snopes.com  

Go Back   snopes.com > Urban Legends > Fauxtography

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 02 November 2007, 02:06 AM
We'veBeenHad
 
Posts: n/a
Default DIY Night Vision?

Well in light (no pun intended) of the failed glomato, there was this one other thing that isn't dangerous and isn't even difficult, that I was curious about. I didn't see it listed here, but it would be cool if real. My problem would be getting the old camera.

Does anyone know if it works?

DIY Night Vision All you need is a flashlight, some cellophane, and an old camera.
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 02 November 2007, 02:26 AM
cageboy
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Would probably just be cheaper to grab a Sony with nightvision off ebay. And I know those work!
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 02 November 2007, 02:27 AM
Eddylizard's Avatar
Eddylizard Eddylizard is offline
 
Join Date: 15 June 2006
Location: Tonbridge, Kent, UK
Posts: 17,865
Default

Well for one I vote shite.

For one the flashlight won't emit that much IR anyway, sticking some filters on the front of it won't boost that emission. At best you will get a zero effect, more likely the material of the filters will absorb some of the IR from the flashlight.

Why the jiggins would anyone make a camera (for normal use) especially sensitive to IR. I mean yes you can ger IR sensitive emulsions and digital cameras for specialised (or creative) use, but in normal circumstances, if the camera was super sensitive to IR, then if you photographed something like a person, a cat a piece of foliage or some masonry that had been heated in the sun prior to dusk, which are much stronger IR emitters than the modified flashlight, then what you will get is a white blur compared to background elements you are using for a light balance that reflect mainly in the visible spectrum. Fairly much not a good thing, unless you want that effect.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 02 November 2007, 02:34 AM
BluesScale BluesScale is offline
 
Join Date: 29 December 2005
Location: Woolhampton, Berkshire, UK
Posts: 1,355
Default

Sounds reasonable. The images that he recorded looked very much like what my Russian night vision gear gives me and because IR is low energy, a lot of torches throw out a good deal of it as as unwanted side effect. Older digital camera were IR sensitive.

Blues
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 02 November 2007, 02:37 AM
UEL's Avatar
UEL UEL is offline
 
Join Date: 01 August 2004
Location: South Lebanon
Posts: 5,440
Default

Our flashlights have IR filters for them. They are great for lighting up Landing Zones etc at night. I don't know how they are for projecting a "beam".

That being said, the fact that the "light" was fixed to the camera makes me suspect that they used the IR light attached to the camera to get their footage. All Sony cameras that have the IR function have the IR light.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 02 November 2007, 02:21 PM
Mycroft Mycroft is offline
 
Join Date: 29 January 2006
Location: Portsmouth, UK
Posts: 1,309
Default

CCDs are sensitive to IR, in fact so sensitive that most CCD cameras have a blue filter so that you get the correct colour balance and not get some weird effects. In many recent cameras the filter is built in the CCD chip, but in some of the older webcams you could remove the filter (you did have to open the casing), and with a good IR source it could be used as a night vision camera.

However in the OP video the camera goes not appear to be modified (although the mods would be internal) and I would be reluctant to use all those filter gels on a torch that powerfull - the heat generated would be terrific; a glass filter would be far better, but also more expensive
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 02 November 2007, 03:03 PM
Doug4.7
 
Posts: n/a
Teacher

Both of my digital cameras are sensitive to IR light. I can tell because I will shine the TV remote at them and although I can't see any light, the camera sees the IR LED flashing. So the camera "seeing" the IR light is very possible. I am not sure about the makeshift filter. However, the spotlight does output serious amounts of IR radiation, so with a proper IR filter (I have one for my big Pentax camera), it could work.
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 02 November 2007, 07:15 PM
TuFurg TuFurg is offline
 
Join Date: 06 July 2005
Location: Grand Rapids, MI
Posts: 1,255
Default

Would the infrared radiation reach the same distance as the light though? No clue, just wondering. Looks pretty much like a guy with a flashlight to me...
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 02 November 2007, 10:20 PM
Diabolus Ex Deus's Avatar
Diabolus Ex Deus Diabolus Ex Deus is offline
 
Join Date: 19 August 2006
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Posts: 113
Default

Ok. looks like I'll be trying this one at some point. I can't promise this weekend like last time tho. We'll see.

