Choices for IR film?

[Craig]

The ariel speed ratings are different than ground based pictorial ratings, so for pictorial use the consensus here is to rate the film at about 100. The last frame on the right with a +2 compensation would take it to a speed of 100 and the exposure looks about right.

The problem will always be that the in camera light meters are not sensitive to IR, or only slightly sensitive, so it's only a guide at best. The amount of IR light can vary considerably and not be visible to our eyes or a lightmeter.

I have not used this particular film, but others say to rate it about EI 6 with a filter and 100 without as a starting point and bracket. Based on the edge print, I'd say your developing was ok.

 

[super_claret]

The ariel speed ratings are different than ground based pictorial ratings, so for pictorial use the consensus here is to rate the film at about 100. The last frame on the right with a +2 compensation would take it to a speed of 100 and the exposure looks about right.

The problem will always be that the in camera light meters are not sensitive to IR, or only slightly sensitive, so it's only a guide at best. The amount of IR light can vary considerably and not be visible to our eyes or a lightmeter.

I have not used this particular film, but others say to rate it about EI 6 with a filter and 100 without as a starting point and bracket. Based on the edge print, I'd say your developing was ok.

Thank you. I think I'm going to try another roll and rate it at 100 and develop less to reduce contrast. I'll report back with my results

 

[markjwyatt]

@super_claret I will make a few comments:

1. I tried ISO 6 with IR72, and found (for me, dev w/HC110 with times for ISO400), I overexposed the highlights; ISO 12 worked best for me.You can see some of my images in this thread an on my Flickr (search for "Rollei"). I did not indicate expoisures on Flickr, but I discussed it in this thread and I think a related one linked earlier.
2. I would not meter through the filter in any case. Meter with an external meter set to ISO 6 or 12.
3. My film is 120, expired 2015 and Made in Belgium (e.g., made and confected by Agfa). The newer film says Made in Germany. From my understanding it is the exact same film and probably batch, just confected by someone other than Agfa in Germany (likely InovisCoat).
4. I cannot comment on how to rate the film without and IR72 filter, as I have not really used it that way. If IR72 is truly a 5 stop (32x) filter), then this does imply ISO400 starting at ISO12 and 200 starting at ISO6.

 

[Helge]

@super_claret I will make a few comments:

1. I tried ISO 6 with IR72, and found (for me, dev w/HC110 with times for ISO400), I overexposed the highlights; ISO 12 worked best for me.You can see some of my images in this thread an on my Flickr (search for "Rollei"). I did not indicate expoisures on Flickr, but I discussed it in this thread and I think a related one linked earlier.
2. I would not meter through the filter in any case. Meter with an external meter set to ISO 6 or 12.
3. My film is 120, expired 2015 and Made in Belgium (e.g., made and confected by Agfa). The newer film says Made in Germany. From my understanding it is the exact same film and probably batch, just confected by someone other than Agfa in Germany (likely InovisCoat).
4. I cannot comment on how to rate the film without and IR72 filter, as I have not really used it that way. If IR72 is truly a 5 stop (32x) filter), then this does imply ISO400 starting at ISO12 and 200 starting at ISO6.

Exactly. 10/12 is actually pretty normal for an IR film.
Konica IR wasn’t faster for instance.
Only HIE was faster at about IE 40 with a R72 filter.

 

[super_claret]

Metering through a darker filter of any color will not be accurate because the meter's spectrum does not cover the complete visual spectrum evenly. The filter's and the meter's spectrums are different and readings are inaccurate. Always use the manufacturer'e filter factore.

Unfortunately, the manufacturer, Kood gives the following statement…

Due to the nature of infrared photography, the filter factor for this filter is highly variable and depends largely on the ISO sensitivity in use and lighting conditions.

A lot of photographers have used 5 stops successfully and when spot metering via the camera, through the IR72, It consistently gives me 5 stops adjustment compared to the reading without a filter.

 

[Sirius Glass]

Unfortunately, the manufacturer, Kood gives the following statement…

Due to the nature of infrared photography, the filter factor for this filter is highly variable and depends largely on the ISO sensitivity in use and lighting conditions.

A lot of photographers have used 5 stops successfully and when spot metering via the camera, through the IR72, It consistently gives me 5 stops adjustment compared to the reading without a filter.

Any particular filter may not be manufactured to the standard filter factors. The filter manufacturer should label each filter correctly. I have only very rarely found a filter that deviated from the filter factors that we find in [older?] books or on the internet.

