Choices for IR film?

Helge · Apr 3, 2021

Under any circumstance it will work with a very dark red filter, which is more than you can say about many other film.
It gets faster into the dark red until it apparently falls off a cliff.

You can dial in exposure to get the optimal effect.

It will lighten foliage and darken the sky, without getting ridiculously slow.

markjwyatt · Apr 3, 2021

grat said:
I was looking at this: https://www.foma.cz/en/fomapan-400

Comparing the two, Freestyle's copy is from 2012, and Foma's was last update 2017-- and the emulsive article is from 2016, so it's possible the emulsion was tweaked in 2017.

You are correct. That is a significant shift. May still try it, and see what I get.

Sirius Glass · Apr 3, 2021

Fomapan drops off before 700 long so much it is not useful for IR use. There is no there there.

markjwyatt · Apr 3, 2021

Sirius Glass said:
Fomapan drops off before 700 long so much it is not useful for IR use. There is no there there.

Agreed. It may not be the best IR film. In the 2012 datasheet, the sensitivity at 700 nm is about equal to the blue sensitivity, and is dropping quickly (at ISO 400). Since it looks like an ISO 1-ish IR film (equivalent with 720 nm filter), opening 8-9 stops (from ISO 400) may still net something. On the other hand, the 2017 data sheet looks less feasible, as it is shifted to the left. Keep in mind we really know nothing about the magnitude of the y-axis. What that graph intends to convey is that the sensitivity increases from blue to red at ISO 400 (and probably for any other ISO/development combination). It is not intended to convey anything about near-IR sensitivity.

revdoc · Apr 3, 2021

I tested Foma 400 and 100 with an R72 filter in 2019; the was no IR response at all. I did get an image if I exposed long enough, but it was from the small amount of red light that leaked through the filter.

You can always try it for yourself, of course.

markjwyatt · Apr 3, 2021

revdoc said:
I tested Foma 400 and 100 with an R72 filter in 2019; the was no IR response at all. I did get an image if I exposed long enough, but it was from the small amount of red light that leaked through the filter.

You can always try it for yourself, of course.

The film may have changed as the shift in curves indicate.

markjwyatt · Apr 6, 2021

Some recent results with Rollei IR 400 (same Mamiya C330f; 80mm f2.8), 720nm filter. This time using an equivalent ISO 12. I lose less highlights.

bench, surreal by Mark Wyatt, on Flickr

The same scene with no IR filter (and overexposed, i.e., "oops")

bench by Mark Wyatt, on Flickr

Helge · Apr 11, 2021

Shot a couple of rolls of HR-50.
It seems an ISO of 10-12 with a standard R72 filter is the correct, which does make it perhaps a bit faster than Retro 80s, that I rated at about 6 to 8 in similar conditions (though with some overexposure on some frames).

Teetering on being hand-holdable every little bit helps.

The few shots where I bracketed, the lower rated shots were overexposed.
If you shoot on a sunny day with some direct sun in the scene, it’s seems hard to underexpose at 10.
The second you’re in deepish shade, and the subject is darker, you need to “overexpose” by a couple of stops.

AnselMortensen · Apr 11, 2021

Yesterday I went out and shot my Speed Graphic with some fresh Rollei 4x5 IR, and some very outdated HIE.
It was a bright, sunny day.
I used a generic Opteka IR filter, and used BDE for ISO 8......1/2 sec @ f32.
Took 5 different setups... 2 sheets of each type of film for each setup, so I can process one of each, evaluate, and adjust processing as necessary.
A lot of variables...a film I've never used before, an outdated film of unknown history, and a filter I've never used before.
Should be interesting!

LFGuy · Apr 11, 2021

For fun, last month I shot a couple of frames of Arista EDU Ultra 400, using a Rollei IR filter (not sure of the wavelength it filters out, but guessing 720 nm). I've had it for years (came with some other Bay VI filters I bought) but never used it. Using an ISO of 25, I got a very very faint image on the film. Scanned, I couldn't get much detail in the foreground (beach and a few plants in front of a lake), though I did get some good clouds with a dark sky. But nothing I'd want to print. A lot more grain than the rest of the roll which was exposed normally.

Paul Manuell · Apr 24, 2021

AnselMortensen said:
Yesterday I went out and shot my Speed Graphic with some fresh Rollei 4x5 IR, and some very outdated HIE.
It was a bright, sunny day.
I used a generic Opteka IR filter, and used BDE for ISO 8......1/2 sec @ f32.
Took 5 different setups... 2 sheets of each type of film for each setup, so I can process one of each, evaluate, and adjust processing as necessary.
A lot of variables...a film I've never used before, an outdated film of unknown history, and a filter I've never used before.
Should be interesting!

Would love to see the results when they're developed

Helge · Jun 26, 2021

Has anyone experimented with water washing film pre-exposure, to increase speed and IR extension?
Or even using a high dilution of silver nitrate?

It was common practice with astronomical film and plates.
I can see no reason why it shouldn’t work with “modern” (N)IR material.

It should be simple enough to do.
Unless someone says it’s definitely a bad idea, I’m going to try it soon.
I know we are not talking astronomical LIRF times here, but every little bit helps.
Even half a stop would be welcome in some instances. But of course I’m hoping for more.

Here is one paper describing a mature version of the technique:
http://cdsads.u-strasbg.fr/pdf/1978AASPB..17...12S

There is of course also the possibility of pre-flashing and latensification.
It appears it’s fortunately not necessary to use an IR source, but regular diffused white light can be used: https://scholarworks.rit.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=5209&context=theses
I’ve done a few experiments by just using the blue sky through an IR filter in camera. But with mixed results.
Raising of the shadows sure, but complete blowout of highlights.
It’s a technique that needs to be dialed in carefully and have a controlled known source of diffuse light for the temperamental Aviphot films.

dwross · Jun 26, 2021

Brain burp deleted.

