Velocity Reviews - Computer Hardware Reviews

Velocity Reviews > Newsgroups > Computing > Digital Photography > INFRARED PANOS LOVE THE TOTALLY DIGITAL D60!

Reply
Thread Tools

INFRARED PANOS LOVE THE TOTALLY DIGITAL D60!

 
 
Annika1980
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      08-06-2008
A steamy hot day when the sun is directly overhead ... perfect time
for an infrared pano!

http://www.pbase.com/bret/image/101276313/original

This was a quickie done with CS3's Photomerge command.
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Mark Thomas
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      08-06-2008
Annika1980 wrote:
> A steamy hot day when the sun is directly overhead ... perfect time
> for an infrared pano!
>
> http://www.pbase.com/bret/image/101276313/original
>
> This was a quickie done with CS3's Photomerge command.


Hi, Bret, nice.. but... (O:

Do you shoot these unfiltered? I mean, I know you have a modded
IR-filter-less D60, but do you *additionally* use an IR-pass filter?
The reason I ask is that the effect seems too much - more like a snow
scene..

For that reason, I think including more sky might have improved it (that
path could go, and I don't really like the way the pine just touches the
top frame).

I can't really post anything competitive, tho' - I'd like to get back
into IR, but my current cam-of-choice is not well-suited. Maybe later.


Thanks for posting these to aus.photo, by the way. (grin)
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Helen
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      08-06-2008
On Aug 6, 12:07*am, Annika1980 <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
> A steamy hot day when the sun is directly overhead ... perfect time
> for an infrared pano!
>
> http://www.pbase.com/bret/image/101276313/original
>
> This was a quickie done with CS3's Photomerge command.



Incredibly beautiful work Bret!
I don't see a sign of where you merged multiple shots. Love the
reflection in the pond.
Stunning, very impressive work!
Helen
 
Reply With Quote
 
PeteD
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      08-06-2008

"Annika1980" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed)...
>A steamy hot day when the sun is directly overhead ... perfect time
> for an infrared pano!
>
> http://www.pbase.com/bret/image/101276313/original
>
> This was a quickie done with CS3's Photomerge command.


Is it just me or do others not see the point of an infrared panorama?
Actually I have not seen much reason for IR shots at all except in very
special circumstance.

Pete

 
Reply With Quote
 
Jeff R.
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      08-06-2008
PeteD wrote:
> "Annika1980" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
> news:(E-Mail Removed)...
>> A steamy hot day when the sun is directly overhead ... perfect time
>> for an infrared pano!
>>
>> http://www.pbase.com/bret/image/101276313/original
>>
>> This was a quickie done with CS3's Photomerge command.

>
> Is it just me or do others not see the point of an infrared panorama?
> Actually I have not seen much reason for IR shots at all except in
> very special circumstance.
>
> Pete


Actually, I'd like to see an IR macro nude panorama.

Possibly 3D.

Taken through a 10x ND filter.

--
Jeff R.
(anything else?)


 
Reply With Quote
 
Noons
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      08-06-2008
Annika1980 wrote,on my timestamp of 6/08/2008 2:07 PM:
> A steamy hot day when the sun is directly overhead ... perfect time
> for an infrared pano!
>
> http://www.pbase.com/bret/image/101276313/original
>
> This was a quickie done with CS3's Photomerge command.

 
Reply With Quote
 
Annika1980
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      08-06-2008
On Aug 6, 1:57*am, Mark Thomas <markt@_don't_spam_marktphoto.com>
wrote:
>
> >http://www.pbase.com/bret/image/101276313/original


> Do you shoot these unfiltered? *I mean, I know you have a modded
> IR-filter-less D60, but do you *additionally* use an IR-pass filter?
> The reason I ask is that the effect seems too much - more like a snow
> scene..
>


No additional filtering was used.

> For that reason, I think including more sky might have improved it (that
> path could go, and I don't really like the way the pine just touches the
> top frame).


Yes, the top of the tree was a victim of the cropping. It was a
choice of either cropping it that way or showing more sky with a hole
in the middle of it. I considered filling in the missing sky with
some cloning, but I have my artistic integrity to think about, dontcha
know.

 
Reply With Quote
 
Annika1980
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      08-06-2008
On Aug 6, 5:08*am, "PeteD" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>
> Is it just me or do others not see the point of an infrared panorama?
> Actually I have not seen much reason for IR shots at all except in very
> special circumstance.
>


I feel the same way about regular old B&W.
It's just a different look. Most people either like or or hate it.
For the photographer, it is a fun way to get pics in what would
normally be considered horrible light for shooting.



