Dark Water 1000nm with converted Sigma fp.

Started 3 months ago | Discussions
SigmaTog
SigmaTog Senior Member • Posts: 1,022
Dark Water 1000nm with converted Sigma fp.
3

Dark Water 1000nm with converted Sigma fp.

xpatUSA
xpatUSA Forum Pro • Posts: 19,543
Re: Dark Water 1000nm with converted Sigma fp.
1

SigmaTog wrote:

Dark Water 1000nm with converted Sigma fp.

Interesting, Colin.

At 1000nm, water absorbs energy about 1000 times more than visible light:

http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/Chemical/watabs.html

-- hide signature --

Pedantry is hard work, but someone's gotta do it ...

 xpatUSA's gear list:xpatUSA's gear list
Panasonic Lumix DMC-LX1 Sigma SD9 Panasonic Lumix DC-G9 Panasonic Leica DG Macro-Elmarit 45mm F2.8 ASPH OIS Sigma 17-50mm F2.8 EX DC OS HSM +13 more
D Cox Forum Pro • Posts: 28,965
Re: Dark Water 1000nm with converted Sigma fp.
2

Maybe you could photograph CO2.

A container full of dry air, and the same after you drop a lighted match or a small candle in before closing the lid.

Don Cox

 D Cox's gear list:D Cox's gear list
Sigma fp
Scottelly
Scottelly Forum Pro • Posts: 16,045
Re: Dark Water 1000nm with converted Sigma fp.

xpatUSA wrote:

SigmaTog wrote:

Dark Water 1000nm with converted Sigma fp.

Interesting, Colin.

At 1000nm, water absorbs energy about 1000 times more than visible light:

http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/Chemical/watabs.html

Wouldn't it depend on the ppm concentration Ted?

-- hide signature --

Scott Barton Kennelly
https://www.bigprintphotos.com/

 Scottelly's gear list:Scottelly's gear list
Sony SLT-A65 Sigma SD1 Merrill Nikon D810 Sigma sd Quattro H Sony DT 18-55mm F3.5-5.6 SAM +26 more
xpatUSA
xpatUSA Forum Pro • Posts: 19,543
Re: Dark Water 1000nm with converted Sigma fp.
1

Scottelly wrote:

xpatUSA wrote:

SigmaTog wrote:

Dark Water 1000nm with converted Sigma fp.

Interesting, Colin.

At 1000nm, water absorbs energy about 1000 times more than visible light:

http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/Chemical/watabs.html

Wouldn't it depend on the ppm concentration Ted?

I'm sure it would Scott.

Er, ppm of what ... ?

-- hide signature --

Pedantry is hard work, but someone's gotta do it ...

 xpatUSA's gear list:xpatUSA's gear list
Panasonic Lumix DMC-LX1 Sigma SD9 Panasonic Lumix DC-G9 Panasonic Leica DG Macro-Elmarit 45mm F2.8 ASPH OIS Sigma 17-50mm F2.8 EX DC OS HSM +13 more
SigmaTog
OP SigmaTog Senior Member • Posts: 1,022
Re: Dark Water 1000nm with converted Sigma fp.

D Cox wrote:

Maybe you could photograph CO2.

A container full of dry air, and the same after you drop a lighted match or a small candle in before closing the lid.

Don Cox

Thank Don, I get the idea, I'll give it a try out soon.

Col

SigmaTog
OP SigmaTog Senior Member • Posts: 1,022
Re: Dark Water 1000nm with converted Sigma fp.
1

xpatUSA wrote:

SigmaTog wrote:

Dark Water 1000nm with converted Sigma fp.

Interesting, Colin.

At 1000nm, water absorbs energy about 1000 times more than visible light:

http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/Chemical/watabs.html

Interesting thanks Ted.
That is why it is a good coolant.

SigmaTog
OP SigmaTog Senior Member • Posts: 1,022
Re: Dark Water 1000nm with converted Sigma fp.

D Cox wrote:

Maybe you could photograph CO2.

A container full of dry air, and the same after you drop a lighted match or a small candle in before closing the lid.

Don Cox

I tried this out Don, but I didn't get anything exciting.
Perhaps it is a very narrow band, or I need some more details ?

Col

xpatUSA
xpatUSA Forum Pro • Posts: 19,543
Re: Dark Water 1000nm with converted Sigma fp.
1

SigmaTog wrote:

D Cox wrote:

Maybe you could photograph CO2.

A container full of dry air, and the same after you drop a lighted match or a small candle in before closing the lid.

Don Cox

I tried this out Don, but I didn't get anything exciting.
Perhaps it is a very narrow band, or I need some more details ?

Col

Have a look at this, Col:

Note: 1 micron = 1000nm

CO2 appears to be only absorbant at much higher wavelength than your 1000nm filter.

