You'll have the same WB issues with any system - unless you cannot adjust WB. I have never found WB to be an issue. I mainly use a single custom WB provided by LifePixel based on sunny daylight. I've taken IR photographs of the landscape lit by nothing but moonlight. I've used IR on cloudy days and even in the rain without fussing with WB.

I would convert the D90. You have great flexibility to use the same lenses with your regular camera and your IR camera. The D90 has Live View which makes manual focus much easier. The advantage to a 4/3 system is the small size makes it a little easier to carry and the camera body might be cheaper - but not much.

@ericbowles: thanks very much. Do you have an opinion as to, starting from scratch, should I convert over a D90 or go with a mirrorless system instead? I am leaning toward just getting the D90 done over but I'm wondering if adjusting WB is going to be never ending drama whenever the sun drops behind a cloud or I walk past a tall building.

I have a converted D200 - with the conversion handled by LifePixel. I also moderate the IR forum on another website.

The big advantage of a converted camera is you can look through the viewfinder and get normal shutter speeds. A full sun image with a D90 that has not been converted is probably a 4 second exposure. Typically a converted camera will AF - and if focus is adjusted during conversion AF is accurate. With a camera that has not been converted, you have to use an opaque IR filter. That means you have to manually focus - and maybe guess a little - and then attach a filter to your lens. That may be fine for landscapes, but not for street photography.

If you have your camera converted, you'll need to decide whether you want AF adjusted to match the IR spectrum. Because IR wavelengths are different, focus is a little off without an adjustment so you need to either manually focus using the IR indicator on some lenses, or use Live View. If focus is adjusted as part of the conversion, you can shoot normally. The one caveat is an AF adjustment is for a single focal length. Typically with LifePixel that is the midpoint of an 18-70 lens or about 40mm. That works for general use - wider images have enough DOF to cover any error. But for longer focal lengths which require precise focus, the AF adjustment will not be accurate. This makes a difference in any macro work and also with long lenses.

White balance is more of a problem with conversions that allow some of the visible spectrum to pass through. This is the approach used for color IR. Lifepixel provides a custom WB with the conversion based on daylight. The D200 in camera custom WB is a little fussy and often does not take. It's better on the D90 and D300. Bright green grass in full sun using pure IR is rendered as a light gray - which means it can be used to create a custom WB. Once you have set the WB for green grass on a sunny day, you can probably continue to use that setting with similar conditions. You'll possibly run into problems with mixed lighting, interior lighting, etc - the same areas where WB is normally a problem.

Channel swapping is used to take an IR image with red light and change it to another color. There are a number of techniques with different software programs. It's pretty simple. Capture NX2 handles channel swapping nicely.

Having some color detail is a nice plus as it makes selective editing easier. If there is no color detail, most software programs struggle a bit more with selective edits. A filter of 800nm will produce images with just IR light. With a correct WB, they look B&W. If you have an IR filter that is in the 600-650nm range, you get some red visible light recorded. This allows the ability to swap channels or selectively edit. You can remove the color in a final edit by using a B&W conversion. The DeepIR conversion at 800nm is a little easier if your intent is B&W - but it depends on how important selective edits are to your workflow.

I like using my Nikon lenses for IR. Most lenses work well, but you need to be aware of hotspots. Hotspots show up as a light circle in the center of the frame. My copy of the 24-70 hotspots terribly. My Tokina 12-24 hotspots terribly. My 18-70, 16-85, and 70-200 show little sign of hotspots unless you are at very narrow apertures (f/18-f/22 and higher).

Thanks for the complement!

shawnino said:
TTJ: after I take a picture of the green grass, how do I set it? I mean, what's my target for what the grass ought to look like?

It will look like grass but really white. With IR, everything that is organic and/or contains chlorophyll will be white - so that is what you need to tell your camera what it white. Your manual will tell you how to set a photo as your custom white balance. Other than that, if it doesn't look that way and if your picture looks like a pig, send me the camera and I'll make good use of it. ;)

Thanks for all the opinions.

TTJ: after I take a picture of the green grass, how do I set it? I mean, what's my target for what the grass ought to look like?

I'm disinclined to go with a new Sigma system. Nothing against Sigma: my 8-16mm is on my D90 as much as any other lens. If I was going away from Nikon DSLR for IR, I think I'd be looking for something more compact.

Great image TTJ. So much to look at. I just get this weird free-association of "sprawl gone bad"--everyone will have his own. It really evokes feeling.

Thanks Pierre!

That was taken with my D50 and LR2 for the b&w tone.

Just a note on using the D50 - 6mp is really showing it's limitations as well as the technology. 8x10s are stretching the limitations of the camera with any cropping and I always shoot at 200 iso. One thing I have noticed with IR (at least with the D50), noise seems to generate quicker than just straight B&W. If you like adding grain to your B&Ws you may like it, but I prefer a real smooth B&W image for display.

