I was looking for an IR cutoff filter in the 720nm range and I came across an adjustable one that is supposed to be able to adjust the cutoff between 530 and 750nm. It looks similar to a polarizer, in terms of turning the filter changes the effect.
Has anyone used this for B&W IR film and is it effective? Or would I be better off buying either a #29 or IR720 filter?
I think these are a variant on a concept (or gimmick) that Spiratone used long ago in filters called "Colorflow." (Took a while to dig around and find that name. Other companies also had similar things.) The two-color Colorflow filters had a pair like yellow/red and rotating the adjustment would change from full yellow, to intermediate, to full red. I believe the way these work is that the adjustment uses a pair of polarizers to blend between the two filters, although I can't at the moment come up with a fully coherent explanation of how that works. The Lifepixel link doesn't really explain it correctly. And of course they have a business interest in selling their own IR filters.
But I think Lifepixel's criticism is legitimate. You can get weird effects from the crossed polarizers, and the other issue that would concern me is transmission leaks. If the adjustable filter isn't perfect, you may get some light blueward of 720nm leaking through. Normally a small out-of-band leak doesn't matter for pictorial use, but when you are trying to use only the very red end of the film's sensitivity, even a few percent of blue leak may dilute the effect.
I would trust a cheap fixed-wavelength IR filter more than these things. Consider just buying two filters like a 720nm and either a Red 25 or 23. You will probably find that two filters covers most uses and you don't need continuous adjustment.
It's years since I used a Spiratone Colorflow filter so my only recent experience with polarizer adjusted filters has been with the Neutral Density type. And that experience has been frustrating through lack of reproducible results. When polarizers are nearly crossed a small turn makes a big difference in transmission and it's hard to get the same exact value twice in a row. I've taped up my adjustable filters so they don't turn. Should have bought fixed value ones first up.
Checked out a variable IR filter.. the FOTGA.
Thanks! I think you have confirmed my suspicions.
I find there seems to be enough variables in IR photography that one or two discrete steps in filter cutoff might should oughta be sufficient. That's especially so since the current films barely make it to the IR region anyway.
I’m interested to see how you guys calculate the exposures you need. With my film, I just meter at 6 ISO on a clear sunny day and the results are phenomenal! I can usually get sub-1 second exposure times to boot. Hearing some of you saying stuff like 30 seconds exposure makes me think I might be doing something wrong!
Most sources agree that IR starts at 700. Therefore current IR film is well into IR.
The suns spectrum filtered through the atmosphere drops by almost half energy from 720 to 1000nm plus there is a narrow but deep valley around 720.Hmmm, OK. But I'm pretty certain IR films of yore were responsive out to 800 or even further, the late lamented Efke IR820 for example; Kodak HIE went to nearly 900. Most of the stuff today appears to be already running out of sensitivity at 720. I found about six additional stops exposure needed to go from a 720 to a 760 filter with Rollei Infrared 400 as an example.
We can get some Wood effect with Ilford's SFX200 and an 89B which is about a 695 cutoff, but that film is sometimes referred to as an "extended red" film. So I guess we have a different perspective on what constitutes "well into IR." That said, it doesn't matter much, as we have to work with what we can get.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?