Not sure what Don was expecting ...

-- hide signature --

Pedantry is hard work, but someone's gotta do it ...

 xpatUSA's gear list:xpatUSA's gear list
Panasonic Lumix DMC-LX1 Sigma SD9 Panasonic Lumix DC-G9 Panasonic Leica DG Macro-Elmarit 45mm F2.8 ASPH OIS Sigma 17-50mm F2.8 EX DC OS HSM +13 more
Scottelly
Scottelly Forum Pro • Posts: 16,045
Re: Dark Water 1000nm with converted Sigma fp.

xpatUSA wrote:

Scottelly wrote:

xpatUSA wrote:

SigmaTog wrote:

Dark Water 1000nm with converted Sigma fp.

Interesting, Colin.

At 1000nm, water absorbs energy about 1000 times more than visible light:

http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/Chemical/watabs.html

Wouldn't it depend on the ppm concentration Ted?

I'm sure it would Scott.

Er, ppm of what ... ?

Whatever is making it dark Ted. I'm assuming the photo was shot using some black food coloring in water, but it could be laser printer toner, which is generally finely ground carbon powder, which coats tiny polymer pellets (plastic beeds), if I'm not mistaken. When the powder is pressed against the paper by a hot roller, the pellets melt, adhering the black carbon powder (probably just left over coal ash, which is ground into an almost nano-particle sized fine grain) to the paper.

-- hide signature --

Scott Barton Kennelly
https://www.bigprintphotos.com/

 Scottelly's gear list:Scottelly's gear list
Sony SLT-A65 Sigma SD1 Merrill Nikon D810 Sigma sd Quattro H Sony DT 18-55mm F3.5-5.6 SAM +26 more
D Cox Forum Pro • Posts: 28,965
Re: Dark Water 1000nm with converted Sigma fp.

SigmaTog wrote:

D Cox wrote:

Maybe you could photograph CO2.

A container full of dry air, and the same after you drop a lighted match or a small candle in before closing the lid.

Don Cox

I tried this out Don, but I didn't get anything exciting.
Perhaps it is a very narrow band, or I need some more details ?

Col

"Carbon dioxide and water vapor are responsible for energy absorption in the troposphere in this model. Absorption bands of carbon dioxide are centered at 15, 4.3, 2.7, and 2 μm (see Fig. 1). The centers of absorption bands of water vapor can be considered at 71, 6.3, 2.7, 1.87 and 1.38 μm [23,24]. Major amounts of oxygen gas and nitrogen gas are transparent to infrared radiation."

From:

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6174548/#:~:text=in%20this%20model.-,Absorption%20bands%20of%20carbon%20dioxide%20are%20centered%20at%2015%2C%204.3,are%20transparent%20to%20infrared%20radiation.

Your 1 micron filter might go as far as 1.38 ?

Probably needs narrow band filters. Do we know the range of IR sensitivity of your sensor ?

Don

 D Cox's gear list:D Cox's gear list
Sigma fp
xpatUSA
xpatUSA Forum Pro • Posts: 19,543
Re: Dark Water 1000nm with converted Sigma fp.

D Cox wrote:

SigmaTog wrote:

D Cox wrote:

Maybe you could photograph CO2.

A container full of dry air, and the same after you drop a lighted match or a small candle in before closing the lid.

Don Cox

I tried this out Don, but I didn't get anything exciting.
Perhaps it is a very narrow band, or I need some more details ?

Col

"Carbon dioxide and water vapor are responsible for energy absorption in the troposphere in this model. Absorption bands of carbon dioxide are centered at 15, 4.3, 2.7, and 2 μm (see Fig. 1).

Ergo, there would be no absorption by CO2 below 2um - thereby making the CO2 transparent in the wavelengths captured by Colin's camera.

-- hide signature --

Pedantry is hard work, but someone's gotta do it ...

 xpatUSA's gear list:xpatUSA's gear list
Panasonic Lumix DMC-LX1 Sigma SD9 Panasonic Lumix DC-G9 Panasonic Leica DG Macro-Elmarit 45mm F2.8 ASPH OIS Sigma 17-50mm F2.8 EX DC OS HSM +13 more
D Cox Forum Pro • Posts: 28,965
Re: Dark Water 1000nm with converted Sigma fp.

xpatUSA wrote:

D Cox wrote:

SigmaTog wrote:

D Cox wrote:

Maybe you could photograph CO2.

A container full of dry air, and the same after you drop a lighted match or a small candle in before closing the lid.

Don Cox

I tried this out Don, but I didn't get anything exciting.
Perhaps it is a very narrow band, or I need some more details ?

Col

"Carbon dioxide and water vapor are responsible for energy absorption in the troposphere in this model. Absorption bands of carbon dioxide are centered at 15, 4.3, 2.7, and 2 μm (see Fig. 1).

