What are you all doing out there--not a lot of photography or at least not posting. Can't keep a forum going without posts. So here's the rest of my photography day. Well, thick as soup haze and then torrential rain, more tomorrow. Luck of the draw, I guess. This was the rest of my afternoon--as I said, 'thick as soup' haze--what I love is how the IR filter is able to gather details in spite of the haze. Here is the color converted to duotone gray first. Notice Bakers Mt in the rear--indistinguishable. However, you do get pretty good detail on the foreground grass.

And here is the IR--also in duotone (Alpha reminded me of nice these are in other than start B/W). Notice the shadows on the mountain that you couldn't even see in the b/w.

That's 'how nice' and 'stark' B/W--its way too late LOL. Just outside photographing an Imperial moth--what a beauty--bigger than many birds. Now it is--for sure--bedtime. A quick question too--notice how much 'noise' there is in the sky in the IR??--and not in the color converted to b/w. I'm wondering if that's due to the haze--that the filter picked up. Anyone know?? Diane

The first one is way cool Diane... Thumbs Up Not sure about the IR and why it is noisy... My guess is that it is reading the moisture in the air at diferent levels of intensity, or that it has something to do with reciricol failure, but I do not understand this enough yet to be sure. BTW... I do not know if it is possible, but that old shed might make some really cool shots if done from the inside out. I bet at the right time of day the lighting coming through those open slats would be spectacular. Now I am off to shoot something... I do not know what, but it is 6:35 AM in my time zone and I am going to find something to photograph.

This is not any great photo for sure, but just working a bit with burn, dodge, etc. to correct an IR (or, for that matter a b/W) without good dynamic range. I knew that the lower 1/3 of the photo was not good and that the sky almost merged with the mountains. I've done a some work here, not a huge amount, but burned in the foreground grass (actually was doing it selectively and then decided to select, add as new layer and do blend mode burn. I also selected the sky and brightened. Do you think this is sufficient to help this hold together better??--any suggestions please. Not to 'save' this pic, but just to learn from a pro a bit more. Doing 3D, esp, Bryce with added Posers, I didn't often do this type of post work to it (though I've always done post). Thanks for your comments in advance. HOpe you are having a wonderful vacation and its not the gloomy weather as here--altho' we'll take the rain (1.3 inches late afernoon yesterday and we're in drought)also the quite cool for this time of year--71 degrees. Diane

OK. Let's get technical! IR basically involves it self as the absorbance and therefore re-emittance of IR energy. So YES you will see an effect of water since it sbsorbs IR! Haze is probably NOT IR active in the wavelength range of what your filter is operating at. Gases such at turpentine should be, grass powder ( since grass is IR active ) will be, ect. Which is why I suggested the different material experiment. At least you will get a feel for how different substances interact witht he IR. Don't forget then that, even if there is a dusty haze before a subject you can still photograph it pretty clearly. Because the haze WON"T absorb IR. Does this make sense? Bsteph

Lets see... I thought that there were three distinct areas in this that could be readily isolated and worked on. So before I started doing any correction, I created three seperate paths. One for the sky, one for the foreground grass area, and one for the shed. Once these were set I created two duplicate layers (I always leave the background layer in tact). On the first layer I made a selection of the foreground area and adjusted the levels (the white and black points were way off). Then on the top layer I created a layer mask set to reveal all and filled the selection with black so that only the foreground was erased. I could now see the foreground grass adjusted the way I wanted, and the rest of the image was the same. Next I did the same with the sky... sort of :) The grain in the sky bothered me, so I gave it a gaussian blur and that was better. But when I got done I decided it was to flat and just made some clouds in Photoshop. Normally I would find a cloud photo, but for the purpose of showing how this worked I took the cheap route. *S* OK... After I got this far, I selected the shed and adjusted its levels, then switched to the mask layer and revealed the underlying shed. I am sure with some real time and energy this could be made into a really nice image, but I only spent about 20 minutes or so... So that you would get the idea. I hope this all makes sense and that you like it :)

Yes, I do like it a lot. I made the mistake of selecting only the foreground grass instead of the whole grass area--I'm trying to see in my mind what you did with the mask/fill. I'll have to try it and then I'll get it. The sky is easy--totally understand what you did and why. I knew the shed was off on its levels but wasn't quite sure how to handle it. I guess you mean that you used the same mask on the top level??? Thanks so much--I didn't really expect you to 'do it' S, but that's a big help. Bsteph, I do understand-thanks. This haze (I should have called it fog, which is what it really is) was definitely not dust haze--it was wet haze--basically a cloud sitting on top of us more or less--which happens fairly often. I have ordered a book called 'Art of Infrared Photography' by John Paduano--I know from reading some reviews and synposes that he discusses materials and how they act and react to IR--for instance, I gathered that spruce and pine do not emit much IR. That means that large areas of our mountains down here may not show a lot of IR activity except in areas where deciduous and evergreens are mixed. At our high altitudes, spruce (which are also highly endangered by pollution and acid rain from the west) are the trees you see the most. Anxious to get up to the higher altitudes and get some pics and see for myself. Diane

I copied and saved the above to try it on my own. Thanks again. Bsteph, you can always get technical with me--I like learning new things.

But did I make any sense? While we're on the subject of IR. Here is my IR instrument. The Perkin Elmer System 2000 FTIR. Laser guided! Duo detected, single chambered, QCIR usable, and very lonely. =:-( > To the far left ( closest to the viewer is the sample compartment ), then is the optics chamber( laser, mirrors, IR source ), then the computer then the moniter for the whold getup. The white dome shaped thing on top of the sample chamber is the IR mascot, the device behind the IR is a Mass Spectroscope ( determines the atomic masses of molecular ions ). The red signs say DO NOT BREATH INTO SAMPLE COMPARTMENT, and PLEASE KEEP CLEAR. Bsteph

This might help... This is the layer that was on top. After each of the three steps I went back to this layer and added to the mask. This way I was able to work each section as I wanted and not change the trees and foliage.

Looks cool bsteph... Can it take a photo???

No but it can show you fancy graphs! Remember your earlier statememnts about the differences of various plant leaves. How about the differences of various chemical groups. In school on IR, one Mass Spectrum, and a Magnegtic Resonance Spectrum was all it took to tell exactly which of 5 or so chemical species were present. Bsteph

bsteph, would I be out of line to ask what you sort of work you do--and where you live?? Thanks Alpha--helpful. The term 'paths' threw me a bit--different terms, PS and others S.

uga chaka-uga chaka- uga uga, uga chaka.... wash rinse repeat

Got it. You can tell that I wasn't real careful in my selections as evidenced the edge of the mountains top right, but I wanted to try your method. I didn't used 'paths' though I could have--don't know if PS has 'painted on' masks, but I particularly like the ease of PP's so used that method instead, but all to the same end--masks. Funny how much more contrast I ended up with--seems my 'eye' likes contrast *S* Also, just browsed through some of mine to find a sky--not necessarily the one I would prefer, but it worked for me trying the methods. Thanks again for your help. I'm sure I will ask again, if you don't mind.

Looking at it again, I believe I would alter the contrast (gamma) in the trees behind the barn--to make that subject just a bit more important