Niagara Falls in Infrared - C&C please

[JRP2661]

this shot was done with IR filter, 30 seconds @ f/8.0, ISO 200. C&C's are appreciated. previous times I tried to post in this forum, the pics suffered from too much compression. hope this one works okay.

[th256]

WOW just wow

[deletedpenguin]

Very cool effect. I like the idea, but the blurred clouds in infrared are a bit distracting.

[argyle]

I like the water movement, but the blurred clouds are a bit distracting...most likely caused by their movement during the very long shutter speed. Shooting with an IR filter is tough...you need to watch your subject matter. The same goes for foliage...any little bit of a breeze will cause movement which will show up as blurred or OOF. Keep practicing, though.

PS If you really want to pursue IR, you may want to consider getting a spare body (good used) and have it converted to IR. You can then shoot as you normally would with a standard camera/lens setup. Say goodbye to those long shutter speeds.

[burntpixel]

very cool indeed!

agree with the others on the clouds being a bit distracting though.

nice work, thanks for sharing

[curiousgeorge]

Nice alternative perspective on the falls. I love the composition and the IR effect.

The blurred clouds add impact though a little less blur would have been better.

[firu3000]

I like the effect. great job.

[WahooWolfe]

Well done!

[JRP2661]

thanks for all your comments, everybody.

I agree about the blurred clouds, but couldn't help it due to 30 second exposure.

Since I recently upgraded to 40D, I have a spare XTI which I could convert to IR, but $350 for conversion......I am not sure whether I am really into IR photography, although I like the result every time I took one.

[Bill Boehme]

OK, I will be the oddball -- I love the whole thing INCLUDING the clouds. To me, the clouds give a sense of motion to the scene that complements the motion seen in the water. When I look at the picture, I see the clouds almost coming out of the picture towards me and it adds to the sense of motion of the water. I like your thinking outside the visible spectrum.

[rakkno]

Wow that is awesome!!!

[JRP2661]

OK, I will be the oddball -- I love the whole thing INCLUDING the clouds. To me, the clouds give a sense of motion to the scene that complements the motion seen in the water. When I look at the picture, I see the clouds almost coming out of the picture towards me and it adds to the sense of motion of the water. I like your thinking outside the visible spectrum.

thank you, Bill

[argyle]

Since I recently upgraded to 40D, I have a spare XTI which I could convert to IR, but $350 for conversion......I am not sure whether I am really into IR photography, although I like the result every time I took one.

I began the same way as you're doing now...I spent $$$ on a 77mm IR filter...I liked the effect, but not the results due to motion, etc. Luckily, I managed to sell the filter for a little less than I paid for it and went with the conversion on an older 10D. I was kinda surprised when I learned that for not much more than the cost of the filter, I could have gotten the conversion in the first place. That being said, the conversion does make it a lot easier...just mount the lens and let the camera take care of the metering. Since the conversion takes place on the sensor and not with a filter, the camera is also able to take advantage of the autofocus system as well. If you decide to stick with IR, you can't go wrong with a converted body. Have fun shooting!

[Duder]

you'd have been better off using an even longer shutter speed, say 120 seconds, that way you'd get more dramatically streaked clouds. As they are now, it looks more like they are the result of camera shake rather than smooth motion blur.

still, it's a great subject for infrared.

[canotographer]

wow wow wow.. stunning!