OLD Efke IR 820 film advice needed

[Wolfram Malukker]

I have six rolls of 135 format Maco IR820C, which I believe is the same film. Mine expired in 2008, and is listed as an ISO100 film. I figure it's probably either fine at 100, or needs to be shot at 50ISO, plus compensation for the Zomei 720nm filter, which I have seen recommended at 4 to 5 stops when used with Aviphot 200 based films (and I have used at 5 stops, and it seemed to vary between OK and overexposed, but I was still metering at 200).

I'll be getting it out again this spring and summer, so this thread is very timely for me!

EDIT: Here's a link to Tim Gray's excellent repository of film datasheets:

https://125px.com/docs/film/maco/MACO_IR820c_AURA.pdf

 

[moofy]

Lately I managed to come into a 5x4 box of Kodak EIR & Efke 820.

I have a glass R72 & a slightly manhandled polyester Lee 87 filter (the result of an experiment with trying to make an infrared flash, slightly underestimated the output of my Metz head and slightly burnt the shape of it into the plastic… ) and I’m wondering what a rough speed to use the Efke would be with the different filters. Will an 87 even be worth it with it with the even longer exposure times?

The suggestion of using ISO 25 and compensating 5 stops for an r72 is confusing me, I thought this film was nominally ISO 100, as per the information I found here: https://www.freestylephoto.com/pdf/product_pdfs/efkefotokemika/EfkeIR.pdf

I assume I’ll also have to compensate with bellows draw, how should I judge how much to rack in? Would focusing with a red filter and stopping down be worth a try to get close while still visible?

 

[blee1996]

I used expired Efke 820 last time in 2024, and this film does not age well. With R72 filter, I used ISO 6, and my negatives has hardly any image registered. From the same day fresh Rollei 400 worked well. Hope you are more lucky than I do. I will probably start with ISO 3 and go bracket lower ISO.

 

[Andrew O'Neill]

Mine has always been freezer stored. No issues when I last shot a couple sheets a couple years ago... I believe I exposed it at EI 3, with a 720 Zomei filter.

 

[romosoho]

It's a long shot but has anyone developed IR820 in F76+? I find 14:00 with 1+9 in the MDC, at EI 100, but figured I'd ask. I have 2 bricks of 120 in the freezer (I used to buy IR film whenever possible, and just recently completed using up HIE and Konica 750. Now it's onto Efke).

 

[Andrew O'Neill]

That person should have indicated in the MDC notes, if that EI is with or without a filter, and if with, which one... Are you planning on using a 720 filter?

 

[moofy]

I was planning on using xtol (xt-3 at least, easier to get here) at 1:1 which is my usual developer for basically everything.

Not sure how my stuff was stored but I suspect it was frozen and the result of a house clearance. Other things from the same batch came out pretty well considering the age.

How much of a problem is the focus shift on large format, I’ve only shot HIE and EIR in 35mm up to this point as my dipping a toe into the infrared realm.

 

[romosoho]

That person should have indicated in the MDC notes, if that EI is with or without a filter, and if with, which one... Are you planning on using a 720 filter?

It's, at best and as discussed in this thread, EI 1 or so with the filter on, right? But no, no notes other a rotary processor (so I'll add 10% anyway from the get go)

 

[Andrew O'Neill]

I was planning on using xtol (xt-3 at least, easier to get here) at 1:1 which is my usual developer for basically everything.

Not sure how my stuff was stored but I suspect it was frozen and the result of a house clearance. Other things from the same batch came out pretty well considering the age.

How much of a problem is the focus shift on large format, I’ve only shot HIE and EIR in 35mm up to this point as my dipping a toe into the infrared realm.

I wouldn't worry too much about focus shift with film as it doesn't stretch way out into the IR like good old HIE did. I've exposed this film through an opaque IR filter, (Kodak 87C), at EI 1.5, and I never bothered with focus compensation.

 

[Maris]

Vine Forest
Gelatin-silver photograph on Freestyle Private Reserve VC FB photographic paper exposed in contact with an 8x10 Efke IR820 infrared negative
from a Tachihara 810HD triple extension field view camera fitted with a Schneider Super Angulon 121mm f8 lens and a IR680 filter.
The film was about 20 years old and an actual film speed test showed the the infrared speed was E.I. = 0.15 ! That's slooow.
Final camera exposure was 20 minutes at f22.

 

[moofy]

I guess I’ll part expose a sheet or two at different times and see what works best with the film age and filter combinations. It would be nice to get results with the 87.

Will report back when (if?) I have something to show for it.

 

[Andrew O'Neill]

If there is a lot of IR energy about, you should get good results with the 87.

 

[Dr. no]

The film was about 20 years old and an actual film speed test showed the the infrared speed was E.I. = 0.15 ! That's slooow. Final camera exposure was 20 minutes at f22.

I have discovered (in the film fridge) some of this too. I tried some with my 720 filter last month, and that day's shooting was all ruined from a new bellows leak. Can't say for sure yet but looks like the film was otherwise OK. It was bought in 2010, I think.
I have some longer wavelength filters to try too. Looking forward to the experiment. I can't believe there was so little wind that the ferns are so sharp!

 

[moofy]

Well, a month later and 8 sheets down I’ve had very mixed results with this stuff. First off it looks like it was well stored, fog is minimal and sheets shot without a filter and with a red 25 came out looking pretty good. A few of the outer sheets have some marks on them and I assume that’s just something to do with age, though the film is interleved (rare to see that past ancient ilford stuff as old as me) with paper.

My results with the R72 and 87 filter however have kind of sucked. The first attempt had a very thin image with the R72 and a blank sheet with the 87, to the point I thought I’d made a development mistake.

The second attempt was better but still really thin on the R72 and a faint shadow for the 87.

Third attempt I didn’t even bother with the 87 and added three more stops to the R72 and got an ok but still pretty thin negative. These were all done in Xtol (XT-3) 1+1 for 13 minutes at 20°C.

Attached is the last 4 sheets, my apologies but my partner has stolen my lightbox to do drawings for her MA so I’m reduced to using a window for illumination. They are:

No filter at ISO 25 | No filter at ISO 50

Red 25 filter at ISO 50 with a compensation of 1⅓ | R72 filter with a compensation of 8 stops

 

[moofy]

And here are the scans of the two that interest me, the no filter 25 & R72 (which was 8 seconds and had the wind start on me just as I hit the shutter):

 

[Andrew O'Neill]

Are you including reciprocity compensation?

 

[moofy]

I added ⅔ of a stop for bellows on the Sinar and an extra stop for the IR shot for reciprocity failure compensation, though that was included now that I think about it, so it was +7 for the filter and +1 on top of that to compensate.

 

[blee1996]

In my eyes, your R72 photo is not bad both in terms of exposure and development.

All my IR negatives are thin as well. Typically I will try to maintain some details in the highlights: plant leaves in your photo. The rest of the photo might become darker, but that is ok with me. This generates more dramatic effects.