Re: There are a lot of mistakes in this IR photography book!

[George L Smyth <GLSmyth@xxxxxxx>]

aeophoto@xxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
> 
> Well of the 2 shots on my website - the railroad tracks were shot @
> 800 and the trees were shot @ 1000.  My original intention was to cut
> down on glowiness.  I do aim for darker shadow areas than you might
> traditionally see with infrared - but with detail in highlight areas.
> Logical thinking normally would have increased grain at higher ISOs -
> but were not talking normal film we're talking infrared.  I don't know
> - I'm starting to get horribly confused - BUT I have been happy with
> my results (knock on wood) for several years.

Well, if you're happy with your results, then absolutely continue to do what you are
doing.  Actually, logical thinking indicates a lower contrast with a slower EI for
the same film.  Shooting a film at EI 100 will give you lesser contrast than shooting
that same film at EI 400.  If you happen to have Laurie White's book, you can
graphically see this on page 51.

OTOH, a film that is rated at a lower EI will inherently have more contrast than one
rated higher.  For instance, Konica IR (nominal rating of EI 32) has inherently
higher contrast than Kodak HIE (nominal rating of EI 250).  A more full explanation
of this can be found in "The Components Of Photographic Materials" on my Web page.

I liked the images on your Web page.  They are dark and moody and certainly fit the
direction you were taking.

> A friend, who is a geologist and has watched infrared film used in a
> technical capacity rather than as art, keeps mentioning the water
> content of things and infrared.  (I.E. The reason new foliage glows
> the most intensely and why evergreens don't glow.)  Now Georgia in
> April is humid, but only pleasantly warm.  It's spring - so there's
> new foliage.

The reason foliage is rendered lightly with infrared film is that the infrared
radiation is strongly reflected by the cells within the leaves.  The scattering of IR
around the air spaces between the cells increases this considerably.  Reference
"Rethinking Infrared Photography - Dispelling Myths" on my Web page.

george

- -- 
 Handmade Photographic Images     
  http://www2.ari.net/glsmyth/
*
****
*******
******************************************************
*  To remove yourself from this list, send:          *
*         UNSUBSCRIBE INFRARED                       *
*       to                                           *
*         MAJORDOMO@xxxxx                            *
*----------------------------------------------------*
*   For the IR-FAQ, IR-Gallery and heaps of links:   *
*  http://www.a1.nl/phomepag/markerink/mainpage.htm  *
******************************************************

------------------------------

End of Infrared-Digest V0 #280
******************************