Comparison Pictures of Young People: UV, VIS and IR

[Kai]

Today I can show a few comparison pictures of young people in UV, VIS and IR.
I was actually able to take more photos, but after reviewing the results some of them didn't agree to be published here. A pity. I really liked some of the pictures.
All the more pleasing that those shown here agreed with it.

UV: 6DFS, EF 1:1.8 50 mm II, Baader-U, f 5.6, 1/15s, 3200 ASA
VIS: 6D, EF 1:1.8 50 mm II, f 11.0, 1/750 s, 200 ASA
NIR: 6DFS, EF 1:1.8 50 mm II, 950 nm, f 8.0, 1/350 s, 3200 ASA

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[colinbm]

Is the last one the only one with Sun screen ?

[photoni]

Well done @Kai
Interesting comparison: UV, VIS and IR
it's something I want to do with photographic film and wet collodion,

in my studio with flash light

(I have 15,000W of power, it's barely enough for the wet collodion which has a sensitivity of only 1 ISO)
... But I have to find a model with freckles.

One thing I read in some posts on portraits in IR is that the pupils, even if dark, appear much lighter,

I don't see it in your photos (perhaps because the direct sun disturbed and did not illuminate the pupil)

Thanks

Toni

[Doug A]

Fascinating images. The different light massively changes the look. Glad the people agreed to publication. Interesting that the shirt is easy to read in UV and vis, but text is invisible in IR.

Thanks for sharing,

Doug A

[jscff]

Thanks for showing these, a good comparison. I enjoy the UV pictures of #1 and #2 - the IR portrait look is not appealing to me - too wax-like. I am curious: the glasses in #3 appear clear, but in my UV portraits they tend to look opaque (like sunglasses). Can this be attributed to bad UV transmission of the Canon EF 50/1.8?

 

Kind regards

[ulf]

20 minutes ago, jscff said:

 I am curious: the glasses in #3 appear clear, but in my UV portraits they tend to look opaque (like sunglasses). Can this be attributed too bad UV transmission of the Canon EF 50/1.8?

I don't think so.

The used Baader U filter have a transmission range that covers the essential upper UV-A range and that upper part is well within the transmission range of the EF 50/1.8.

 

Most modern glasses are made by a polycarbonate-like material with a cutoff near 400nm, but not all.

There are also some coatings that cut a bit further up into the violet range.

 

The girl's glasses might be of another type of material, even glass, that transmit a bit down into the upper UV-A range.

 

That would be a more likely explanation to that they are almost transparent, and not that the lens is limiting the range.

The EF 50/1.8 do not have an excellent UV-A range, but it is not very bad.

[Kai]

10 hours ago, colinbm said:

Is the last one the only one with Sun screen ?

He told me back then that he hadn't used any sunscreen or other skin cosmetics!

[Kai]

8 hours ago, photoni said:

Well done @Kai
Interesting comparison: UV, VIS and IR
it's something I want to do with photographic film and wet collodion,

in my studio with flash light

(I have 15,000W of power, it's barely enough for the wet collodion which has a sensitivity of only 1 ISO)
... But I have to find a model with freckles.

One thing I read in some posts on portraits in IR is that the pupils, even if dark, appear much lighter,

I don't see it in your photos (perhaps because the direct sun disturbed and did not illuminate the pupil)

Thanks

Toni

Yes, I have to look into the matter of the eyes systematically.
Sometimes the entire eyes appear very dark, but in individual cases the iris can also appear light.
This young woman has very dark brown eyes. In this picture (720 -950 nm) they appear bright.

[Kai]

7 hours ago, Doug A said:

Fascinating images. The different light massively changes the look. Glad the people agreed to publication. Interesting that the shirt is easy to read in UV and vis, but text is invisible in IR.

Thanks for sharing,

Doug A

Yes. I actually have access to a lot of young people who are interested in science. Unfortunately, the fear of abuse with images is also increasing among these young people. Very unfortunate. Many of the pictures are really interesting, impressive and simply beautiful...

[Kai]

3 hours ago, jscff said:

Thanks for showing these, a good comparison. I enjoy the UV pictures of #1 and #2 - the IR portrait look is not appealing to me - too wax-like. I am curious: the glasses in #3 appear clear, but in my UV portraits they tend to look opaque (like sunglasses). Can this be attributed to bad UV transmission of the Canon EF 50/1.8?

 

Kind regards

Of course I can only speculate in this case. My suspicion is more due to the different materials and coatings of the “glasses”...

[dabateman]

The last picture of the boy, looks like he is using a spray on tanning product. He might have really pale skin, but doesn't want others to know.

Amazing how UV brings out the masks. They just disappear in visible and IR. Too bad the boy was wearing a mask for the UV shoot, as it would have been easier to see if thats his nature skin or spray on tann.

 

 

[Andy Perrin]

20 minutes ago, dabateman said:

The last picture of the boy, looks like he is using a spray on tanning product. He might have really pale skin, but doesn't want others to know.

Amazing how UV brings out the masks. They just disappear in visible and IR. Too bad the boy was wearing a mask for the UV shoot, as it would have been easier to see if thats his nature skin or spray on tann.

 

 

I don't know...looking at the UV pic on my large monitor, if he sprayed something on, he got VERY even coverage, even up into his hairline and on his ears. I'm inclined to take him at his word. He probably just has more melanin than the others and it absorbs UV quite well. Yay genes!

[photoni]

3 hours ago, Kai said:

12 hours ago, photoni said:

Yes, I have to look into the matter of the eyes systematically.
Sometimes the entire eyes appear very dark, but in individual cases the iris can also appear light.
This young woman has very dark brown eyes. In this picture (720 -950 nm) they appear bright.

yes... that's what I said. it probably depends on the lighting,

in this one there are no shadows on the eyes, like in those of yesterday with the harsh light of the sun.

[Andrea B.]

Delightful images of these youngsters! Tell them "thank you" for letting us see these comparisons. 

 

I was interested in how the hair looks in UV, all 4 are dark it seems. But in IR the vis lighter hair is lighter and the vis darker hair is darker.

[lukaszgryglicki]

I would expect them (hair) to be always (almost?) dark in UV.