 

[Mark J]

Last week I shot some 120 Rollei Superpan 200 in generally sunny conditions on my GW690 III using a Hoya R72.
The results were very good, I got a couple of really satisfying images with good tonality.
Film was dev in pyro PMK standard at the equivalent of 17mins @ 20°C, although my temp was a touch higher, which helped reduce the time.
Just as an approx indication with spot metering, I reckon this stock is between iso 6 and iso 12 dependant most likely on the colour temperature of the shadows.

I would warn anyone used to using Rollei IR 400 ( like me ) that the Superpan is on a thinner base and does not trigger the frame-counting on certain film backs ( eg. Horseman ) .

 

[MattKing]

Any particular filter may not be manufactured to the standard filter factors. The filter manufacturer should label each filter correctly. I have only very rarely found a filter that deviated from the filter factors that we find in [older?] books or on the internet.

The filter factors are based on transmission of visible light, and are probably only truly accurate for a particular narrow range within the visible part of the spectrum.
Once you work with a 720nm filter, almost all the image creating light is in the near-infrared region - different light than the filter factor is based on.
In addition, filter factors are employed in relation to the meter readings, and your meter doesn't read the light that the film actually sees.

 

[Maris]

Lake Cooroibah on Rollei Infrared, #9

Gelatin-silver photograph on Ilford Classic VC FB photographic paper, image size 16.3cm X 16.3cm,
from a Rollei Infrared negative exposed at EI = 10 in a Seagull 4A-103A twin lens reflex camera fitted with a IR720 filter.

In the near infrared there is a useful correlation between visible light meter readings and how things will be rendered on infrared film. Some things come out the same and other things come out very different.

In the above example tree bark comes out as metered as does the white sand in the foreground. The white cloud measured in visible light and placed on Zone VIII falls on Zone VIII in the infrared.
On the other hand the water and sky come out darker and the clump of green grass in the corner is much lighter. Metering these objects will deliver misleading values.
Other things that are useful to meter are rocks, bare dirt, dead yellow grass, paved roads, weathered wood. These deliver a good "ballpark" exposure guide.

But the infrared remains wild and delivers surprises, mostly good.

 

[bags27]

Sorry I haven't read through the entire thread and it might be somewhere, but....

Anyone developing Rollei infrared 400 @ 6 ISO in Pyrocat HD? 1:1 or divided? Times, agitation? thanks in advance for any information!

I used to shoot a lot of infrared when I shot digital (no more). I'm assuming Rollei infrared 400 is the closest film available for MF infrared? Thanks!

 

[Andrew O'Neill]

I develop Rollei IR in Pyrocat-HD. Not sure about your 1:1 though. I develop it in a 1+1+100 dilution. I've not tried it in divided Pyrocat-HD, but it's on the list... my experience with divided Pyrocat-HD (and conventional films), yields excellent negatives for scanning, but not so for Alt. printing (unless a digi-neg is your goal). Curious to see if it's possible with Rollei IR.
Yes, it's currently the best out there for IR. I've been shooting it for years, in MF and LF. I can share my development times when I get home from work. I also have reciprocity data that I generated myself...

 

[bags27]

I develop Rollei IR in Pyrocat-HD. Not sure about your 1:1 though. I develop it in a 1+1+100 dilution. I've not tried it in divided Pyrocat-HD, but it's on the list... my experience with divided Pyrocat-HD (and conventional films), yields excellent negatives for scanning, but not so for Alt. printing (unless a digi-neg is your goal). Curious to see if it's possible with Rollei IR.
Yes, it's currently the best out there for IR. I've been shooting it for years, in MF and LF. I can share my development times when I get home from work. I also have reciprocity data that I generated myself...

Thanks so very much. My bad on the 1:1. That was a mental slip, typing way too quickly. Yes 1+1+100. I'd really appreciate both your development times and reciprocity data when you get a chance to post them.

I agree about divided Pyrocat. A lot more expensive so I've developed around 8-10 rolls within 1 day's time that way and they've turned out terrific.

 

[destroya]

I develop the rollei 80 metered at 3 and the 400 at 6, either in pyro-m or MeCD4 2 bath. for pyro, I do 1+1+100 at 72 degrees for 14 to 15 min depending on the scene dynamic range. 1 min initial agitation, the 10 seconds every 3 min. the MeCD4 reduces the contrast quite a bit but is not as sharp. the pyro has much better highlight control

there is quite a long thread on developers for the rr400 in this section, its a good read.

here is a shot I did with the RR80 with an IR filter, but I developed them as slide film. did these yesterday so plan on projecting them tonight to check them out. first glance they seem a touch under exposed, but the lighting was strange as the rain clouds were giving me issues with metering. will try metering at 2 next time

john

 

[Andrew O'Neill]

Thanks so very much. My bad on the 1:1. That was a mental slip, typing way too quickly. Yes 1+1+100. I'd really appreciate both your development times and reciprocity data when you get a chance to post them.

