"Normal" vs Infrared

[JonBowles]

Here's two shots of the same scene, the fiirst taken with the A7rii, the second with an IR converted Sony Nex5N (converted at 665nm). The IR shot shows how IR shows up sediment in the watr much better than the "normal" image. It also penetrates haze far better; the RAW file from the A7rii had an incredible amount of haze in comparison to the IR shot, which makes processing far more difficult.

I'd be interested in people's thoughts.


Zohreh River by Jon, on Flickr


Zohreh River by Jon, on Flickr

 

[Neil Burnell]

I love the second shot Jon, just makes the river stand out that little bit more. Saying that though they are both very interesting to view.

 

[AJQS]

There's no denying the IR shot is clearer, however the colours in the normal version are that much more interesting.

 

[JonBowles]

There's no denying the IR shot is clearer, however the colours in the normal version are that much more interesting.

IR only picks up colour from water, sky or vegetation, which is sometimes a drawback, especially in desert scenes. I have tried combining IR with normal shots, but it's very difficult as the images never line up properly due to movement of the aircraft between shots. This one took me about 7 hours to line the images up, and another hour or so processing; it's an image from the IR Nex 5N merged with a shot from a Pentax K5. To combine A7rii sots with IR shots I would need to resize the A7rii images to 16mp first (unless I bought an IR A7rii, which I am considering).

Kunlun Pentax K5+Sony Nex5N(IR) by Jon, on Flickr

 

[Paul Cronin]

Think i prefer No.2 with the soft colours compared with the first one being too harsh for me. Both nicely taken though.

 

[LongLensPhotography]

I like both but aesthetically no 2 has slightly more pleasing colours

 

[Terrywoodenpic]

Not sure this is about aesthetics. It is more about what is shown and how.
It is interesting how much "Hotter" the water is in the two Oxbow lakes.