B&W IR film processing?

[stradibarrius]

I have several rolls of Rollie IR and some Ilford SFX.
I haven't shot any of it yet because there are no leaves on the trees.
My question is about processing the film.
Is it processed just like standard B&W? Can I using my small tank and D-76?

 

[David William White]

Yes! Read spec sheets for filtration, exposure, & development. If no leaves, shoot skies!

 

[stradibarrius]

Are there anythings inside that work well with IR film or does it take sunlight of some sort to get the effect?
I am in the southern US and spring is beginning to unfold here. I am very anxious to shoot some IR.

 

[Toffle]

Yes.... and Yes.
You don't say if you're using 35mm or 120. It can make a difference in regards to how you handle the film.
I don't know about the Rollei, but the SFX can be handled like any B&W film. To be safe, you might want to handle the film canisters in in the dark or in subdued light, but in my experience, that is only really necessary for the Kodak IR films, which had more extreme IR sensitivity.
Keep in mind that though you can use something like a red-25 filter, these films show their best qualities with an R-72 or equivalent filter. It's hard to meter TTL at those levels, so I use a handheld meter set at ISO 6 for the SFX. If the Rollei is more like Maco or Efke, (which I suspect it might be) I would meter at ISO 1.5 The Maco/Efke I have shot tend to produce rather odd looking, but quite printable negatives. (I'm not quite sure what I mean by that... my Maco negs are just... odd. hm...)

Well good luck with shooting when the leaves appear... shouldn't be too long for you down in GA.

Cheers,

 

[glbeas]

IR is great for architectural shots, the shadows are more intense and makes spectacular contrast in the sky. I've also found it will bring out details in drab looking overcast. Try it on house plants too, use a flash.

 

[David William White]

Are there anythings inside that work well with IR film or does it take sunlight of some sort to get the effect?
I am in the southern US and spring is beginning to unfold here. I am very anxious to shoot some IR.

If by inside, you mean with flash or studio strobes, yes! Strobes are rich in IR. Hot lights (tungsten) probably more so. Portraits in IR can be really interesting with sufficient filtration.

As Toffle suggests, rate low. Then bracket lower.

 

[jim appleyard]

I can only speak for SFX. it is processed just like any other b/w film. I go with times off the MDC.

Use a tripod, cable release and an R72 filter for the IR effect. It is not a true IR film. but is easier to use than a true IR; daylight loading, no focus shift, etc.

 

[stradibarrius]

Jim What exposure times are you using?

 

[jim appleyard]

Strad, I just use the in-camera meter. I set it @ 200 which is the box speed of SFX, compose the scene, focus and then put the filter over the lens and meter thru it. You should bracket a bit as meters can be different.

Great for black skies and white foliage. I've only shot it during summer when the foliage is out here in the Northeast, but non-foliage months could be an interesting chanllenge.

I've used D-76, HC-110 and Rodinal. IMO, it doesn't matter as this film is grainy no matter what you do it! But, that's also its charm.

 

[stradibarrius]

That is the method that I have used with my digital camera and an 89b filter. I also have the Ilford filter that comes with the promo pack of the SXF film. I am not sure if there is any difference in that filter and the 89b? They both are basically opaque.

 

[Toffle]

The Ilford/Cokin filter that shipped with the SFX promo pack is equivalent to an R-72. The sensitivity of SFX falls off very quickly after 720nm, so I can't see any way that and 98b would work with this film.

In my opinion, based on the nature of IR photograhy, the Cokin filter is of limited use. Unless you can compose with the filter in place, you must place the filter in the holder for each individual shot, and remove it before composing the next shot. For a gelatin filter, this requires far too much handling, and you run the risk of damaging the fragile filter material. I exercised the utmost of caution (I thought) and never touched the surface of the filter with anything... but made the mistake of using the filter on a very (very) humid day. The fine particles of water in the air adhered to the surface of the gelatine and now there are some tiny but discernable dimples on the surface. I might get away with using this filter again, but it sits in my case and I use an R-72 instead.

Cheers,

 

[David William White]

That is the method that I have used with my digital camera and an 89b filter. I also have the Ilford filter that comes with the promo pack of the SXF film. I am not sure if there is any difference in that filter and the 89b? They both are basically opaque.

I think ilford recommends a 4 stop overexposure for their oem IR filter (which is probably an 89b). That means a rating of 25, and I would bracket +/- a stop on either side and decide what works.

Concerning the matter of composing through such an opaque filter, a TLR seems to be a more sensible camera to do 120 rollfilm (or a rangefinder for 135).

But, camera is going to be on a tripod anyway, so it's not such a biggie to hold sheet in front after composing & while opening the shutter.

Please report back once you've done some shooting!

 

[MattKing]

If you take a look at my APUG gallery you will see two photos using the Rollie IR film in 120. In both cases I was using an R72 filter on a Mamiya TLR. To take into account the filter factor, I metered using EIs between 3 and 12.

Here is a link to one of the photos:

(there was a url link here which no longer exists)

They were both from the same roll, and were developed in HC110 dil H. I was careful to load and unload the camera in subdued light, and I always use black plastic 120 film containers to store the exposed rolls until they are developed, but essentially I didn't handle the film in any special way.

Matt