Does anyone know if digital cameras have any sensitivity in
the ultraviolet or infrared ranges? Is there a way (not too
expensive I hope) to take photos beyond the visible light
range and bring this out in false human visible color in the
images?
I'm especially interested in photographing flowers in
ultraviolet. Insects see in the ultraviolet range and flowers
often have markings that are visible to them that are not
visible to humans.
I know could do this with film, but digital is so much simpler
and cheaper, if it can be done.
On Tue, 5 Feb 2008 16:02:39 -0800 (PST), Alan Meyer <ameyer2@yahoo.com>
wrote in
<b6b8cb43-7481-4fab-9fd1-10ea2cf129d6@i29g2000prf.googlegroups.com>:
>Does anyone know if digital cameras have any sensitivity in
>the ultraviolet or infrared ranges? Is there a way (not too
>expensive I hope) to take photos beyond the visible light
>range and bring this out in false human visible color in the
>images?
>
>I'm especially interested in photographing flowers in
>ultraviolet. Insects see in the ultraviolet range and flowers
>often have markings that are visible to them that are not
>visible to humans.
>
>I know could do this with film, but digital is so much simpler
>and cheaper, if it can be done.
Photographing Ultra-Violet Fluorescence with Digital Cameras
<http://palimpsest.stanford.edu/waac/wn/wn23/wn23-2/wn23-205.html>
Note that most digital cameras are much less sensitive to UV than to
visible light and to infrared.
--
Best regards,
John Navas
Panasonic DMC-FZ8 (and several others)
In article
<b6b8cb43-7481-4fab-9fd1-10ea2cf129d6@i29g2000prf.googlegroups.com>,
Alan Meyer <ameyer2@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Does anyone know if digital cameras have any sensitivity in
> the ultraviolet or infrared ranges? Is there a way (not too
> expensive I hope) to take photos beyond the visible light
> range and bring this out in false human visible color in the
> images?
>
> I'm especially interested in photographing flowers in
> ultraviolet. Insects see in the ultraviolet range and flowers
> often have markings that are visible to them that are not
> visible to humans.
most cameras have an infrared cutoff filter on the sensor, since
otherwise it would cause problems with normal photography. older
cameras tend to have weaker filters and are more suitable to infrared
photography. even with the filter still in place, infrared photography
is still possible, however, the exposures tend to be fairly long (1/2
second in bright sunlight, for instance). you'll also want an infrared
filter on the lens to cut out visible light, which for a dslr makes for
interesting times. a company called lifepixel can remove the filter
if you wish to dedicate the camera to infrared or sell you a kit if you
want to do it yourself.
On Tue, 5 Feb 2008 16:02:39 -0800 (PST), Alan Meyer <ameyer2@yahoo.com>
wrote in
<b6b8cb43-7481-4fab-9fd1-10ea2cf129d6@i29g2000prf.googlegroups.com>:
>Does anyone know if digital cameras have any sensitivity in
>the ultraviolet or infrared ranges? Is there a way (not too
>expensive I hope) to take photos beyond the visible light
>range and bring this out in false human visible color in the
>images?
>
>I'm especially interested in photographing flowers in
>ultraviolet. Insects see in the ultraviolet range and flowers
>often have markings that are visible to them that are not
>visible to humans.
>
>I know could do this with film, but digital is so much simpler
>and cheaper, if it can be done.
In message
<b6b8cb43-7481-4fab-9fd1-10ea2cf129d6@i29g2000prf.googlegroups.com>,
Alan Meyer <ameyer2@yahoo.com> writes
>Does anyone know if digital cameras have any sensitivity in
>the ultraviolet or infrared ranges? Is there a way (not too
>expensive I hope) to take photos beyond the visible light
>range and bring this out in false human visible color in the
>images?
A few of them do although most are deliberately filtered to lose their
intrinsic sensitivity to the near IR. They are less good at UV.
>
>I'm especially interested in photographing flowers in
>ultraviolet. Insects see in the ultraviolet range and flowers
>often have markings that are visible to them that are not
>visible to humans.
>
>I know could do this with film, but digital is so much simpler
>and cheaper, if it can be done.
Fuji announced a somewhat expensive digicam capable of doing UV or IR
when combined with the right filters (which are also not cheap). eg
On Feb 5, 6:15 pm, John Navas <spamfilt...@navasgroup.com> wrote:
> On Tue, 5 Feb 2008 16:02:39 -0800 (PST), Alan Meyer <amey...@yahoo.com>
> wrote in
> <b6b8cb43-7481-4fab-9fd1-10ea2cf12...@i29g2000prf.googlegroups.com>:
>
> >Does anyone know if digital cameras have any sensitivity in
> >the ultraviolet or infrared ranges? Is there a way (not too
> >expensive I hope) to take photos beyond the visible light
> >range and bring this out in false human visible color in the
> >images?
>
> >I'm especially interested in photographing flowers in
> >ultraviolet. Insects see in the ultraviolet range and flowers
> >often have markings that are visible to them that are not
> >visible to humans.
>
> >I know could do this with film, but digital is so much simpler
> >and cheaper, if it can be done.
>
> Photographing Ultra-Violet Fluorescence with Digital Cameras
> <http://palimpsest.stanford.edu/waac/wn/wn23/wn23-2/wn23-205.html>
>
> Note that most digital cameras are much less sensitive to UV than to
> visible light and to infrared.
>
> --
> Best regards,
> John Navas
> Panasonic DMC-FZ8 (and several others)
In addition to silicon not being as sensitive to UV as film, normal
optical glass lenses filter out most of the UV. UV cameras have to
have special lenses with glasses specifically designed to allow UV
through.
Ultraviolet? Infrared? 
a company called lifepixel can remove the filter
Linear Mode
