Southern Louisiana/New Orleans

[Major Nikon]

These are all infrared images from my IR converted D5000 with a 590nm filter. The color images require just a bit more post processing. I first have to white balance with DXO, since photoshop can't. Once in photoshop the red and blue color channels are swapped. That's really the bulk of post processing. Once in photoshop, I'll make some adjustments to color, contrast, and brightness, but that's about it. The images I want for monochrome are converted to B&W just like any other digital image. The last picture is interesting not because it's that great of a photo, but because precise focusing with infrared is traditionally somewhat difficult. The live mode in the D5000 takes care of this problem since the focus is adjusted from the medium, rather than the autofocus sensors.

[Mira]

1. When it comes to infrared photographs I am reduced

to remind myself of the people who stand in front of modern art and say: "I don't know anything about it, but I know what I like".
Translation: I like what it does to bring a more poignant, crisp, life-like and credible black and white to me. Evidenced in all three of yours, but I ADORE the first one.
About the color: I just don't like it yet, because I don't understand the need for it.
I was in "that very swamp" around NOLA last summer, and it did not look like your photo to my simple mind.

[Major Nikon]

4. There are differnt types of IR filters

IR filters are rated at their cutoff frequency. A true IR filter is 720nm or higher which means it cuts off all visible light and passes only IR. A 590nm filter like mine will pass red and orange in addition to IR, but cuts off the rest of the visible spectrum. With a few post processing tricks, you can produce false colors like the color image I posted. My preference is for true IR images. The reason I went with the 590nm filter is because with a few photoshop tricks, I can produce pretty much the same images a 720nm filter will produce, with the added benefit of being also able to produce false color images.

If you want to experiment with IR, all you have to do is buy an IR filter that fits your lens. If you're really cheap, you can even make your own out of developed, but not exposed slide film (the ends of the roll aren't exposed). The disadvantage is you will have to focus either by prefocusing with the filter off, or use live mode if your camera has it. If you use the prefocus method, you need to use a small aperture setting like f/8 or higher because the infrared focusing point is not the same as the visible spectrum. If you focus in live mode you don't have to worry about it. Either way you will have to use a tripod, because exposure times will be long to very long, depending on your camera (such as 30 seconds give or take, even on a bright day). If you buy a commercial filter, the cheap ones are made out of plastic. I recommend starting with a cheap one. Here is one for a lens that takes 52mm filters:

http://www.amazon.com/NEEWER%C2%AE-52MM-Infrared-Filter-IR720/dp/B003TY2UQG

Here is an image that's similar to #3, but in monochrome.

[Mira]

6. After this I suspect I have a new thing to learn on my list

I thank you for taking the time to teach and respond.
The photo you posted has all the qualities of what I like about infrared and b/w, it is so very intriguing and invites to linger.

[Major Nikon]

7. It starts out cheap, but can get expensive

The downside to using an external filter is the very long exposure times. One of the great things about IR is the effect of turning foliage to bright white. If you have any wind at all, a long exposure means blurry leaves and flowers. Sometimes this is OK as it makes for an even more surrealistic effect. If you want normal exposure times, you have to replace the internal IR blocking filter with an IR pass filter. You can do this yourself on the cheap by getting a cheap plastic IR filter on ebay if you can find one for your camera, but this requires some pretty deep disassembly for most cameras and is not for the faint of heart. I opted to have this done professionally with a nice glass filter, but this is not cheap and will typically run in the $250-300 price range. It also renders your camera useless for anything but IR photography.

I used to do IR photography back in the film days when you could just buy IR film and things were far less complicated.

[JCMach1]

2. lovely

[pscot]

3. You might be interested

in this site: http://www.naturfotograf.com/irstart.html There are some spectacular images. Rorslett also has a lense page that evaluates the IR capabilities of all nikkor lenses.

[Major Nikon]

5. I visited that guy's site many times before I opted to have a camera converted to IR

His UV images are quite impressive. It would be incredible to convert a camera for UV photography, but glass lenses don't pass UV very well and a quartz lens for my Nikon would cost north of $4,000, which is a bit more than I'd want to spend on such an endeavor.

http://www.company7.com/nikon/lens/0105f4.5uv.html