Perry Way · Feb 24, 2023

MattKing said:
Ilford SFX.
Three different exposures of the same scene - one without a filter and metered at 200, one with an R72 filter and exposed at six (6) stops more than the unfiltered one and another with an R72 filter and exposed at nine (9) stops more than the unfiltered one - all to show variations of how much Wood Effect is available:

View attachment 244614

Excellent example. A picture tells more than words. Thanks for this!

Sirius Glass · Feb 24, 2023

I prefer Rollei IR 400 shot at ISO 400 and corrected for the filter used. I use Red23, Red25, Red29 and 720.

abruzzi · Feb 25, 2023

you can usually get Rollei Retro 400S for a little cheaper than Rollei IR, and as far as I understand they are the same film (I've used Retro 400S with an R72 filter semi-frequently.)

relistan · Feb 25, 2023

abruzzi said:
you can usually get Rollei Retro 400S for a little cheaper than Rollei IR, and as far as I understand they are the same film (I've used Retro 400S with an R72 filter semi-frequently.)

Same film but packaged by Foma (Superpan 200, Retro 400S) rather than Harman/Ilford (Infrared).

Craig · Feb 25, 2023

Years ago there was a special Ilford SFX filter in the Cokin system. I can't find the datasheet on it, does anyone know what the transmissibility curve is and does it approximate a IR720 filter? It's a very dark filter, clearly more cutoff than a red 25.

Sirius Glass · Feb 25, 2023

Craig said:
Years ago there was a special Ilford SFX filter in the Cokin system. I can't find the datasheet on it, does anyone know what the transmissibility curve is and does it approximate a IR720 filter? It's a very dark filter, clearly more cutoff than a red 25.

Red23 2 f/stops
Red25 3 f/stops
Red29 4 f/stops
720 5 f/stops

super_claret · Apr 13, 2023

GLS said:
I've used DD-X and Pyrocat-HD for IR400 with good results.

Any idea what dev times for 510 Pyro 1+100 in a Jobo CPE2 please. I’ve rated 35mm Rollei Infrared at 400 and can’t seem to find anything but stand development times.

BAC1967 · Apr 13, 2023

22 minutes according to the Massive Development Chart

Rollei Infrared IR400 in 510-Pyro

super_claret · Apr 13, 2023

Team ADOX said:
As explained above in detail, all these three different named films (Rollei IR, Rollei Retro 400S, Rollei Superpan 200) are all based on Agfa Aviphot Pan 200.
And there is only one valid / true data sheet for this film. Please have a look here at the Agfa homepage:
https://www.agfa.com/specialty-products/wp-content/uploads/sites/8/2017/06/AVIPHOT-PAN-200.pdf

ADOX - Innovation In Analog Photography.

Would you be able to advise on developing times for Rollei IR 400, rated at 400, in 510 Pyro 1+100 in a Jobo CPE2 please?

super_claret · Apr 13, 2023

BAC1967 said:
22 minutes according to the Massive Development Chart

Rollei Infrared IR400 in 510-Pyro

Thank you, I’ve seen that but it’s for semi stand development and not rotary processing

neilt3 · Apr 14, 2023

super_claret said:
Thank you, I’ve seen that but it’s for semi stand development and not rotary processing

Best way to work it out is to shoot a test roll then cut it into shorter prices while loading it into developing tanks in a darkroom / changing bag .
If you've only one tank / reel , it might take a bit of time waiting for the reel to dry out before you can load the next peice .

Each peice only needs to be a few inches long , and shoot the same scene on all 36 frames with the same exposure.
Start developing the first sample for say 7 minutes, assess the results , then try again . Increase or reduce development times untill your happy .

One roll of film and a bit of experimenting will give you the time your happy with with your technique .

Regards exposure, if I'm allowing my camera (usually a Minolta Dynax 9) to meter for me with Rollei IR threw the R720 filter , I set the cameras ISO at 320 .
If I'm using it in any other camera , medium or large format , I use a hand held spot meter and meter at ISO 6 .
I never shoot it at ISO 400 . YMMV.

super_claret · Apr 14, 2023

neilt3 said:
Best way to work it out is to shoot a test roll then cut it into shorter prices while loading it into developing tanks in a darkroom / changing bag .
If you've only one tank / reel , it might take a bit of time waiting for the reel to dry out before you can load the next peice .

Each peice only needs to be a few inches long , and shoot the same scene on all 36 frames with the same exposure.
Start developing the first sample for say 7 minutes, assess the results , then try again . Increase or reduce development times untill your happy .

One roll of film and a bit of experimenting will give you the time your happy with with your technique .

Regards exposure, if I'm allowing my camera (usually a Minolta Dynax 9) to meter for me with Rollei IR threw the R720 filter , I set the cameras ISO at 320 .
If I'm using it in any other camera , medium or large format , I use a hand held spot meter and meter at ISO 6 .
I never shoot it at ISO 400 . YMMV.

Thank you. Unfortunately, I‘ve already shot a variety of subjects, some with an IR720 filter and some without. I also rated the film at box speed, which after reading several threads, seems I’ve underexposed by a stop, at least. Can’t for the life of me think why manufacturers rate a film at 400, when most people seem to think it should be 200 or less…really frustrating for inexperienced users.

Choices for IR film?

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency