Surreal Nightmare

[JBW]

The shot was good. Then I turned it into a negative and had some fun.

[Shadowman]

Nice concept.

[JBW]

Nice concept.

and the colors flow nicely

[xpatUSA]

Nice, Brian.

I shot a barn spider a while back in 'full spectrum" (no UV/IR blocking filter), they do come out quite weird.

[JBW]

Nice, Brian.

I shot a barn spider a while back in 'full spectrum" (no UV/IR blocking filter), they do come out quite weird.

I wonder how the web and pider would come out in I.R.?

[xpatUSA]

I wonder how the web and spider would come out in I.R.?

Brian, I'm currently using the Sigma SD14 with it's UV/IR blocking filter removed. For NIR (near infrared), I'm favoring a Tiffen 87 (850nm) on the lens.

It will all depend on the spectral reflectance curve of the surfaces involved. If the spider absorbs NIR to a great extent, I would expect a low contrast blurry image. OTOH, if the background is live vegetation, I would expect the background to be blown out.

As to the web, it could be that the web silk's properties of reflectance or absorbance in NIR have to do with making it invisible to flying insects.

In either case, I know little about the properties of spider/silk surfaces, so can't help much, sorry.

If you were thinking of dabbling, since your cameras are not modified for "full spectrum" (approx 350-1150nm), you would be facing very long exposure times, of course.

[JBW]

Brian, I'm currently using the Sigma SD14 with it's UV/IR blocking filter removed. For NIR (near infrared), I'm favoring a Tiffen 87 (850nm) on the lens.

It will all depend on the spectral reflectance curve of the surfaces involved. If the spider absorbs NIR to a great extent, I would expect a low contrast blurry image. OTOH, if the background is live vegetation, I would expect the background to be blown out.

As to the web, it could be that the web silk's properties of reflectance or absorbance in NIR have to do with making it invisible to flying insects.

In either case, I know little about the properties of spider/silk surfaces, so can't help much, sorry.

If you were thinking of dabbling, since your cameras are not modified for "full spectrum" (approx 350-1150nm), you would be facing very long exposure times, of course.

define 'very'

[xpatUSA]

define 'very'

https://dictionary.cambridge.org/us/...y/english/very har-di-har

OTOH, IR exposure time on an unmodified camera is likely to be 30 seconds or more ... :

https://photographylife.com/introduc...ed-photography (Section 4)

... up to 8 minutes or so:

https://photography.tutsplus.com/tut...re--photo-9533 (Section 6).

HTH

[JBW]

https://dictionary.cambridge.org/us/...y/english/very har-di-har

OTOH, IR exposure time on an unmodified camera is likely to be 30 seconds or more ... :

https://photographylife.com/introduc...ed-photography (Section 4)

... up to 8 minutes or so:

https://photography.tutsplus.com/tut...re--photo-9533 (Section 6).

HTH

that would be pushing even my luck