Ergo, there would be no absorption by CO2 below 2um - thereby making the CO2 transparent in the wavelengths captured by Colin's camera.

So it would need a thermographic camera.  Oh well, it was just a thought.

Don

 D Cox's gear list:D Cox's gear list
Sigma fp
xpatUSA
xpatUSA Forum Pro • Posts: 19,543
Re: Dark Water 1000nm with converted Sigma fp.

Scottelly wrote:

xpatUSA wrote:

Scottelly wrote:

xpatUSA wrote:

SigmaTog wrote:

Dark Water 1000nm with converted Sigma fp.

Interesting, Colin.

At 1000nm, water absorbs energy about 1000 times more than visible light:

http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/Chemical/watabs.html

Wouldn't it depend on the ppm concentration Ted?

I'm sure it would Scott.

Er, ppm of what ... ?

Whatever is making it dark Ted. I'm assuming the photo was shot using some black food coloring in water, but it could be laser printer toner, which is generally finely ground carbon powder, which coats tiny polymer pellets (plastic beeds), if I'm not mistaken. When the powder is pressed against the paper by a hot roller, the pellets melt, adhering the black carbon powder (probably just left over coal ash, which is ground into an almost nano-particle sized fine grain) to the paper.

Colin used clean water, Scott.

What he is demonstrating is the absorption of light at a wavelength of ~1000nm.

At that wavelength, liquid water absorbs 100 times more light than visible red, 1,000 times more than visible green and 10,000 times more than visible blue. Therefore it looks dark compared to the Pyrex glass.

http://www.idc-online.com/technical_references/pdfs/chemical_engineering/Water_absorption_spectrum.pdf

See web page 7.

-- hide signature --

Pedantry is hard work, but someone's gotta do it ...

 xpatUSA's gear list:xpatUSA's gear list
Panasonic Lumix DMC-LX1 Sigma SD9 Panasonic Lumix DC-G9 Panasonic Leica DG Macro-Elmarit 45mm F2.8 ASPH OIS Sigma 17-50mm F2.8 EX DC OS HSM +13 more
SigmaTog
OP SigmaTog Senior Member • Posts: 1,022
Re: Dark Water 1000nm with converted Sigma fp.
2

Thanks Ted & Don
Yes Scott, clean drinking water was used.
The light source was a 275nm bathroom heat lamp that was a few metres behind & above the converted Sigma fp camera.

xpatUSA
xpatUSA Forum Pro • Posts: 19,543
Re: Dark Water 1000nm with converted Sigma fp.

SigmaTog wrote:

Thanks Ted & Don
Yes Scott, clean drinking water was used.
The light source was a 275nm bathroom heat lamp that was a few metres behind & above the converted Sigma fp camera.

Just to be sure, was "275nm" a typo, Col?

I ask because 275nm is UV, not heat ...

-- hide signature --

Pedantry is hard work, but someone's gotta do it ...

 xpatUSA's gear list:xpatUSA's gear list
Panasonic Lumix DMC-LX1 Sigma SD9 Panasonic Lumix DC-G9 Panasonic Leica DG Macro-Elmarit 45mm F2.8 ASPH OIS Sigma 17-50mm F2.8 EX DC OS HSM +13 more
SigmaTog
OP SigmaTog Senior Member • Posts: 1,022
Re: Dark Water 1000nm with converted Sigma fp.

xpatUSA wrote:

SigmaTog wrote:

Thanks Ted & Don
Yes Scott, clean drinking water was used.
The light source was a 275nm bathroom heat lamp that was a few metres behind & above the converted Sigma fp camera.

Just to be sure, was "275nm" a typo, Col?

I ask because 275nm is UV, not heat ...

Yes Ted a typo...275 WATTS

Scottelly
Scottelly Forum Pro • Posts: 16,045
Re: Dark Water 1000nm with converted Sigma fp.

xpatUSA wrote:

Scottelly wrote:

xpatUSA wrote:

Scottelly wrote:

xpatUSA wrote:

SigmaTog wrote:

Dark Water 1000nm with converted Sigma fp.

Interesting, Colin.

At 1000nm, water absorbs energy about 1000 times more than visible light:

http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/Chemical/watabs.html

Wouldn't it depend on the ppm concentration Ted?

I'm sure it would Scott.

Er, ppm of what ... ?

Whatever is making it dark Ted. I'm assuming the photo was shot using some black food coloring in water, but it could be laser printer toner, which is generally finely ground carbon powder, which coats tiny polymer pellets (plastic beeds), if I'm not mistaken. When the powder is pressed against the paper by a hot roller, the pellets melt, adhering the black carbon powder (probably just left over coal ash, which is ground into an almost nano-particle sized fine grain) to the paper.

Colin used clean water, Scott.

What he is demonstrating is the absorption of light at a wavelength of ~1000nm.