Personally I would go at least 10mp just to add the ability to crop and enlarge for files.

Beautiful image TaoTeJared.

DutchNikon said:
Option 3 : GooGLe for "Infrared with Sigma sd10 or sd11 or sd14 , and you will find that those camera's do need no modification what so ever. since the protective filter inside the camera can be removed easely by the user . Those camera's were build/ designed that way to allow easy cleaning of the filter in front of the sensoe...

All you need xtra then is a if filter for the right wavelength you want to use for your IF explorations...

But then say goodbye to your Nikon glass, the Sigmas have a proprietary mount. I'm not even sure what lenses are particularly good for IR photography.

I think a strong choice to make if you're thinking about going serious about IR photography is to get a D50 converted to IR only.

Option 3 : GooGLe for "Infrared with Sigma sd10 or sd11 or sd14 , and you will find that those camera's do need no modification what so ever. since the protective filter inside the camera can be removed easely by the user . Those camera's were build/ designed that way to allow easy cleaning of the filter in front of the sensoe...

All you need xtra then is a if filter for the right wavelength you want to use for your IF explorations...

shawnino said:

but nothing about getting into IR-P from scratch. Any insight on the following? I can see myself shooting 90%+ landscapes and-nature, very few Zombie-Bride portraits:

Be forewarned, shooting people with IR is insanely difficult. To me, everyone looks like images taken with IR deer cam. I found the focus should be on a dress, or features. If you have someone with sharp facial features it can kind of work. Granted I gave up early on people and didn't really try to work on it.

WB - Just take a photo of well lit green grass and set that as your custom WB. Works for my D50. The newer cameras may do more "auto" something to make it more difficult. with IR you do a lot of PS type of work on the images anyway, so I don't think it would be that big of a deal.

On camera choice - I struggle with that as well. I want to upgrade my IR set-up but I don't know to what. To me, with a nikon body, at least you can use any lens you want or have. Go another route, you are limited or you have to invest into another system. Personally I think I'm going to get my G11 converted as I don't take my D50 along due to space in my bag. That camera has strong enough IQ that I feel comfortable with it.

One thing to note, AF does not like IR. You will mostly be in MF. Also IR's focus is different than visible light. Anything close, like macro work you will see it, but sweeping landscapes @ f/11 you will not notice at all. Some companies offer to adjust the AF point. Supposedly that was done on mine but I have noticed the camera likes to only lock on organic materials (bright light) and does not like locking on buildings. Not sure why it would make a difference, but that is my experience. Not a big deal as I'm always in MF anyway.

Lens, I use whatever I want for the day. No different than a normal camera.

LR - I do all my editing in LR and NIK's suite, mainly for B&W conversion. If you want to swap channels (eerie blue and yellow look) you will need at least Photoshop Elements or one of the Corel products. LR just doesn't allow to move the channels enough to really do it right.

Oh, thank goodness....someone finally did a forum search before posting a new thread. Thank you, shawnino!

I have found some threads on Infrared Photography, like these:
http://nikonrumors.com/forum/topic.php?id=3196
http://nikonrumors.com/forum/topic.php?id=351
http://nikonrumors.com/forum/topic.php?id=1976
http://nikonrumors.com/forum/topic.php?id=3334&page=2

but nothing about getting into IR-P from scratch. Any insight on the following? I can see myself shooting 90%+ landscapes and-nature, very few Zombie-Bride portraits:

Camera Body:

Option 1 is to convert my D90. Now I've been all over Life Pixel's site like a cheap suit (suggested, by TTJ I believe, in another thread). They claim that all the consumer-grade Nikon bodies have issues setting in-camera white balance. Is this the case or are they being overly pessimistic?

Option 2 is to do what they seem to suggest: buy a Micro 4/3 body (largely financed with my D90 body, which I'd sell) and convert that. If this is just-plain-better I'll do it, but my familiarity with the buttons/menus on the D90 make me reluctant to do that unless the payoff is large. There is apparently a serious boost as the lens calibration issues largely disappear. I'm not really upset about the inherent aperture tradeoffs with micro 4/3 as it'll be largely landscape so I'll be up around (effectively) f/8 to f/11 regardless.

So I'm thinking about option “2B”: Nikon CX, and trying to get that converted. Life Pixel doesn't advertyise V1/J1 conversion but I'm sure someone would do it (them, or somebody else). Any experience with that? This is partially out of Nikon-brand loyalty and partially wondering about the idea of slapping the converter on the CX body and using the glass I already own.

Camera lens: Clearly dependent on body.

If I'm going to have the D90 done over, the Life Pixel site suggests the Nikon 18-70mm DX lens for calibration. Discontinued; unpleasant. (A lot of their site info is old.) To those who are using D5/6/7/8/90, what's your walk around lens? How is the calibration?

