IR Photography & The Nikon D200

Can anyone please tell me what it takes to make great IR images with my Nikon

D200? I'd rather not cheat and use Photoshop. I've been told a slew of

answers ranging from:

 

(a) All you have to do is put a IR filter over your lens and take pictures.

 

(b) You have convert your camera to take IR images and it's a timely and

possibly hazardous endeavor.

 

Which of these answers closest resembles the truth? I really want to take

digital images, however, I don't want to have to reengineer my camera in the

process.

 

All the Best!

 

Joseph.

The D200 is not a good IR or UV camera.

 

You will find the information you are looking for here: http://www.naturfotograf.com/index2.html

A D70s is a great infrared camera if you don't mind using a tripod, but a D200 has a better IR blocking filter, so it's not so good.

I used to do a lot of film IR with a Leica rangefinder camers. Got a Canon P&S and used the same filters. Exposures got really long from 1/250 6.3 to 4 sec. A tripod was necessary. Pics were ok, not special and very flat needing a considerable constast boost to look like film IR.

 

I got a D200 a month ago and considered a large IR filter just to try it out. The long exposures will come back due to the blocking IR filter and the focusing issues. The lens is 67mm so it will be expensive so I considered PS.

 

I will never go back to IR film again. Give it a try. Make a color pic with the D200 as first step.

 

The easy way is adj layer, channel mixer, boost the green to 100, red 50, and blue down 50 as starters. Change to monochrome. This gets very good IR, as good as film. Then you do ps adjustments.

 

There is another method with more control outlined on RadiantVista.com. Color to black and white conversion tutotial. IR is at the end. Mark Johnson explains it better than I. It involves the channels and moving them as individually as monochrome layers to the layer stack. This gives fabulous control. Blur is added to green layer and so is artificial grain to flattened image.

 

Once you are doing digital, I can`t see why you would want to try a IR filter and all the work taking it off and on and the tripod.

Joseph

 

There are two ways to do it on camera.

 

You can use a tripod and a IR filter on the lens. Exposure times will be long. Probabbly in the seconds.

Or you can send the camera to some one like

 

www.lifepixel.com.

 

 

They can convert it to a IR only camera or to one that can do IR,UV and visible light

 

I had them convert a D100 to IR only. I shoot a lot of IR now hand held.

 

If I where you I would try the filter first and see if you like the effect.

 

 

After that you can decide if you want to have them convert you D200 or maybe you could find a used D70 and have that converted.

 

MIchael

 

PS I do not work for or have any ties to LIf Pixel

Ronald,

 

You got to be kidding. Pseudo IR that you describe doesn't even start to compare to the real thing. And yes, I've tried pseudo IR extensively.

To All,

 

Thanks for the good advice & comments, this is turning into an interesting forum. Although I would really love to utilize my Nikon D200 it's starting to look like it's not the best platform for IR sensing. If anybody has a 100% solution and one that's feasible to using the D200 for IR I'm all ears...

 

I asked another PhotoNet member via email and I've pasted what he replied below:

 

_______________________________________________

 

Hi Joe,

 

In my opinion, digital IR is the way to go. Many years ago, I did use IR B & W film and then hand colour the resulting print, very labour intensive, a very enjoyable way to spend your free time, but life's too short.

 

With digital all I ever do is to make two exposures, using the camera on a tripod of course, one with a Hoya R72 red filter and the other normally and then using PS amalgamate the two together, that is it, in essence, obviously there can be a lot more to it, but that's up to the individual to decide how far to take it.

 

I use a Minolta Dimage 7 which has an electronic viewfinder, this I find quite horrible to use for normal photography but it is brilliant when covering the lens with an opaque filter, because the camera can see through it and you can compose your image in the normal way, most SLR* cameras cannot see through these filters and you have to compose your image before you apply the filter, which as you can imagine is a pain in the butt. If you suddenly see a different viewpoint from the one you had first chosen and need to change camera position you have to go through the whole rigmarole again. This camera is old technology and I only use it for IR. I bought mine from eBay for about ?130 including shipping, I don't know what that is in US$ but for a camera that cost ?1000 when new I reckon that's a good and cheap way into IR and you don't have the worry and expense of converting your D200.

 

*I think I'm right in saying that SLR's (I haven't tried them all) can't see through these dark filters and only cameras that have the electronic viewfinder will do this, I did try using a Canon EOS 5D for IR, it did work but for the reasons I've outlined above and the very long exposures needed, it was very awkward and certainly not as fast to use as the Minolta.

 

Anyway, I hope that goes some way to answer some of your queries and that you can understand my waffle, if you have any more questions, feel free to email me again, it was great to hear from you.

 

All the best,

 

Derek.

 

PS If you do decide to go with the Minolta Dimage 7 I've just remembered that there are two newer models, the 7i and 7Hi, these are nowhere as good for IR, it has to be the 7.

 

Have a look at the links below, the top one is Daniella T's work, it was seeing her images that fired me up, she has amazing work.

 

http://www.pbase.com/zylen/infrared

 

http://www.pbase.com/sheila/infrared_shots

 

http://www.outdooreyes.com/photo94.php3

 

_______________________________________________

 

In reference to his email I had started to do research on cameras with electronic viewfinders and found that you can test whether or not a camera can capture IR light waves by taking it into a room without light with a old TV remote (has to be IR) and by looking through the viewfinder of the camera you can see the IR light coming out of the remote as you press the buttons of the remote.

 

I tried this with a Fuji FinePix S5200 I have and I saw the IR light through the viewfinder. Now it was rather faint and I'm wondering if this simple point and shoot camera may be good for experimenting with IR photography. According to Derek, the Minolta DiMAGE 7 seems to be so good it has created a cult following of IR photographers. Any comments?

 

I'd still prefer to utilize my Nikon D200, however, I'd be happy if I could take IR images with my Fuji FinePix S5200...

 

Thanks again and I look forward to all of your replies.

 

All the Best!

 

Joseph.

There is no correlation between cameras with EVF's and IR capability. The remark that SLR's (dSLR's) are less IR capable is also incorrect. The sensors are sufficiently IR capable, but it is the IR blocking or hot mirror filter in front of the sensor that determines how sensitive the camera is to IR. Some dSLR's are better than others, depending on the IR blocking filter. My D70 works well with a Hoya R72 filter, but of course you have to deal with slow shutter speed, in the range of seconds. Any dSLR would work well in IR when converted to IR by replacing the IR blocking filter by an IR pass filter, but then the camera cannot be used for anything but IR.