposed to be June-July. This kind of fiery orange-red is quite unusual for wild flowers with this shape here in my region. I like this intense colour very much as it differs so much from all the different yellow species you often see here. Multispectral crops of images below, to show different filtering effects. All cropped directly from the process-window of FastRawViewer. No contrast enhancements or sharpening. Only exposure adjustments made to taste. Camera: a full spectrum converted Canon 60D. Illumination: two quartz-tube converted Godox AD200. WB against virgin PTFE. Background: a black toned cotton fabric. UV and UV+ -images with filters stacked to a S8612/2mm: U-360/2mm. -- The flower is quite UV-dark. There is virtually no difference between images from UG2A/2mm, UG1/1mm or U-360/2mm. UG5/1mm -- A thin version of the typical "Bee's vision" stack. It clearly pass some red tones, mixed with the green. UG5/1.5mm -- A typical version of the typical "Bee's vision" stack. It still show some red. U-330/2mm -- A thick version of the typical "Bee's vision" stack. BG3/2mm -- The typical version of the "Bug's vision" stack. This stack sometimes turns yellow flower's images red. Here due to the high UV-darkness, only some dark green remains. BG25/2mm -- An alternative version of the "Bug's vision" stack. This stack can also turn some yellow flower's images red. Here due to the UV-darkness, only some brighter green remains. NIR-images: 850nm 720nm ending with a FullSpectrum image, as a mild contrast to the powerful VIS-image:

What could you say about Nikon D3100 as UV camera? I am going to remove on it hot mirror filter.

This is a cultivar, found growing in a bush. It matches the existing UV signature for that species on the site here. (The only other thing it could be is dwarf cinquefoil, but the leaves don't match. Or, I suppose, some other cinquefoil that we don't have a record of on the site yet.) Of note, the SWIR image showed some interesting effects on the anthers(?) around the center of the flower. (I am not confident of my botanical vocabulary here.) Visible and UV-A photos were taken with the Resolve 60mm lens on my old NEX-7 camera (which is APS-C and therefore is better covered by the small image circle of the Resolve lens). SWIR was with the TriWave camera. I did not record exposure info. Visible (BG38 2mm+DB850 stack) UV (330WB80 filter) This image is an HDR made from 4 exposures, because those petals were very very dark. SWIR (Thorlabs 1500nm long pass filter, and the camera cuts off at 1600nm) This is a pano (as all my SWIR pics are now, since that's the only way to get a decent resolution). I also oversharpened it, but oh well.