At that wavelength, liquid water absorbs 100 times more light than visible red, 1,000 times more than visible green and 10,000 times more than visible blue. Therefore it looks dark compared to the Pyrex glass.

http://www.idc-online.com/technical_references/pdfs/chemical_engineering/Water_absorption_spectrum.pdf

See web page 7.

Oh. Thanks Ted, and please excuse my ignorance.

-- hide signature --

Scott Barton Kennelly
https://www.bigprintphotos.com/

 Scottelly's gear list:Scottelly's gear list
Sony SLT-A65 Sigma SD1 Merrill Nikon D810 Sigma sd Quattro H Sony DT 18-55mm F3.5-5.6 SAM +26 more
Scottelly
Scottelly Forum Pro • Posts: 16,045
Re: Dark Water 1000nm with converted Sigma fp.

xpatUSA wrote:

D Cox wrote:

SigmaTog wrote:

D Cox wrote:

Maybe you could photograph CO2.

A container full of dry air, and the same after you drop a lighted match or a small candle in before closing the lid.

Don Cox

I tried this out Don, but I didn't get anything exciting.
Perhaps it is a very narrow band, or I need some more details ?

Col

"Carbon dioxide and water vapor are responsible for energy absorption in the troposphere in this model. Absorption bands of carbon dioxide are centered at 15, 4.3, 2.7, and 2 μm (see Fig. 1).

Ergo, there would be no absorption by CO2 below 2um - thereby making the CO2 transparent in the wavelengths captured by Colin's camera.

I don't understand. Are you saying Colin's camera can only see light with wavelengths shorter than 2 um? (That's μm, right?) I thought it could see the beginnings of infrared light, which is around 700 nanometers, or .7 μm. I know thermographic cameras can see light with much longer wavelengths, like 10,000 nanometers, or 10 μm. Are you suggesting that the sensor in the fp can not see light that is 2 μm wavelengths, because he did not "get anything exciting" in his experiment? I wonder if releasing CO2 from a CO2 canister into a large, transparent plastic bag might give different results. Maybe since the CO2 gas is not as dense as a liquid, the experiment requires a much larger "chamber" to absorb a significant amount of light.

-- hide signature --

Scott Barton Kennelly
https://www.bigprintphotos.com/

 Scottelly's gear list:Scottelly's gear list
Sony SLT-A65 Sigma SD1 Merrill Nikon D810 Sigma sd Quattro H Sony DT 18-55mm F3.5-5.6 SAM +26 more
xpatUSA
xpatUSA Forum Pro • Posts: 19,543
Re: Dark Water 1000nm with converted Sigma fp.

Scottelly wrote:

xpatUSA wrote:

D Cox wrote:

SigmaTog wrote:

D Cox wrote:

Maybe you could photograph CO2.

A container full of dry air, and the same after you drop a lighted match or a small candle in before closing the lid.

Don Cox

I tried this out Don, but I didn't get anything exciting.
Perhaps it is a very narrow band, or I need some more details ?

Col

"Carbon dioxide and water vapor are responsible for energy absorption in the troposphere in this model. Absorption bands of carbon dioxide are centered at 15, 4.3, 2.7, and 2 μm (see Fig. 1).

Ergo, there would be no absorption by CO2 below 2um - thereby making the CO2 transparent in the wavelengths captured by Colin's camera.

I don't understand. Are you saying Colin's camera can only see light with wavelengths shorter than 2 um? (That's μm, right?)

I am saying that Colin's camera can see from about 0.2 to about 1.15 um and that would be with no filter on the lens.

Yes, Scott, by um I mean micrometers.

I thought it could see the beginnings of infrared light, which is around 700 nanometers, or .7 μm.

Again, Colin's camera can see from about 0.2 to about 1.15 um.

I know thermographic cameras can see light with much longer wavelengths, like 10,000 nanometers, or 10 μm.

So do I.

Are you suggesting that the sensor in the fp can not see light that is 2 μm wavelengths,

Yes ...

because he did not "get anything exciting" in his experiment?

... but not for that reason.

I wonder if releasing CO2 from a CO2 canister into a large, transparent plastic bag might give different results.

Straw Man. CO2 is transparent below 2um, ergo, Colin's camera can see through it.

Maybe since the CO2 gas is not as dense as a liquid, the experiment requires a much larger "chamber" to absorb a significant amount of light.

How much larger?

-- hide signature --

Pedantry is hard work, but someone's gotta do it ...

 xpatUSA's gear list:xpatUSA's gear list
Panasonic Lumix DMC-LX1 Sigma SD9 Panasonic Lumix DC-G9 Panasonic Leica DG Macro-Elmarit 45mm F2.8 ASPH OIS Sigma 17-50mm F2.8 EX DC OS HSM +13 more
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads