# Sepia infrared



## Roger (Apr 20, 2008)




----------



## PaulBennett (Apr 20, 2008)

Nice results...real nice.  Can you share technique?


----------



## nealjpage (Apr 20, 2008)

That's pretty freakin' sweet, Roger!


----------



## Antithesis (Apr 20, 2008)

Interesting, I like it. Is it "real" IR? or just a filter and some photoshop?


----------



## Coldow91 (Apr 20, 2008)

that is awesome! I would like to see a B&W version but  the picture itself is amazing!


----------



## Roger (Apr 21, 2008)

PaulBennett said:


> Nice results...real nice.  Can you share technique?



thanks glad you like it....technique...I use a converted Canon 300D with L lenses in this case a 17-40. I process the RAW file in Adobe Bridge doing minor adjustments to exposure, fill light, recovery etc. Then I work on the created PSD file in photoshop and choose adjustments>b&w then choose a filter, usually green then click ok. I then work on various adjustment layers for different sections of the image to get the detail and tones I want before doing a sepia tone. On this image I also used a local contrast action of 200pxl to give better separation and add to the sky. Save the file then downsize for the web at 72 pxls then smart sharpen 100% at 0.4 pxls.



nealjpage said:


> That's pretty freakin' sweet, Roger!



thanks very much Neal.



Antithesis said:


> Interesting, I like it. Is it "real" IR? or just a filter and some photoshop?



thanks a lot....real IR? That's an interesting question, what real IR is. A lot of people consider film to be the only real IR....but then what is regular digital photography. I think whether you use film, digital, IR filter or a converted camera (my case) it's all real, just a different means of getting to the same point, an image. 



Coldow91 said:


> that is awesome! I would like to see a B&W version but  the picture itself is amazing!



thanks a lot....I don't have a straight b&w version.


----------



## bikefreax (Apr 21, 2008)

WOW! all said.:hail:


----------



## daluke09 (Apr 21, 2008)

Wow!  I think I found a new computer back ground.  Where was the photo taken?


----------



## Roger (Apr 21, 2008)

bikefreax said:


> WOW! all said.:hail:



thank you very much 



RyMo said:


> Simply awesome!
> 
> Well done.



thanks a lot 



daluke09 said:


> Wow!  I think I found a new computer back ground.  Where was the photo taken?



thanks for the compliment....it was taken last Sunday, the Dolomite Mts in the area of Cansiglio.


----------



## lena5538 (Apr 22, 2008)

nice photoshop effects buddy.


----------



## Roger (Apr 23, 2008)

lena5538 said:


> nice photoshop effects buddy.


 
thanks.


----------



## PaulBennett (Apr 23, 2008)

Roger said:
			
		

> thanks glad you like it....technique...I use a converted Canon 300D with L lenses in this case a 17-40. I process the RAW file in Adobe Bridge doing minor adjustments to exposure, fill light, recovery etc. Then I work on the created PSD file in photoshop and choose adjustments>b&w then choose a filter, usually green then click ok. I then work on various adjustment layers for different sections of the image to get the detail and tones I want before doing a sepia tone. On this image I also used a local contrast action of 200pxl to give better separation and add to the sky. Save the file then downsize for the web at 72 pxls then smart sharpen 100% at 0.4 pxls.



Thanks for sharing...You have opened my eyes to many things here including making images look better on the internet.  I looked up Adobe Bridge and learned you must be an Apple byter.  Then I googled 'Canon 300D conversion' and found another day's reading at LifePixel.com.   Thanks again, learning keeps me alive.



			
				Roger said:
			
		

> ....real IR? That's an interesting question, what real IR is. A lot of people consider film to be the only real IR....


While were are in 'ponder' mode - PhotoShop has forever removed the meaning for real.  When the last film photographer passes, IR will become simply an ancient art form. We are actually close to that day when most photographers don't know what the letters IR stands for.  Soon, someone will rename the technique of digitally removing color and be lauded for it.

Couple days ago I posted a shed, questioning reasons it's lifelessness. But what now strikes me, after again viewing your awesome shed...it's the sky, missing in my  'mossy shed' but your rock shed & sky complement each other, like 2+2=5.