Luckily I can get gels from my TV studio so I won't have to pay for crap.
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 03 November 2007, 03:10 AM
We'veBeenHad
 
Posts: n/a
Default

I vote fake. There wasn't even an embed code.
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 03 November 2007, 11:24 AM
BluesScale BluesScale is offline
 
Join Date: 29 December 2005
Location: Woolhampton, Berkshire, UK
Posts: 1,355
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by TuFurg View Post
Would the infrared radiation reach the same distance as the light though? No clue, just wondering. Looks pretty much like a guy with a flashlight to me...
Yep. IR is light and behaves like light. I have an IR torch/flashlight and it looks just like that with an IR imager. To look at, there is a very dull red glow from my IR torch but you can barely feel the heat on your hands.

Blues
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 05 November 2007, 08:06 AM
Troberg Troberg is offline
 
 
Join Date: 04 November 2005
Location: Borlänge, Sweden
Posts: 11,242
Default

I've done something similar with my Olympus C2100UZ, a camera which is wonderfully sensitive to IR (if one is into IR photography, that is). Instead of the ordinary IR filter on the lens thingy, I put the filter in front of the flash in a dark room. The flash was barely visible (less than a LED), but the camera took decent pictures.

I didn't save the pictures, as it was just a test and I'm not that interested in my cellar, but you can see some of what the C2100UZ is capable of with an IR filter here: http://rpglab.net/troberg/gallery/view.php?gid=97 . All these shots are taken handheld, with shutter times that are very workable handheld. That camera is somewhat of the holy grail of IR photography. Best of all, you can get them on eBay for $100-$200 nowadays, plus $30-$40 for the IR filter!
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 05 November 2007, 08:50 AM
PrometheusX303
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Just experimented a little with my Sony Handycam and a Sanyo digital camera.

The Handycam is about as sensitive to IR as the Sanyo or webcam with the Nightshot Plus turned off. With it on, it become super sensitive. I was able to see my TV remote's IR pulses reflecting off the wall with it on (and the Handycam's IR emitter blocked).

The Sanyo, however, only detected the Handycam's IR as a faint red glow, and that only when it was less than 12" from a surface (a white sheet of paper in this case). I got similar results with my cell phone and webcam.

As far as the filters on the spotlight... I don't see how it would help with regular digital cameras, unless they were much more sensitive than the Sanyo. However, using night mode on the Handycam with normal lighting conditions distorts colors, some severely. This may be a normal function of the camera, but if it's a result of the increased sensitivity, should older cameras have this problem?
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 05 November 2007, 10:34 AM
Troberg Troberg is offline
 
 
Join Date: 04 November 2005
Location: Borlänge, Sweden
Posts: 11,242
Default

Quote:
As far as the filters on the spotlight... I don't see how it would help with regular digital cameras, unless they were much more sensitive than the Sanyo.
Different cameras are vastly different when it comes to IR sensitivity, and most newer have filters which filter out IR. My Olympus C2100UZ shoots IR like normal shots, and does it brighter than my Canon EOS 350D does on a 30 second exposure at 1600 ISO.
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 05 November 2007, 11:07 AM
James G's Avatar
James G James G is offline
 
Join Date: 11 January 2004
Location: London, UK
Posts: 3,680
Default

I've modded my webcam to be IR sensitive. There's a tutorial availible here.

ETA: http://www.hoagieshouse.com/IR/

How did I forget the link?
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 20 November 2007, 09:31 PM
RayPV RayPV is offline
 
Join Date: 26 January 2005
Location: Puerto Vallarta, Mexico
Posts: 84
Default

Why go through all the hassle, why not just use the flashlight to see in the dark? No need for the filters. You already have the flashlight there, just use it to light up your subject.
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 21 November 2007, 06:23 PM
Troberg Troberg is offline
 
 
Join Date: 04 November 2005
Location: Borlänge, Sweden
Posts: 11,242
Default

Quote:
Why go through all the hassle, why not just use the flashlight to see in the dark? No need for the filters. You already have the flashlight there, just use it to light up your subject.
Look at my link above (those were shot in the summer), IR gives a completely different image. It's not just seeing in the dark, it's seeing things in a different way.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 06:02 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2013, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.