That's fine with me. But one question - why do photographs have to be "natural" looking? I am not claiming that my shots are "fine art", but I have seen many beautiful photographs and paintings that were not "natural" looking either in their coloring or lighting but I could still be "attracted" to them.I don't understand peoples attraction to IR...to me it's just so unnatural looking.
Just my 2 cents worth.
Yes, the camera was modified to shoot IR by removing the no-pass filter that is put into all digital cameras. In my case the filter is replaced by a 720 nm filter which allows only IR frequency light. You can get what is called a "full spectrum" conversion, where the no-pass filter is replaced by clear filter. Then you control the light that gets to the sensor by different filters put on the lenses. So you can put on a filter (the equivalent of the original no-pass filter) on the lens to allow for "normal" shooting. So yes, otherwise the camera is "useless" with regards to non-IR shooting.I think these photos look great! You said "converted IR", so are you saying that the camera has been especially modified to accentuate the IR effect or are you using an IR filter on the lens? Does this modification render the camera useless except for IR work? How do you achieve the unusual colors; thru post processing? Has anyone done any IR photos that look like Kodak's Color IR Ektachrome?