I agree about divided Pyrocat. A lot more expensive so I've developed around 8-10 rolls within 1 day's time that way and they've turned out terrific.

I just remembered that I have a file on my phone with certain photo data that I use when I'm out in the field...
Here's the reciprocity data that I have been using for several years... Metred exposure time is on the X-axis, compensation on the Y...

 

[destroya]

thanks for that info Andrew!

john

 

[Andrew O'Neill]

thanks for that info Andrew!

john

You are very welcome!

 

[Andrew O'Neill]

1+1+100 dilution: 15 minutes 21C (I use continuous rotary in BTZS tubes, and it's no fun standing there twirling tubes in a tray for that long ) so I standardised on a 1+1+50 dilution. 7:30 at 21C. You will probably have to increase my times a bit if you are using intermittent agitation regimes. I do use the weaker dilution for when N minus development is required. I hope this helps!

 

[bags27]

Thanks so very much, Andrew and destroya!

 

[Ivo Stunga]

I would very much like to see samples of photos made on HR-50 with the Heliopan RG 715

Have some examples, developed as slides. More to come.

Flickr Search — “hr50rg715”

www.flickr.com

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

I have done prewash to remove antihalation layers to make them render things closer to HIE. Am planning to do so with Retro 80S and Superpan 200. Didn't notice "extended" IR performance, here are some examples:

Flickr Search

www.flickr.com

 

[Helge]

Have some examples, developed as slides. More to come.

Flickr Search — “hr50rg715”

www.flickr.com

I have done prewash to remove antihalation layers to make them render things closer to HIE. Am planning to do so with Retro 80S and Superpan 200. Didn't notice "extended" IR performance, here are some examples:

Flickr Search

www.flickr.com

You should get some speedup from back-reflection alone.

I only tried it once, because the film need to be dried quickly and evenly and shot quickly for chemical speedup to have an effect.

Interestingly the halation is much smaller I diameter with medium format. Which makes sense when you think about it.

How do you perform the wash?
Details please.

I put the film on a Paterson reel. Wash with cold demineralized water for thirty seconds, with constant agitation. Then wash with alchol to speed up drying.
Then dry with a hairdryer on cold. Re-roll the film and shoot it.
Medium format it’s real tricky to re-roll, but it can be done with a guide rig.

Potentially you can paint the backing paper. Use retro reflective paint, white or even silver.
This will further aid the halation and speed the film up.

 

[Ivo Stunga]

You should get some speedup from back-reflection alone.

Agred, it's to be expected, but I just didn't pay attention to it - will the next time around. I even put a white paper on backplate to reflect some more, but the summer ran out and took IR beauty with it, so I just left this for this season as the available infrared light faded away with leaves.

How do you perform the wash?
Details please.

1) 2min bath with 3 inversions every 30 seconds,
2) followed by a quick Ilford wash, then
3) another 4min bath with 3 inversions per 60s,
4) followed by a quick Ilford wash, then
5) another 6min bath with 3 inversions per 90s,
6) followed by a quick Ilford wash, then
7) distilled water bath for 8 minutes, 3 inversions every 120s,
8) followed by a 2 minute rinse in 10% isopropyl alcohol and distilled water bath, doing 3 inversions every 30 seconds, then
9) hang to dry and respool.

But I still got unevenness here and there, the antihalation layers are stubborn... Therefore the next time around I'll start this by doing 2min continuous agitation bath and see if it helps. If not, I could try squeegee as the final move.

Oh, and avoid rinse aid to finish off prewash if you want even development.


This obviously takes some time, so do it at night if lightproof room isn't available. And do multiple films at once. What I'll do: cut off 4x 135/36 rolls from a bulk roll (by hand/toolless), put them on Paterson reels and do the dance to have 2-4 prewashed films in one go.
Hmmm, if you must shoot right away after washing to observe any speed gain - if it's true, maybe that's why I didn't notice any gain in speed? This and/or didn't pay attention to it.

 

[Helge]

Agred, it's to be expected, but I just didn't pay attention to it - will the next time around. I even put a white paper on backplate to reflect some more, but the summer ran out and took IR beauty with it, so I just left this for this season as the available infrared light faded away with leaves.


