| Author | Thread |
|
|
09/18/2005 11:19:16 AM · #1 |
I was out shooting a series of infrared, and all the images from just this particular scene experienced this black banding in the sky. It is definitely not hardware related; because I̢۪ve used the same camera, filter, lens combination later that day with normal results (any since). Could this be some sort of atmospheric phenomenon? I̢۪ve been shooting infrared for almost twenty years, and I̢۪ve never experienced this before. Has anyone else?
 |
|
|
|
09/18/2005 11:33:51 AM · #2 |
Hmm... the only thing I can think of is the recent solar flare activity, which might have changed the mix of the upper atmosphere in the IR range a bit over the last few days...
|
|
|
|
09/18/2005 11:35:01 AM · #3 |
I'm at a bit of a loss as to exactly what you're referring to... could you expand a bit upon what you're seeing and where on the image?
|
|
|
|
09/18/2005 11:40:51 AM · #4 |
I don't see it in the example either.
|
|
|
|
09/18/2005 12:08:44 PM · #5 |
|
|
|
09/18/2005 12:13:34 PM · #6 |
I don't see anything either.
|
|
|
|
09/18/2005 12:16:10 PM · #7 |
| I'm talking about the very dark sky at the top of the image then midway down the abrupt shift to the lighter toned sky. It reminds me of when you use a polarizer on a super wide angle so that only a small section of the sky darkens. Of course i didn't use a polarizer here and the separation of light & dark tones is more pronounced. |
|
|
|
09/18/2005 12:18:23 PM · #8 |
Me neither.....Have you been using a different monitor? Sounds a bit like the banding you get when the monitor can't cope with subtle variations in shade????
too late..but Kirbic's explanation seems right....I've seen two layers of cloud formations many times before.
Message edited by author 2005-09-18 12:40:19. |
|
|
|
09/18/2005 12:32:57 PM · #9 |
Originally posted by hyperfocal:
I'm talking about the very dark sky at the top of the image then midway down the abrupt shift to the lighter toned sky. It reminds me of when you use a polarizer on a super wide angle so that only a small section of the sky darkens. Of course i didn't use a polarizer here and the separation of light & dark tones is more pronounced. |
Ah. I think this is purely an atmospheric effect. There was prolly a rather abrupt transition between dryer, cooler air above and warmer, wetter air below.
|
|
|
|
09/18/2005 12:47:39 PM · #10 |
Originally posted by kirbic:
Ah. I think this is purely an atmospheric effect. There was prolly a rather abrupt transition between dryer, cooler air above and warmer, wetter air below. |
That's wild because to the visible eye the tone was consistant across that area. Thanks for your response. |
|
|
|
09/22/2005 11:47:46 AM · #11 |
| WHATEVER IT IS IT LOOK REALLY COOL!! |
|
|
|
09/22/2005 12:37:50 PM · #12 |
Originally posted by hyperfocal:
Originally posted by kirbic:
Ah. I think this is purely an atmospheric effect. There was prolly a rather abrupt transition between dryer, cooler air above and warmer, wetter air below. |
That's wild because to the visible eye the tone was consistant across that area. Thanks for your response. |
But your eye doesn't see in IR.
|
|
|
|
09/30/2005 03:45:20 AM · #13 |
Just came across this tidbit:
NIRC – The Near Infrared Camera for the Keck I telescope is so sensitive it could detect the equivalent of a single candle flame on the Moon. |
|
|
|
09/30/2005 03:53:27 AM · #14 |
Originally posted by GeneralE:
Just came across this tidbit:
NIRC – The Near Infrared Camera for the Keck I telescope is so sensitive it could detect the equivalent of a single candle flame on the Moon. |
THEORITICALLY? :p |
|
|
|
09/30/2005 04:06:57 AM · #15 |
Originally posted by shadow:
Originally posted by GeneralE:
Just came across this tidbit:
NIRC – The Near Infrared Camera for the Keck I telescope is so sensitive it could detect the equivalent of a single candle flame on the Moon. |
THEORITICALLY? :p |
Well, it takes some trickery to burn a candle on the Moon, so I suppose they're using that as an easier-to-grasp example than saying it can see a star like the Sun from 14 billion light-years away ... |
|
|
|
09/30/2005 04:35:56 AM · #16 |
Originally posted by GeneralE:
Well, it takes some trickery to burn a candle on the Moon, so I suppose they're using that as an easier-to-grasp example than saying it can see a star like the Sun from 14 billion light-years away ... |
some food for thought on a slow afternoon... light supposedly move in a straight line. so the light from a far far away sun may not even cross the earth to be captured. i last heard of a similar theory for the SETI project and why it was "almost" closed down. |
|
Home -
Challenges -
Community -
League -
Photos -
Cameras -
Lenses -
Learn -
Help -
Terms of Use -
Privacy -
Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2025 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 08/25/2025 04:51:35 PM EDT.