----------



## emptypockets (Apr 23, 2008)

The shot itself is excellent and your added effects add to its visual appeal. Very well done!


----------



## Socrates (Apr 23, 2008)

Roger said:


> thanks a lot....real IR? That's an interesting question, what real IR is. A lot of people consider film to be the only real IR....but then what is regular digital photography. I think whether you use film, digital, IR filter or a converted camera (my case) it's all real, just a different means of getting to the same point, an image.


 

"Regular digital photography" involves an image that has been placed onto a digital sensor after first passing through a filter deliberately designed to REMOVE infra-red wavelengths. This filter, present on all digital cameras, exists for the purpose of ensuring that the recorded image resembles as close as possible what the human eye sees. PP procedures can not restore the IR wavelengths but can create an image that _looks like_ a true IR image.


----------



## Roger (Apr 23, 2008)

PaulBennett said:


> Thanks for sharing...You have opened my eyes to many things here including making images look better on the internet.  I looked up Adobe Bridge and learned you must be an Apple byter.  Then I googled 'Canon 300D conversion' and found another day's reading at LifePixel.com.   Thanks again, learning keeps me alive.
> 
> While were are in 'ponder' mode - PhotoShop has forever removed the meaning for real.  When the last film photographer passes, IR will become simply an ancient art form. We are actually close to that day when most photographers don't know what the letters IR stands for.  Soon, someone will rename the technique of digitally removing color and be lauded for it.
> 
> Couple days ago I posted a shed, questioning reasons it's lifelessness. But what now strikes me, after again viewing your awesome shed...it's the sky, missing in my  'mossy shed' but your rock shed & sky complement each other, like 2+2=5.



thanks Paul, glad to have stimulated the learning process...I'm actually a windows user btw ....photoshop...real...perhaps we should change the word to original, or 'as perceived by the eye' and variations from that are interpretations. This discussion has been had many many times, in the end what concerns me is the result of my endeavours, not so much how I got there....but then I have been told I'm quite the pragmatist .



emptypockets said:


> The shot itself is excellent and your added effects add to its visual appeal. Very well done!



thanks very much.



Socrates said:


> "Regular digital photography" involves an image that has been placed onto a digital sensor after first passing through a filter deliberately designed to REMOVE infra-red wavelengths. This filter, present on all digital cameras, exists for the purpose of ensuring that the recorded image resembles as close as possible what the human eye sees. PP procedures can not restore the IR wavelengths but can create an image that _looks like_ a true IR image.



yes I am aware of this....I haven't made any reference to producing 'look alike' IR images in PS.


----------



## soul.glo (Apr 23, 2008)

Impressive PP.  Very nice shot!


----------



## Roger (Apr 26, 2008)

soul.glo said:


> Impressive PP.  Very nice shot!



thank you very much.


----------



## surfnturf (Apr 28, 2008)

Very nice shot!  I have an old 300D that I have thought about converting to IR but I just havn't pushed myself to do it yet?  It's pictures like these that make me want to do it even more.  Great job!


----------



## abraxas (Apr 28, 2008)

Roger,

However, whatever, very fine image.


----------



## stoic (May 1, 2008)

Wow!  Where was the shot taken?  However you did it it's brilliant!  Thanks for telling us how.  Might try the technique myself if the sun ever shines again here.  Nothing but rain here for the last few days.
Stoic


----------



## Roger (May 4, 2008)

surfnturf said:


> Very nice shot!  I have an old 300D that I have thought about converting to IR but I just havn't pushed myself to do it yet?  It's pictures like these that make me want to do it even more.  Great job!



thanks very much...get the 300D converted you won't regret it ....I might add that quality lenses produce the best results.



abraxas said:


> Roger,
> 
> However, whatever, very fine image.



thanks a lot abraxas.



stoic said:


> Wow!  Where was the shot taken?  However you did it it's brilliant!  Thanks for telling us how.  Might try the technique myself if the sun ever shines again here.  Nothing but rain here for the last few days.
> Stoic



thanks very much....it was taken near Cansiglio in the Dolomite Mts, Northern Italy.....about an hour from where I live. One thing you can count on in England is rain eh.


----------

