Choices for IR film?

[Helge]

So, can Adox pre-flash the film and maintain its beneficial effects for a long enough to make it useful for a user of this film?

Looks like we need an answer from Team ADOX on this. I wonder if it is still maintaining a presence here so it will see this question and answer it?

pentaxuser

They regularly answer and participate. But we might not expect of them to answer in this case since it’s sensitive to one of their products.
It’s a hornets nest to stick your hand into as a product manufacturer.
It can very quickly go all kinds of unforeseen wrong.

 

[bluechromis]

Oh some weird people in the far north of Scotland still seem to abuse it

Some of us in Oregon USA guzzle stout as well.

 

[bluechromis]

Indeed, the best way to shoot an IR film with an R72 filter is to use a TLR: the opaque filter doesn't obscure the viewing lens.

That is one of the reasons I got my Mamiya C330 f. But for SLR uses they do have the adapters with a hinge that you screw your filter into and conveniently fold in on or off as needed.

 

[bluechromis]

I have some of the last batch of 35mm HIE left and some 120 Aerographic re-spool which is the same thing but medium format. Other than that, I have a good amount of Rollei IR 400 and a king's ransom in Efke IR820 in 120 and 4x5 which if handled well is stunning IR film. I hope we don't lose IR400, it is super sharp film with great IR effect with an R72 filter. Since I basically have the year off from shooting commercial work, I am really looking forward to making some great images on this film, even this week hopefully as the green is starting to emerge below the snow capped peaks.

Here is one from 4x5 IR400 / R72:

View attachment 245361

And here is one in 4x5 from Efke IR820:

View attachment 245362

Beautiful images

 

[Nokton48]

70mm Infared 2424 by Nokton48, on Flickr

150 feet of 70mm Infared Aerographic 2424 (same emulsion as HIE 35mm) which will run smoothly through my Hasselblad A70 backs. Also six rolls of same film respooled by David Romano with 120 backing.

 

[pentaxuser]

They regularly answer and participate. But we might not expect of them to answer in this case since it’s sensitive to one of their products.
.

I understand why Adox like any other film maker would not be prepared to say how it achieves the pre-flash if there is something involved that is commercially valuable to ADOX but simply seek an answer which may be the same answer for all film that explains why in say those films that do not have a latent image problem what it is about film as opposed to paper that enables it to retain the pre-flash effect and for roughly how long.

pentaxuser

 

[bluechromis]

I’d like to do the pre-flashing myself.
It’s much better done right at the moment of capture or just before or after.
Is there any of their film that is the same emulsion, just without preflash?

Preflash plus push processing, is the only readily attainable way to have a real speed increase with film.
It’s very dependent on the situation though, and is not something that can just be done brainlessly.

The ultimate solution would be to have a camera with build in concurrent adaptive flashing.
But until that day, I’ll do it myself, thankyouverymuch.

 

[bluechromis]

Adox HR-40 R72 filter developed in Adox Silver Max developer.

 

[bluechromis]

JCH Street Pan 400 has decent IR sensitivity. My understanding is it is freshly made and derived from an Agfa surveillance film. Mamiya C330 f with R72 filter. Developed in PC-TEA.

 

[fs999]

Adox HR-40 R72 filter developed in Adox Silver Max developer. View attachment 256697

JCH Street Pan 400 has decent IR sensitivity. My understanding is it is freshly made and derived from an Agfa surveillance film. Mamiya C330 f with R72 filter. Developed in PC-TEA. View attachment 256699

Superb shots !

 

[bluechromis]

Superb shots !

Thanks fs999

 

[Team ADOX]

How about Adox HR-50 Speed Boost?
Looks like a pretty nice film and they claim to have “Speed boosted” it whatever that is?
Team Adox do you have any comments?

Our ADOX HR-50 (and its "brother" Scala 50) has a spectral sensitization which is reaching so far into the red-/infrared area that real infrared shots can be easily achieved. We recommend an infrared filter which is blocking visible light underneath 715 nanometer (e.g. the Heliopan RG 715). By using such a filter you can achieve an excellent "Wood effect" with tree-leafs rendering in pure, brillant white, and blue skies rendering very dark. So you get the typical and wanted "infrared-look".
But with excellent sharpness, resolution and extremely fine grain.
Concerning our "Speed Boost" technology: Its main advantages are an improved light sensitivity, better shadow detail and an improved characteristic curve with better tonality. It is a unique technology. We have worked hard for quite a long time to implement it in industrial serial production. No other film manufacturer is using it. To protect our technology we cannot publish technological details, as it is a company secret. Thanks for your understanding. But we can say that the rumors and speculations about it mentioned in forums are mostly wrong, we have never read a correct description of our industrial manufacturing process. So best you can do is to ignore these rumors and instead concentrate on using and enjoying this wonderful film and its outstanding characteristics.

ADOX - Innovation in Analog Photography.

