Digital BW, The Print

>At web size, I can't tell the difference in noise level, since downsizing
>reduces the amount of noise. However, I'm surprised at the amount of visible
>noise in the St. Olive Church image.

Yes, I was too. But seconding your point below, it is not a particular effective IR image anyway.

>I'm not sure that pushing the exposure compensation so far is a good idea.
>Some highlights look clipped to me.

Good point. I need to strike a balance between by burning desire to hand-hold and to have the best images possible.

>I think the most effective images are, not surprisingly, the ones that
>contain foliage. The point of IR, it seems to me, is to look different from
>regular B&W, and if you take a picture of just a building, there's nothing
>that jumps out and says "IR".

I completely agree. 

>I love the one with the ivy and three trees--that would be worth seeing at a larger size.

Finally, there is a scan of a silver print of the same "ivy and three trees" scene at the following URL. This is from a Kodak HIE (High Speed Infrared) negative that was printed in the darkroom and then scanned. This is one of my favorites too.

http://www.leica-gallery.net/dlk/folder-8218.html

Dave.
-- 
David Keenan, ausdlk@... on 4/17/2006