Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 69,977   Posts: 1,523,654   Online: 1130
      
Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 25
  1. #1
    StoneNYC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Connecticut, USA
    Shooter
    8x10 Format
    Posts
    7,036
    Images
    223

    IR question: Shooting the Sun and Moon in IR

    I was reading an article in National Geographic about scientists who were recording the sun at 10+ wavelengths of light to determine weather patterns to predict solar radiation etc etc.

    It got me thinking about shooting the sun with some IR film and how would I go about this? Are there details on ratings? Like exposure, aperture, etc? If possible? Same question with the moon (which I'm sure there are more details on then the sun).

    Next anyone know how to mount an RZ67 to a telescope? Haha I could borrow a nice 400mm or 600mm canon lens and add 2x extension tubes for my 35mm but would prefer to shoot this on 120 for higher detail/magnification rather than 35mm.

    I already have an IR filter and would be using Rollei IR film for 120 or Rollei IR film OR exposure HIE (which I've just acquired two rolls of) in 35mm.

    Any thoughts? Info? Thanks!


    ~Stone

    Mamiya: 7 II, RZ67 Pro II / Canon: 1V, AE-1, 5DmkII / Kodak: No 1 Pocket Autographic, No 1A Pocket Autographic | Sent w/ iPhone using Tapatalk
    ~Stone | "...of course, that's just my opinion. I could be wrong." ~Dennis Miller

  2. #2
    mooseontheloose's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Kyoto, Japan
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,663
    Images
    36
    I think the problem with shooting the moon is the fact that you'll have a longish exposure because of the filter, which means some movement of the moon.
    Rachelle

    My favorite thing is to go where I've never been. D. Arbus

  3. #3

    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    3
    Frankly, the Moon isn't worth it in IR in my opinion. Like moose says above, it's going to move, and fast. So unless you have a goto telescope with tracking, you won't get anything useable. Even if you did have a goto/tracking 'scope, I don't think you're going to gain any new perspective with IR.

    With respect to the Sun there are few things to note. First is an IR filter is not safe to view the Sun. You are cooking your eye. Second, again you are gaining very little here. At best you will capture sunspots, but you could do that without the IR. If you want to see the coronal loops, prominances, or the "roiling" surface, you need a Ca K-line or an H alpha filter which are ridiculously expensive. Without tracking down that article, they are probably recording in IR but a very narrow section of IR to tell them something specific.

    Something else to note. I've been shooting film for 20+ years, and have been trying to make it work for astrophotography for 3. I don't know how they did it before d*****, frankly (respect beyond comprehension to those that did/do). I've taken countless shots of the Moon through an 8" Meade LX90 ACF, and not a single one passes my QC. Same goes for the Sun. I tried to get the transit of Venus and my focus still doesn't please me. To me, it isn't worth it anymore. I'd rather do AP with a nice CCD and go hybrid.

    I don't know how to attach a RZ67 to a telescope. People generally attach Canons, Nikons, etc., which there are specific T adapters for. You could try Googling T adapters for your knife type. Otherwise if it is 58mm aperture, Baader Hyperion eyepieces are set up for afocal photography.

    Good luck.

  4. #4
    StoneNYC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Connecticut, USA
    Shooter
    8x10 Format
    Posts
    7,036
    Images
    223
    THanks for the good info, for some reason I hadn't "subscribed" to my own thread, just saw the responses.

    I've gotten a few good moon images and found a bracket of f/8, f/11 and f/16 with 1/200 shutter at ISO 100 gives a good image on a 300mm prime with 2x extension tube on a normal tripod on my canon, so I don't think that it would be so bad for my purposes, on a clear night, to get something at f/8 with a shutter of 1/60 or 1/80 to get something decent, sure under exposed for IR slightly but usable.

    As far as the sun, thanks for the eyeball advice, I WAS aware of this, but it's always a smart thing to include the info just in case.

    I'm aware that most use canon's (especially with digital because they make the special N series that doesn't have the IR coatings so you can capture IR light for stars and such on some of their models). I just thought it would be a lot better to capture it on a 6x6 (or 6x7 as it were) frame, such detail! It's all just an idea, I just can't imagine that there isn't an adapter for the RZ series or that one couldn't be made.

    Once you get the numbers and the light intensity levels down, it's actually quite easy to shoot the moon. That's why Ansel got such a good image of that field and barn, I forget the name, but he was out and the sun went down and moon came up, and he couldn't measure anything, but remembered the lumens of the moon or something and calculated the proper exposure in his head and got a fantastic image with the foreground and moon both exposed properly.

    Anyway I just want to do it, just to do it, so any further advice would be helpful.

    Thanks guys!

  5. #5

    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Southern USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    3,769
    The moon is a passive reflector. It reflects little or no IR light.
    A rock pile ceases to be a rock pile the moment a single man contemplates it, bearing within him the image of a cathedral.

