Are there any programs that can convert color infra-red photos to actual color?
in [Digital Cameras]
|
From: Grimly Curmudgeon on 18 Jul 2010 08:24 We were somewhere around Barstow, on the edge of the desert, when the drugs began to take hold. I remember Kennedy McEwen <rkm(a)nospam.demon.co.uk> saying something like: >This particular Royal was very savvy about the technology and commented >that he had used something similar during his combat experience, to >which another colleague remarked "I know". When asked by the Royal in >question how he knew this, my colleague replied "Your mom told me!". ;-) Ah, the chopperjock. He and his brother are quite clued-in about many things technical. I can't say the same for many of the others, though.
From: Scotius on 28 Jul 2010 17:24 On Sat, 17 Jul 2010 13:42:15 +0100, Grimly Curmudgeon <grimly4REMOVE(a)REMOVEgmail.com> wrote: >We were somewhere around Barstow, on the edge of the desert, when the >drugs began to take hold. I remember sligoNoSPAMjoe(a)hotmail.com saying >something like: > >>It would be something like trying to make a Big Mac taste like >>cheese cake with cherry topping with out having cheese or cherries or >>even knowing that what you have to start with is a Big Mac. > >Living by chemistry. >I'm sure some food researchers are working on it. Alexander Shulgin would probably be interested in it if he was still alive... and then I'd be immediately NOT interested in it. I just can't respect acid-loving hippies.
From: Scotius on 28 Jul 2010 17:26 On Sat, 17 Jul 2010 13:46:37 +0100, Grimly Curmudgeon <grimly4REMOVE(a)REMOVEgmail.com> wrote: >We were somewhere around Barstow, on the edge of the desert, when the >drugs began to take hold. I remember Kennedy McEwen ><rkm(a)nospam.demon.co.uk> saying something like: > >>I was once asked by a senior member of the UK >>Royal Family why the false colour pictures from a thermal camera, >>representing temperature from blue being cold to red being hot, made >>someone's shirt look orange when it was obviously blue. Just as I >>repeated that it was false colour, a colleague jumped in and told him >>not to worry because I would have that fixed in a day or two. No such >>thing as a stupid question, just stupid people. > >Your colleague saw the Royal's eyes glaze over two sentences into the >explanation and leapt in to save you. The Royals are notoriously >difficult to penetrate with any meaningful knowledge, their inbreeding >prevents it. It's probably not so much that as it is them being distracted by worrying if anyone's noticed their club feet.
From: Scotius on 28 Jul 2010 17:32 On Sat, 17 Jul 2010 20:45:22 -0400, "Peter" <peternew(a)nospamoptonline.net> wrote: >"David J Taylor" <david-taylor(a)blueyonder.co.uk.invalid> wrote in message >news:i1rugq$sum$1(a)news.eternal-september.org... >> "DanP" <dan.petre(a)hotmail.com> wrote in message >> news:46365b3d-a169-4fa0-8995-a96da2cdde1f(a)e5g2000yqn.googlegroups.com... >> [] >>> The information from an IR image has nothing to do with the colour. >>> A hot green mug will look different in IR than a plant with the same >>> shade of green. >>> So you cannot map IR to visible colour. >>> >>> DanP >> >> Be careful not to confuse near-IR with far-IR. With digital cameras and >> film it's the region just beyond the red end of the visible spectrum which >> people call "IR" - a wavelength of ~0.8um. Here, the prime difference is >> that the reflectance of vegetation is much higher and hence the >> characteristic appearance of monochrome IR images. >> > > >Almost! >Chlorophyll is transparent to waves in the near IR spectrum. Hence it >appears to be white. Similarly many clothing dyes are transparent in that >spectrum and also appear white. Particles in the air cause the sky to appear >blue. In this spectrum these particles do not reflect the energy waves and >thus appear black. > >BTW I have submitted an IR photo in the SI. I'm glad everyone is enjoying this discussion so much, although I was pretty much done when I found it that "...it wouldn't work" :) Meanwhile, I've now been convinced that I might be best off to stay well away from infra-red completely. Am I to understand that not only would I not be able to convert the infra-red colors back to "regular" color since there's a lack of information about the regular color in the infra-red image, but also that there are things out there that absorb the infra-red and make using it for photography far more difficult? I might to to B & W infra-red for photos where I don't want to distract anyone with flash, but I won't go anywhere near color infra-red... unless I want to take spooky looking pix that is.
From: Better Info on 28 Jul 2010 19:01
On Wed, 28 Jul 2010 17:22:59 -0400, Scotius <yodasbud(a)mnsi.net> wrote: > > Well, you've convinced me. I still think B & W infra-red is a >good idea for not bothering a band or crew though... or am I wrong >about that too? Oh God don't let me be wrong about that too... can an >IR flash be seen (I'm hoping not)? Wrong? A bit. Most people will look like they have blonde hair in IR illumination. Retinal reflection will be increased so they all look like they have demon eyes. And there will be other shifts in people's appearances in IR. I would suggest instead getting talented with handheld camera techniques and knowing when to trip the shutter, at the peak or moment of reversal of motion. I once documented the band of a 3-day concert taking place deep in the Everglades with a handheld superzoom camera. Due to location, the night lighting was provided by campfires and 12volt battery powered system. IOW, not much illumination. While I had to use slower shutter speeds (and long focal lengths), sometimes the band members would be blurred, yet this only added to the images greatly. The wave of a hand across the guitar strings or the blurred hair of some singer flipping their head to the side captured the sense of motion on the stage, instead of some sterile images of posed manikins. There's more to the art of photography than trying to make everything look frozen. This is especially true in sports photography. Today's snapshooting morons just don't "get it". |