If I'm going M 4/3 or Nikon CX, what are your lens combos and what are you happy with and unhappy about?

Software: I'm currently running LR3. It takes care of all my current (visible-light) photography needs. If I start doing IR-P, am I going to want something else?

Thanks very much.

Here's another rbid. I actually did this one 1st.

@weatherfreak: That is nice.. thanks for the links :)

Here's one of my pics

PS. If you have NIK software that you tube video showing the white neutraliser from color efex pro 3 or 4 is FANTASTIC to remove the last of the wrong hues.

Hey rbid, here's some sites that got me going. I'm NO IR expert at all, actually I only started doing it about 4 weeks ago.
I can't seem to post a pic. I'll read the stickies again see where I'm going wrong.

These sites helped me too:
http://www.lifepixel.com/tutorials/infrared-photoshop-videos (I found a lot of life pixel pages help me)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z_7K6wGqKYQ (this one helped me the most actually, don't blame me for the music)

http://digital-photography-school.com/forum/tutorials/86765-good-tip-infrared-photography-white-balance.html (I don't know why or how this works, but this is where I got the CWB trick from and it works really well for me!

weatherfreak said:
If you're prepared to go thru the motions with post using Capture NX2 to remove the red hue. I use a custom WB from a still with the R72 on. The majority of the photo has green in it. The midday sun thing NEVER worked for me.
I then open it in Cap NX2, open white balance, I then set a grey point from the drop box. Hit start and use either a marquee square or set point, give it a second to calculate the new WB and your off. Channel mix if you so desire. You might need to adjust further.
Good luck

Thanks.. I will use your advice :)

If you're prepared to go thru the motions with post using Capture NX2 to remove the red hue. I use a custom WB from a still with the R72 on. The majority of the photo has green in it. The midday sun thing NEVER worked for me.
I then open it in Cap NX2, open white balance, I then set a grey point from the drop box. Hit start and use either a marquee square or set point, give it a second to calculate the new WB and your off. Channel mix if you so desire. You might need to adjust further.
Good luck

@rbid - You might want to try a converted higher end digi cam. Cheaper and really when it comes down to it, you will be shooting in bright sunlight/day light all the time.

IR shooting in low light really doesn't turn out good (pictures) at all or I have not found anything that does. Due to the way IR works, there inherently is less minute detail and just edge detail so noise doesn't show up and you can blow images up a lot larger since a lot of surface details are smoothed out. 100% of my shots are at the lowest ISO, bright partly cloudy days and with foliage. So basically the camera's best performance settings. Personally I would rather have a G9 converted than my D50 since I'm always shooting at the base iso images and I would like to take it with me more when I'm shooting but I don't want to make room for another body.

@Kay Burn: Thanks for your advice.

I guess that a IR Modified D7000 is the best solution... but I'm not there yet (due to the lack of $$$).

You have excellent photos on your sets .. I'm still looking to find some IR photos there... thanks for sharing.

--- Ricky Marek

I know this thread is about a month old. But after doing a lot of research, I found some solutions...

Basically, you can convert your NEF files to DNG using Adobe's DNG converter, Then open it in the DNG profile Editor. (Both free to download from Adobe). DNG profile editor can do WB temps of far lower than 2000K. On the right side, choose the color "Color Matrices" tab and adjust the white balance of your image with it. (I slid mine ALL the way to the left and adjusted a few other settings slightly, your milage may vary). Once you have done it, save your profile (I saved mine as D7000 IR) and then chose to export it from the file menu.

Now when you open any IR file DNG or NEF in PS using ACR (Adobe Camera RAW), on the right side, click on the camera calibration tab (the one that looks like a little camera) and load the camera profile which you saved (Mine was D7000 IR). Presto, you will have the same WB setting as set as in the DNG Profile Editor. You will notice that the K value is also changed.... take no notice of it as you have "Recalibrated" it now.

I hope this helps anyone else trying to fiddle with doing this. It hasn't been easy trying to find this solution. I shoot a D7000 now and am picking up a modified D7000 next week. Will post my findings then. I did my tests using a cheap 720 IR filter with a D7000 and a Tokina 11-16 (no hotspot). You can find me on Flickr if you have more questions. Hopefully I may be able to help.

Cheers,
Kay Burn

NikoDoby - can you combine the other thread with this one? Both were very similar but had different info. It would seem to make since.

@rbid - I will have to look into that program. Thanks for the update!

This thread is too similar to the other IR thread you created and bumped rbid.

rbid, please don't bump so many threads with the same info. You posted this four times within a few minutes.

@TaoTeJared: I always learn something new from your advice. Thanks!

I found a free tool called IFRaw that I'm starting to play, and for my surprise, it allows to set WB in IR photos...

I will post my results here.