W/ or W/out birds? (IR)

JC · February 10, 2015

~700 nm false color infrared. Slightly different views, but anyone have a strong feeling for with or without birds? I have a very strong preference, curious to see if others feel the same. Any other C&C appreciated as well.

(pixelation is not there in the originals, birds are small, but obviously birds)

1)

2)

These were just after dawn, valley was allready filling up with haze, mts in the distance are hardly seen in my standard color images.

Thelensspot · February 10, 2015

Definitely WITH the birds for me. Your shots create a surreal world which lies dormant in #1.
In #2 there is life with the birds telling me "We live in our world. You live in yours."
I like the effect.

Also for me in #1 the sky looks a little monotonous.

Stumblebum · February 10, 2015

Birds.
They become the stars!
Love the color and scene!
Maybe best of yours that I have seen yet!

David_S85 · February 10, 2015

Birds. Very eerie image - which is good, BTW.

kdog · February 10, 2015

Absolutely with the birds.

Really special shot, JC.

denisegoldberg · February 10, 2015

definitely with the birds, truly wonderful!

--- Denise

Cornflake · February 10, 2015

I love both versions. My reaction before I read any comments was that the answer depends on what you want the shot to be about. If I were going to order a print of one, though, I'd get the birdier one.

And yes, infrared cuts through atmospheric gunk, a fact I discovered by accident

David_S85 · February 10, 2015

Love it. New term = "birdier"

Cornflake · February 10, 2015

PS: I like black and white infrared very much, but I'd almost never seen any with color that I liked. Now I have.

lifeinfocus · February 10, 2015

Like #2 more. #1 without the birds in the air would be cool too.

How is this done - the infrared part that is?

Phil

JC · February 10, 2015

Thanks all, the 'birdier' one is my favorite too. Lets hope the International Association of Volcanology and Chemistry of the Earth's Interior agrees (my guy's on a mission with his 'pet' volcanoes).

lifeinfocus wrote: »

Like #2 more. #1 without the birds in the air would be cool too.

How is this done - the infrared part that is?

Phil

Well, for commercial cameras, it's easier to just put an infrared blocking filter in front of a sensor than it is to design a sensor that sees red light, but not near infrared.

I sent a refurbishes OM-D E-m5 mirrorless camera in to have the UV-IR "cut" (blocking) filter removed, making my camera a full spectrum camera. Then I put a filter on the lens that blocks the unwanted part of the spectra. The filter on this picture transmits a minor amount of blue and green light, but 88% of the transmission is in the mid-red and near infrared (reflected infrared, not the emitted thermal). The raw files are thus heavily biased towards the red, but in post you can switch the red and blue channels to make scenes look a bit more natural or pleasing. I think this works best in scenes with lots of sky and water, as in this case. If I have a lot of structures or plants, I prefer a straight black and white image using a filter that only transmits in the near infrared, without any transmission in the RGB spectra.

bristlecone · February 11, 2015

These are wonderful images JC. With birds for sure. Truly unique.... the color, the light, the feeling.
Bravo!

-Leonard

PrevailingConditions · February 11, 2015

I'm going to the birds as well, but I suspect that's because you've shown both images. I agree with Cornflake though, what were you trying to get across? The first one is more about the scene and environment while the second is about the birds.

Mike

Stumblebum · February 11, 2015

I guess it can be what you want it to be....
If you want it to be Cindy Crawford....go with the birds...
If you want it to be Rosie O' Donnel.....then no birds.
Cheers!

hstrynrd · February 11, 2015

With the birds is fantastic!

JC · February 12, 2015

Thanks again to everyone that commented. I appreciate it.

PrevailingConditions wrote: »

I'm going to the birds as well, but I suspect that's because you've shown both images. I agree with Cornflake though, what were you trying to get across? The first one is more about the scene and environment while the second is about the birds.

Mike

I'm trying to make the scene look as dramatic as possible. I love it with the birds, I was just worried that other people might find them more of a distraction. This is the Salton Sea, if people know it and or haven't figured that out yet, and it's pretty irrevocably linked with birds (being one of the last major stops left on the 'pacific' flyway, so they are part of the scene, so to speak.

BenA2 · February 12, 2015

Love the birds
It's been a long time since I've commented on an image on Dgrin. But, that birds image just sucked me in. I love it because I didn't even know what I was looking at at first and once I figured it out, I was amazed. I feel like I could stare at a large print of this for a long time.

Beautiful.

Tom Foster · February 13, 2015

As I think has unanimously been said before, I would go with the birds one too! Nice images but the bird one does it much more for me!

W/ or W/out birds? (IR)

Comments