pachuco
El ****
I saw this on the NYT website about photojournalist Tyler Hicks using a night vision device in front of his camera lens to photograph in Afghanistan. The images kind of reminds me of Holga images.
http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2009/05/13/world/asia/20090513-nightvisionjournal/index.html
http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2009/05/13/world/asia/20090513-nightvisionjournal/index.html
JoeV
Thin Air, Bright Sun
That was very interesting, thanks for posting.
I was thinking about how the standards of image making are less important when there's no other way of capturing them. In any other context, like using IR nightvision just as an effect, it would be dismissed because better results could be had without it. In this case it's instrumental to the success of the project.
~Joe
I was thinking about how the standards of image making are less important when there's no other way of capturing them. In any other context, like using IR nightvision just as an effect, it would be dismissed because better results could be had without it. In this case it's instrumental to the success of the project.
~Joe
pachuco
El ****
It certainly does put image quality into perspective!
RioRico
Opinionated User
My favorite little digicam is a Sony DSC-V1 (I'm on my third, having worn out the first two). 5mpx with 4x Carl Zeiss optics, and NightShot. The latter pulls the hotfilter (IR blocker) away from the sensor and turns on an IR light. I also use an external IR light and can shoot in absolute darkness, the only visible light being the dim green glow of the LCD screen. Short of putting a bulky nightvision image amp in front of an unmodified camera, this is the most feasible way I've found to shoot in darkness. Image quality isn't as bad as you'd imagine, with proper PP tweaks, ranging from dramatic to dreamy. Yes, for greater reach, like shooting in conflicted areas, a sniperscope is better - the photog should live longer.