 
Reply With Quote
 
Helen
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      08-07-2008
On Aug 6, 9:56*pm, "Frank ess" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
> Alan Browne wrote:
> > PeteD wrote:

>
> >> "Annika1980" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
> >>news:(E-Mail Removed)....
> >>> A steamy hot day when the sun is directly overhead ... perfect
> >>> time for an infrared pano!

>
> >>>http://www.pbase.com/bret/image/101276313/original

>
> >>> This was a quickie done with CS3's Photomerge command.

>
> >> Is it just me or do others not see the point of an infrared
> >> panorama? Actually I have not seen much reason for IR shots at all
> >> except in very special circumstance.

>
> > Agree.

>
> > I do like Bret's shot, most esp. because of its depth, layers and
> > reflection in the pond, but the whole 'look' is beginning to ...
> > er, pale.

>
> I like the infrared that I've seen because of the sensual
> characteristics. The Bret photo is an excellent example of how it
> overwhelms my usual sensibilty with a wash of ummm ummm ummm input.
> Then I turn the page. There isn't a lot of interesting feature to
> inspect, and my voyeuristic streak is not particularly stimulated or
> satisfied. I "like" infrared in a way different from the way I like
> landscapes and cityscapes and street portraits, for instance.
>
> It's a bit like an anticlimax: I can only tolerate a small number of
> them, and then I'm gone. Or maybe the squirting lapel-flower; who
> needs a second shot? Not me. A book of these things would be
> waterboarding for me.
>
> Not that there is anything wrong with infrared. It just doesn't fit
> me. (He said slyly, digging out his IR photos for entry in the
> Shoot-In)
>
> --
> Frank ess



I love IR work. Your description of its sensual characteristics and
how it overwhelms the usual sensibility with a wash of ummm ummm
ummm, pretty well nails it right on the head for me. One of my very
favorites is Bret's Thundering Heard.
 
Reply With Quote
 
tony cooper
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      08-07-2008
On Wed, 6 Aug 2008 19:31:00 -0700 (PDT), Helen
<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

>On Aug 6, 9:56*pm, "Frank ess" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>> Alan Browne wrote:
>> > PeteD wrote:

>>
>> >> "Annika1980" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
>> >>news:(E-Mail Removed)...
>> >>> A steamy hot day when the sun is directly overhead ... perfect
>> >>> time for an infrared pano!

>>
>> >>>http://www.pbase.com/bret/image/101276313/original

>>
>> >>> This was a quickie done with CS3's Photomerge command.

>>
>> >> Is it just me or do others not see the point of an infrared
>> >> panorama? Actually I have not seen much reason for IR shots at all
>> >> except in very special circumstance.

>>
>> > Agree.

>>
>> > I do like Bret's shot, most esp. because of its depth, layers and
>> > reflection in the pond, but the whole 'look' is beginning to ...
>> > er, pale.

>>
>> I like the infrared that I've seen because of the sensual
>> characteristics. The Bret photo is an excellent example of how it
>> overwhelms my usual sensibilty with a wash of ummm ummm ummm input.
>> Then I turn the page. There isn't a lot of interesting feature to
>> inspect, and my voyeuristic streak is not particularly stimulated or
>> satisfied. I "like" infrared in a way different from the way I like
>> landscapes and cityscapes and street portraits, for instance.
>>
>> It's a bit like an anticlimax: I can only tolerate a small number of
>> them, and then I'm gone. Or maybe the squirting lapel-flower; who
>> needs a second shot? Not me. A book of these things would be
>> waterboarding for me.
>>
>> Not that there is anything wrong with infrared. It just doesn't fit
>> me. (He said slyly, digging out his IR photos for entry in the
>> Shoot-In)
>>
>> --
>> Frank ess

>
>
>I love IR work. Your description of its sensual characteristics and
>how it overwhelms the usual sensibility with a wash of ummm ummm
>ummm, pretty well nails it right on the head for me. One of my very
>favorites is Bret's Thundering Heard.


Damn! I knew Bret was good, but it never occurred to me to turn on my
speakers when I look at his images.


--
Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Love love love imuaplease@gmail.com C++ 0 06-03-2009 02:53 AM
INFRARED STEREOGRAMS LOVE THE TOTALLY DIGITAL D60! Annika1980 Digital Photography 3 04-13-2008 03:35 AM
FALL PANOS LOVE THE 20D! Annika1980 Digital Photography 18 11-11-2006 09:06 PM
FALL PANOS LOVE THE 20D !!! Annika1980 Digital Photography 18 11-12-2005 12:44 AM
REALLY HUGE PANOS LOVE THE 20D !!! Annika1980 Digital Photography 57 11-22-2004 01:39 PM



Advertisments