 

[Helge]

Our ADOX HR-50 (and its "brother" Scala 50) has a spectral sensitization which is reaching so far into the red-/infrared area that real infrared shots can be easily achieved. We recommend an infrared filter which is blocking visible light underneath 715 nanometer (e.g. the Heliopan RG 715). By using such a filter you can achieve an excellent "Wood effect" with tree-leafs rendering in pure, brillant white, and blue skies rendering very dark. So you get the typical and wanted "infrared-look".
But with excellent sharpness, resolution and extremely fine grain.
Concerning our "Speed Boost" technology: Its main advantages are an improved light sensitivity, better shadow detail and an improved characteristic curve with better tonality. It is a unique technology. We have worked hard for quite a long time to implement it in industrial serial production. No other film manufacturer is using it. To protect our technology we cannot publish technological details, as it is a company secret. Thanks for your understanding. But we can say that the rumors and speculations about it mentioned in forums are mostly wrong, we have never read a correct description of our industrial manufacturing process. So best you can do is to ignore these rumors and instead concentrate on using and enjoying this wonderful film and its outstanding characteristics.

ADOX - Innovation in Analog Photography.

Thank you very much for the answer Team ADOX!
You made me want to go out and try HR-50 right away, but it will have to wait until the photoshop opens tomorrow.
If it's as good as you say, it will probably become my preferred 135 IR film, with Agfa Superpan 200 for 120.

The speed boost curve looks like it will go well with a slight push, if you need extra speed.
I can see why people think its "just" flashing, because it looks alike.
Interesting to know it's not.

I'm planning doing experiments with IR flash indoors (2x layers of Congo Blue gel over the flash and a red filter over the lens to blog UV) so any boost to the shadows is very welcome.

BTW. My Hoya R72 arrived yesterday. Turned out it wasn't that expensive on German Amazon.de.
These are some quick and nasty comparisons/tests, just with an iPhone, with just two layers of C41 vs. the real deal a couple of weeks later:

Exposed C41 as filter

R72 filter:

There is just no comparison.
I won't even try to use film as an IR filter for flash.

 

[removedacct1]

Our ADOX HR-50 (and its "brother" Scala 50) has a spectral sensitization which is reaching so far into the red-/infrared area that real infrared shots can be easily achieved. We recommend an infrared filter which is blocking visible light underneath 715 nanometer (e.g. the Heliopan RG 715). By using such a filter you can achieve an excellent "Wood effect" with tree-leafs rendering in pure, brillant white, and blue skies rendering very dark. So you get the typical and wanted "infrared-look".

ADOX - Innovation in Analog Photography.

I would very much like to see samples of photos made on HR-50 with the Heliopan RG 715 to compare with the Hoya R72. Are the results much different using these two filters?

 

[Helge]

I would very much like to see samples of photos made on HR-50 with the Heliopan RG 715 to compare with the Hoya R72. Are the results much different using these two filters?

My guess is that they aren’t much different, if at all.
Look at the curves, and even the names.

ADOX and Heliopan are just collaborating in some capacity, which there is nothing wrong with of course.

 

[Team ADOX]

I would very much like to see samples of photos made on HR-50 with the Heliopan RG 715 to compare with the Hoya R72. Are the results much different using these two filters?

No, they are not. You can use both.
We have just mentioned the Heliopan RG 715 as an example, and because it is easily available and offered in a huge amount of different (and often rare) sizes.

ADOX - Innovation in Analog Photography.

 

[removedacct1]

No, they are not. You can use both.
We have just mentioned the Heliopan RG 715 as an example, and because it is easily available and offered in a huge amount of different (and often rare) sizes.

ADOX - Innovation in Analog Photography.

Thank you.

 

[Leavesofglass]

JCH Pan is close to/near Infrared in full sunlight. Sorry, no example photos.

 

[Helge]

What is actually the fastest IR film available?

I shot through a roll of 80s yesterday @ 6 ISO developed @ box speed (juust fast enough to allow handheld) and I am surprised at how fast it is.
Even if I bracketed my most interesting shots, a surprising amount of them are overexposed, even at the low end.
All shot in a sunny day with few clouds.
Some of the frames turned out beautifully though.

I didn’t seem to have that problem with Pan 200 shot at IIRC 12 ISO.

Going to try HR50 today.
It’s probably either Agfa Aviphot 80 or 40.
How fast is that film really in the IR range?

 

[Henning Serger]

What is actually the fastest IR film available?

Ilford SFX 200.
Because as explained in detail many times here on photrio, Agfa Aviphot Pan 200's official ISO rating is only valid for aerial photography, as the standards are much different in that field.
For normal pictorial photography on the ground the best is to use it with an Exposure Index (EI) of around 50/18°, if you want usable shadow detail.

Going to try HR50 today.
How fast is that film really in the IR range?

I am using HR-50 with ADOX HR-DEV with an EI of 32/16°, and with ADOX FX-39 II with an EI of 25/15° (I care for shadow detail, and I am doing optical prints with an enlarger). For IR I am using a Heliopan RG 715 filter.
And with IR I always make exposure series, as the IR light intensity differs over the day, but you can't measure it (well, at least not with your normal light meter ). From my experience over the years series with about 4 to 5.5 stops more exposure (with the 715 Nm IR filter) have led to success in almost all situations. I then choose the optimal result (due to aesthetic preferences) on the contact sheet.