1) 2min bath with 3 inversions every 30 seconds,
2) followed by a quick Ilford wash, then
3) another 4min bath with 3 inversions per 60s,
4) followed by a quick Ilford wash, then
5) another 6min bath with 3 inversions per 90s,
6) followed by a quick Ilford wash, then
7) distilled water bath for 8 minutes, 3 inversions every 120s,
8) followed by a 2 minute rinse in 10% isopropyl alcohol and distilled water bath, doing 3 inversions every 30 seconds, then
9) hang to dry and respool.

But I still got unevenness here and there, the antihalation layers are stubborn... Therefore the next time around I'll start this by doing 2min continuous agitation bath and see if it helps. If not, I could try squeegee as the final move.

Oh, and avoid rinse aid to finish off prewash if you want even development.


This obviously takes some time, so do it at night if lightproof room isn't available. And do multiple films at once. What I'll do: cut off 4x 135/36 rolls from a bulk roll (by hand/toolless), put them on Paterson reels and do the dance to have 2-4 prewashed films in one go.
Hmmm, if you must shoot right away after washing to observe any speed gain - if it's true, maybe that's why I didn't notice any gain in speed? This and/or didn't pay attention to it.

I would be afraid of washing out some of the synthesizing dye with all that washing.

If you only look for the coloring of the water, it seems the halation layer is removed after a vigorous first short wash.
And the last possible remnants is washed off with the isopropyl alcohol bath.

I imagine it’s important to use demineralized water in any pre-washing as to not affect the sensitivity of the film with metals and salts in the water.

All papers on astronomical water hypering of IR film and plates, is adamant about the importance of using the film quickly, and even fast drying to not have the film fogged and to get the most out of the speed up.

 

[Ivo Stunga]

I would be afraid of washing out some of the synthesizing dye with all that washing.

Haha, it's a rough routine to be fine-tuned for sure! I started simple - with 2 washes, but got blotchy film and uneven development afterwards. Then I iterated on 2 more films, then stopped for the winter with the routine above.

I do prewash for clear-base films quite often in order to keep AH layers out of my reusable developer, and I've noticed that the water comes out clear-ish only after third bath - so 3 bath washing + squeegee could be enough. Like I said above - will try and see what constant agitation in prewash stage will do, how many baths will it take for the water to be clear, then settle on minimum+


What I've noticed from my leaders thrown in bathtub with water (to keep chems in bucket at a constant temperature) - it takes quite a surprising amount of time for the leader to loose all of that green.
And it must come off evenly for the antihalation layer free exposures to be with even density afterwards.

 

[Helge]

Haha, it's a rough routine to be fine-tuned for sure! I started simple - with 2 washes, but got blotchy film and uneven development afterwards. Then I iterated on 2 more films, then stopped for the winter with the routine above.

I do prewash for clear-base films quite often in order to keep AH layers out of my reusable developer, and I've noticed that the water comes out clear-ish only after third bath - so 3 bath washing + squeegee could be enough. Like I said above - will try and see what constant agitation in prewash stage will do, how many baths will it take for the water to be clear, then settle on minimum+


What I've noticed from my leaders thrown in bathtub with water (to keep chems in bucket at a constant temperature) - it takes quite a surprising amount of time for the leader to loose all of that green.
And it must come off evenly for the antihalation layer free exposures to be with even density afterwards.

It’s a game of time. The AH layer is on the back of the substrate and comes right off with washing. The emulsion opens up gradually when wetted.
Therefore I figured that a quick very intense, and cold wash (heat opens the emulsion faster) was the key.
It should still remove the bromide that slows down the IR sensitizers.

An almost homeopathic solution of silver nitrate (google the exact ratio) should also speed up the sensitizers. But then you shouldn’t do the alcohol end wash.

You shouldn’t touch the emulsion with anything after wash and before development. It’s sure to leave marks.
The emulsion is still soft even when dried. And the sensitizers are very sensitive to skin oil or pressure.

 

[Ivo Stunga]

Thanks for input - it's the second time I read about dye sensitivity to pressure, and all in one day! Didn't know about this till today.

But I'm sure I'll have the itch to try out squeegee regardlessly - bought it last year for this very purpose and it's just sitting, collecting dust. Maybe your quick wash + squeegee will do the AH wash off trick evenly, maybe it'll introduce funky, lovable artifacts.

Have to try that dance with Satan at least once!