    ~Antoine de Saint-Exupery

  6. #6
    StoneNYC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Connecticut, USA
    Shooter
    8x10 Format
    Posts
    7,036
    Images
    223
    Quote Originally Posted by Gerald C Koch View Post
    The moon is a passive reflector. It reflects little or no IR light.
    Ah!! see now THAT was good intel ... haha thank you Gerald, I guess I'll be shooting the sun then... saves me from worrying about the whole rotation thing as I'll be shooting at much higher shutter speeds now

  7. #7
    Rudeofus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    1,559
    Images
    10
    Quote Originally Posted by StoneNYC View Post
    As far as the sun, thanks for the eyeball advice, I WAS aware of this, but it's always a smart thing to include the info just in case.
    Sun light normally blinds you so you turn your eyes away as quickly as you can, or you close you lids. Once you put an IR filter between the sun and your eyes, that natural reflex stops working, it looks dark after all. But the strong IR light is still there, frying your eyes.
    Quote Originally Posted by StoneNYC View Post
    It's all just an idea, I just can't imagine that there isn't an adapter for the RZ series or that one couldn't be made.
    There are a few things which make it quite unfeasible to mount an RZ67 to a telescope. First, you have a crop factor of about 0.5 compared to 35mm, and it already takes 1000-1500mm focal length to fill the frame with sun or moon on 35mm. Next thing is the shutter of your RZ67 sits in the lens, so apart from physically fitting a telescope to your camera you'd have to give it a shutter and control this shutter with the electronic signals coming from your RZ67. Also note that most telescopes are mounted such that they track the movement of stars, which means a heavy camera like the RZ67 is not something you want attached at the end of your telescope.
    Quote Originally Posted by StoneNYC View Post
    That's why Ansel got such a good image of that field and barn, I forget the name, but he was out and the sun went down and moon came up, and he couldn't measure anything, but remembered the lumens of the moon or something and calculated the proper exposure in his head and got a fantastic image with the foreground and moon both exposed properly.
    Ansel Adams was a true master of the dark room. His shot "Moonrise, Hernandez" is paramount to that. He needed intensifier to make the neg work, which tells me it was underexposed. Not bad for an estimate but no magic either.
    Trying to be the best of whatever I am, even if what I am is no good.

  8. #8
    StoneNYC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Connecticut, USA
    Shooter
    8x10 Format
    Posts
    7,036
    Images
    223
    Quote Originally Posted by Rudeofus View Post
    Sun light normally blinds you so you turn your eyes away as quickly as you can, or you close you lids. Once you put an IR filter between the sun and your eyes, that natural reflex stops working, it looks dark after all. But the strong IR light is still there, frying your eyes.

    There are a few things which make it quite unfeasible to mount an RZ67 to a telescope. First, you have a crop factor of about 0.5 compared to 35mm, and it already takes 1000-1500mm focal length to fill the frame with sun or moon on 35mm. Next thing is the shutter of your RZ67 sits in the lens, so apart from physically fitting a telescope to your camera you'd have to give it a shutter and control this shutter with the electronic signals coming from your RZ67. Also note that most telescopes are mounted such that they track the movement of stars, which means a heavy camera like the RZ67 is not something you want attached at the end of your telescope.

    Ansel Adams was a true master of the dark room. His shot "Moonrise, Hernandez" is paramount to that. He needed intensifier to make the neg work, which tells me it was underexposed. Not bad for an estimate but no magic either.
    Thanks all wise comments, I'm really paranoid about my eyes, I've had eye surgery and really never look in the sun, and if I do have a shot with the sun I pull back my eyes from the viewfinder so it's only a vague glimmer, I focus and recompose to the sun after I'm away from the viewfinder and at an angle from it, but thanks for the reminder.

    The RZ67 CAN be fired from the lens itself, so triggering it with a cable can be done in mirror lock up mode, however, I suppose you're right, I just would LOVE to have a transparency of the moon the size of a 6x6 frame, it would just be friggin awesome! Oh well... I guess it's Canon for me...

    That's true, he was a darkroom master... but I'll just be shooting at the sun, not giving it surroundings, however it's a good point for sure. I think it was magic, darkroom magic...

  9. #9
    Rudeofus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    1,559
    Images
    10
    Quote Originally Posted by StoneNYC View Post
    The RZ67 CAN be fired from the lens itself, so triggering it with a cable can be done in mirror lock up mode, however, I suppose you're right
    Stone, the RZ67 does not have a shutter, and most telescopes don't have one either! Once the mirror is up, there is nothing between the front entrance of your camera and the film back.

    If 6x7 astro slides mean a lot to you and you are not afraid of some fiddling, you could try the following: focus your telescope onto a piece of ground glass, put the macro lens and some extension rings on your RZ67 and photograph the ground glass. This technique has been used by video folks to get very small DOF despite their camera's small sensors, look for DOF converter.
    Trying to be the best of whatever I am, even if what I am is no good.

  10. #10
    Sirius Glass's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Southern California
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    13,014
    Do not bother shooting the Moon with IR film, it is a cold body.

    So the only other way to shoot the Moon is to drop trousers, although I do not recommend that.
    Warning!! Handling a Hasselblad can be harmful to your financial well being!

    Nothing beats a great piece of glass!

    I leave the digital work for the urologists and proctologists.

Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Contact Us  |  Support Us!  |  Advertise  |  Site Terms  |  Archive  —   Search  |  Mobile Device Access  |  RSS  |  Facebook  |  Linkedin