Best regards,
Henning

 

[Helge]

Ilford SFX 200.
Because as explained in detail many times here on photrio, Agfa Aviphot Pan 200's official ISO rating is only valid for aerial photography, as the standards are much different in that field.
For normal pictorial photography on the ground the best is to use it with an Exposure Index (EI) of around 50/18°, if you want usable shadow detail.



I am using HR-50 with ADOX HR-DEV with an EI of 32/16°, and with ADOX FX-39 II with an EI of 25/15° (I care for shadow detail, and I am doing optical prints with an enlarger). For IR I am using a Heliopan RG 715 filter.
And with IR I always make exposure series, as the IR light intensity differs over the day, but you can't measure it (well, at least not with your normal light meter ). From my experience over the years series with about 4 to 5.5 stops more exposure (with the 715 Nm IR filter) have led to success in almost all situations. I then choose the optimal result (due to aesthetic preferences) on the contact sheet.

Best regards,
Henning

Thanks for the answer Henning. Always a pleasure to read your qualified and well written posts.

Just a few clarifying questions:
Are you shooting HR-50 @ 32 and 25 with 720 nm IR filter‽
That would be surprisingly fast.
I have Rodinal and XTOL and was not unhappy with shadow detail in the good shots from yesterday’s roll from box speed development in XTOL.
I’m open to try something else though.

On paper SFX doesn’t seem faster than Agfa Superpan 200. But you say it is?
I know Macos speeds are optimistic at best. But looking at the Aviphot data sheets there doesn’t seem to be as vast difference between the two “200” films.
Apart from Superpan 200 being more fine grained when printed or scanned?

 

[Henning Serger]

Thanks for the answer Henning. Always a pleasure to read your qualified and well written posts.
Just a few clarifying questions:
Are your shooting HR-50 @ 32 and 25 with 720 nm IR filter‽

No, without IR filter.

On paper SFX doesn’t seem faster than Agfa Superpan 200. But you say it is?
I know Macos speeds are optimistic at best. But looking at the Aviphot data sheets there doesn’t seem to be as vast difference between the two “200” films.

Well, as explained by some others here on photrio and me in the recent past, the light sensitivity / speed of Agfa aerial films is defined and measured much differently to the ISO rating for normal pictorial films which we use "on the ground". For aerial films the logD 0.1 for the rating is measured at Zone III, not at Zone I as for normal pictorial films.
Therefore you have about two stops less speed (real shadow detail) with aerial films when you are using them on the ground.
The reason is that in aerial photography you shoot from 1000, 3000, 5000 meters or even higher straightly down to the ground. And in this application you just don't have any (deep) shadows, and also no bright highlights. You have mainly midtones. Shadow detail is not (so much) needed. Therefore all the Agfa aerial films have a very strong S-shaped characteristic curve, with a perfect and strong tone separation in the midtones, but much less detail and tone separation in the shadows, and a compensating effect with less tone separation in the highlights.

Best regards,
Henning

 

[Wallendo]

I recently got decent effects shooting a roll of Silberra Pan 160 with a Leica "hell rot" filter - probably similar to a 25A red filter. The images were all overdeveloped (it is hard to find reliable Silberra times), and likely somewhat overexposed. For my next roll, I will likely use the development times recommended by Rollei for their IR 400 film (which is likely the same base film). I picked up several rolls of Silberra during their kickstarter and now have rolls I don't really know what to do with, so I am shooting them as IR.

 

[destroya]

yesterday I shot 6 rolls, 3 RR80 and 3 RR400. I find a lot of the speed depends on HOW you meter. if you use an in camera meter, you will get different speeds than using a hand held meter. I use an Incident meter. I use ISO 4 for RR80 and 8 for RR200, using a 720 filter, so 5 stops, then develop for my normal speed for the emulsion. when I took the rolls out to hang to dry, I always forget, for a second, and think how under exposed they images are. then remember that the negs will look thin because of the IR effect. just scanned yesterday, but I love this time of year. the oak trees look great with IR shots

john

 

[Sirius Glass]

Thanks for the answer Henning. Always a pleasure to read your qualified and well written posts.

Just a few clarifying questions:
Are your shooting HR-50 @ 32 and 25 with 720 nm IR filter‽
That would be surprisingly fast.
I have Rodinal and XTOL and was not unhappy with shadow detail in the good shots from yesterday’s roll from box speed development in XTOL.
I’m open to try something else though.

On paper SFX doesn’t seem faster than Agfa Superpan 200. But you say it is?
I know Macos speeds are optimistic at best. But looking at the Aviphot data sheets there doesn’t seem to be as vast difference between the two “200” films.
Apart from Superpan 200 being more fine grained when printed or scanned?

I have used Rollei IR 400 shot at box speed with the 720 filter and adjusted with the Zone System for shadow details developed in replenished XTOL. That I have found consistently brought out the shadow detail while retaining the Wood Effect.