Hummingbird in infrared

[kirispupis]

I took this hummingbird shot with an infrared (590nm) 6D recently. AF didn't work so I had to manually focus it, which was a bit difficult. I am curious what you think of the shot.

Infrared Hummingbird by Joseph Calev, on Flickr

 

[fugu82]

Very cool image! Don't think I've ever seen anyone shoot hummingbirds in IR.

 

[dswtan]

Good to see you still experimenting, Joseph! I miss your macros, which inspired me to do things like https://500px.com/photo/113571757/cardinal-meadowhawk-closeup. For IR, probably the best "creature" shot I've got is https://500px.com/photo/43699048/honeybee-on-sedum-in-infrared.

But after trying many such things myself, it seems one just can't beat getting the traditional nice cloudscapes or water-vegetation contrasts in IR. But let's keep trying!

 

[Sashi]

Wow, beautiful capture!

 

[sanj]

Honestly, I do not see the point of this. I so much prefer proper color version.

 

[arthurbikemad]

Its a GREAT shot, IR photography is interesting and makes me wonder what wildlife must perceive the world like if viewed in a different spectrum of light unlike ours. However I do kind of agree about IR photography in that I don't quite get it.. but then I guess I have contradicted myself already as I find the shot interesting

 

[kirispupis]

Thanks for the feedback. I have been photographing infrared for some time, but until now most of my shots were of landscapes. What I have found is infrared is an individual case. Some people absolutely love them, while others simply don't like them. It's kind of like my high speed water drop photos. Some people don't see the point, while I have many others hanging on walls.

That being said, I am finding that the population that likes infrared macros vs infrared landscapes is quite a bit smaller. I suspect that's because you have the interesting skies for landscapes.

The toughest thing with infrared is learning to 'see' with infrared. What I have found is that landscapes that look interesting in color will generally not be interesting in infrared. Certain lighting conditions must be present. I know what to look for in landscapes, but it looks like I still have a lot to learn for infrared macros.

 

[Ozarker]

The photo is fine, but what impresses me is that you were able to manual focus on the hummingbird. They don't remain still for long.

 

[eml58]

Honestly, I do not see the point of this. I so much prefer proper color version.

I'm also somewhat of a traditionalist, but if you have a look at Joseph's web site, there are some quite beautiful Images of Hummingbirds in full colour, or, color if preferred.

As for the Image itself Posted here, I agree with others regards the skill needed here to take this Image with Manual Focus, I've tried with my Zeiss 55 & 85, without success.

 

[Mr Bean]

The last time I tried colour IR was back in the film days. I like the image, for technical reasons, plus, its different

I am curious about the IR setup. My interest at the moment is trying to study skin diseases on animals. The other week, I had an idea about using IR to help determine if a certain condition of the skin appears, without handling the animal. But, I wasn't entirely sure how to setup the IR rig. This certainly looks like an idea to try

 

[JPAZ]

Nice shot, kirispupis . I am very impressed with your focusing skills, as well. To me, IR is a bit like B&W. It is different than how our eyes see the world around us. I've seen some IR images I really like and some no so much.

 

[kirispupis]

The last time I tried colour IR was back in the film days. I like the image, for technical reasons, plus, its different

I am curious about the IR setup. My interest at the moment is trying to study skin diseases on animals. The other week, I had an idea about using IR to help determine if a certain condition of the skin appears, without handling the animal. But, I wasn't entirely sure how to setup the IR rig. This certainly looks like an idea to try

If you are looking to photograph skin conditions, then you should look into UV instead of IR. Eventually I want to also do UV photography, but it is a bit trickier. With IR I converted a camera to 590nm, then many different filters exist for other wavelengths. I've seen filters up to 95mm, though I only need 82mm.

For UV you can convert a camera, but if you need a specific spectrum then you need a filter - but those filters are much smaller than my lenses. The biggest is about 52mm. Therefore for UV I'll probably convert a much smaller camera.

 

[kirispupis]

Thank you for the comments. Here is another one from the same series. The processing is slightly different.

IMG_0031-Edit.jpg by Joseph Calev, on Flickr

 

[scottkinfw]

Awesome shot, and great skill to get it in mf.

That said, for me, I just love the iridescent colors.

sek

Thank you for the comments. Here is another one from the same series. The processing is slightly different.

IMG_0031-Edit.jpg by Joseph Calev, on Flickr

 

[AlanF]

Whereas many animals and birds see in the near UV, there is no evidence that any animal sees in the IR, though snakes etc can detect heat. IR photography ruins the beautiful colours of birds so I join the others who are asking what is the point of IR photography of humming birds?

 

[Mr Bean]

The last time I tried colour IR was back in the film days. I like the image, for technical reasons, plus, its different

I am curious about the IR setup. My interest at the moment is trying to study skin diseases on animals. The other week, I had an idea about using IR to help determine if a certain condition of the skin appears, without handling the animal. But, I wasn't entirely sure how to setup the IR rig. This certainly looks like an idea to try

If you are looking to photograph skin conditions, then you should look into UV instead of IR. Eventually I want to also do UV photography, but it is a bit trickier. With IR I converted a camera to 590nm, then many different filters exist for other wavelengths. I've seen filters up to 95mm, though I only need 82mm.

For UV you can convert a camera, but if you need a specific spectrum then you need a filter - but those filters are much smaller than my lenses. The biggest is about 52mm. Therefore for UV I'll probably convert a much smaller camera.

Thanks for the feedback. I'll start exploring the UV aspect.

 

[NancyP]

Evaluation of skin disease in humans often involves the "Wood's lamp", a long-wave UV (UV-A) lamp that shows fluorescence in otherwise often hard-to-see dermatophytes (fungal infection of the skin - "ringworm", "athlete's foot", etc).

 

[NancyP]

An option for those who may want a "full-spectrum" camera would be the Astronomik clip-in filter system:
http://www.astronomik.com/en/clip-filter-system.html I would think that one could order up custom filters, if needed.
There is plenty of info out there on conversions for UV photography. Scientific photographers often use UV.
Flowers often look different under UV, and this matters because many insects see into UV spectrum. Lenses that work for visible light may or may not be good for UV or for IR. "Process lenses" are terrific, apparently, because UV is/was used in photolithography and other reproductive processes.