EFKE Infrared 820c Test images

[Schafphoto]

After the news of HIE's demise, I started to test the new batch of EFKE 820c Infrared. The first tests were kind of disappointing... I tried to shoot at normal speeds with a 29 red filter at around 125ASA (TTL metering through the 29 red). The film wasn't really rendering an infrared effect.
The guys at Freestyle in LA said that I needed to use a IR cut-off filter because the film was very similar to the old MACO820c, and that film didn't respond to dark red filters either. My first tests with a 092 B/W filter were much more promising, good wood effect, high contrast, even a little halo/aura around highlights... but I found the ASA to be around 1(ONE).
So combine a film with super slow speed, with a filter you can't see through, and you have a complete departure from the way I usually shoot HIE, hand-held through a light red 23. If life gives you lemons, make lemonade, so I go out armed with a tripod, Efke 120 loaded in a rangefinder Mamiya 7 so I can compose with the filter over the lens. Now I'm looking for subjects that move, combined with things that don't, my latest Efke IR tests are up on my flickr site http://www.flickr.com/photos/schafphoto/ take a look and let me know what you think. It's no replacement for High Speed HIE, but it lets me keep shooting film and going into the darkroom to print.

 

[thefizz]

You could also try the Rollei IR film. Not as strong as the Efke but still nice. What developer did you use with the Efke film?

Peter

 

[kraker]

(...) my latest Efke IR tests are up on my flickr site http://www.flickr.com/photos/schafphoto/ take a look and let me know what you think. It's no replacement for High Speed HIE, but it lets me keep shooting film and going into the darkroom to print.

Some very nice examples over there, I think. And a few nice side-by-side comparisons of Efke and HIE. Well done!

ASA 1 doesn't sound too promising, though...

Thanks for sharing these test results!

 

[keithwms]

I also was initially disappointed with the Rollei stuff because I realized very quickly that I was looking at ~2 sec exposures. But then I realized that doing longish exposures was something I hadn't done before and it opened up new possibilities for me. Yes it's a limitation but it's also an opportunity to look at a scene differently.

Anyway, for any of these films you need an rm72 at least; I use a #87.

If you badly want short exposures and extreme IR effects then you could shoot digitally... I'm not a fan of the look though. The highlights just blow together. For digital shooters I think a low and a high cutoff filter is probably needed, to address the problem of highlight differentiation. With the Rollei stuff and a #87, I get different shades of white in the foliage- a more sophisticated tonality. That's what I'm talking about. The IR effect doesn't hit you in the face, it works into the composition in a more subtle way.

Anyway, the images in your gallery are marvelous!

 

[Ole]

The Rollei IR 820/400 is pretty fast; fast enough for hand-held shooting with a 695nm filter at least. Works great in a Bessa-L...

 

[Ralf]

Excellent pictures, thanks for sharing your results.

ASA 1? Even a good handheld meter won't do that, does that mean exposure becomes a mix of guesswork and experience?

 

[Ole]

Exposure at EI 1 is dead easy: You would use IR film on sunny days, which means "Sunny 16" (or "brightish 11ish", depending on location and latitude) works just fine: 1 second at f:16.

 

[Ralf]

Exposure at EI 1 is dead easy: You would use IR film on sunny days, which means "Sunny 16" (or "brightish 11ish", depending on location and latitude) works just fine: 1 second at f:16.

Okay, then it was the latter I mentioned above: Experience (or knowledge).

Funny that a guy from Norway would know about exposing film at f/16, though. *don't slap me*

 

[Ole]

That's why I mentioned "brightish 11ish", which is a far more useful rule-of-thumb in Norway.

 

[pentaxuser]

If handheld IR shots are what you would prefer or no tripod available then if I recall correctly the thread on Ilford SFX, it mentions that with a SFX filter or similar to give full IR effect, shots at about 1/30th and f5.6 are possible.

pentaxuser

 

[Schafphoto]

As far as developer for the Efke, I have created an easy way to develop my HIE at my local pro lab that gets me same day processing and is repeatable whenever i teach an infrared photography workshop. I tell the students to go to their lab and have their HIE developed as TMAX 100. Every pro-lab in the USA does a lot of TMAX and many use Tmax-RS automated development (but this works with other developers as well as a starting point). If I expect a special TIME/TEMP/DEVELOPER formula for my Infrared film it will inevitably cost me a special fee, push upcharge or at the very least I have heard "We only do Infrared processing once a week because it's special". As long as your lab has no Infrared safelights or leakage in their developing room, they can develop the IR right along side the Tmax-100 on the same dip & dunk rack.
So my ASA for Efke is between Half and One ASA at Tmax 100 RS time (handheld meter).
For comparison, my HIE ASA (TTL & Filter) is ASA200, at Tmax Time.
I rate my HIE at 32 when I'm using a hand-held meter.
The filters I use for HIE are 23,25,29, and 29+Polarizer. But mostly 23.

As far as my hand held meter going to ASA 1, it doesn't. I set it at ASA 3 and open 2 stops. But then I'm still bracketing as I try to find my way with this film. My images for the past 20 years with HIE have not revolved around sunlight, landscapes or puffy white trees, so these new tests are a little out of my comfort zone. Especially dragging the tripod around.

Enjoy the samples, I'm going to try waves next.

 

[Black Dog]

My Lunasix F can go down to ASA 0.3 .....handy.

 

[rusty71]

I've had similar experiences with Efke and MACO infrared. At least it is a true IR film. Just ultra slow. I've had decent luck using a Wratten 92 red gelatin filter mounted inside my Nikon FE2. Years ago on the Infrared Mailing List run by a fellow out of Holland (Jan Markerink?) the idea of mounting a deep red filter inside an SLR so you could focus normally was discussed. Thin mylar tape, like the kind used for slides proved to work well to secure the gelatin between the film rails. The wratten 92 is a strange bird; visually it looks like a 29 red, but it's IR cutoff seems to be much deeper. Not as great as a Hoya R72, but it was the deepest red gelatin filter I had.
Some day I'll do more tests and post them on flickr. In the meantime, good work with the Efke IR820.

 

[dr5chrome]

here is another sample of the efke 820

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

with the 72 black filter @ 10iso

regards

dw

 

[kraker]

but I found the ASA to be around 1(ONE).

Why didn't I do a search on APUG before shooting this film (yesterday) and developing it (today)? I only did a quick google search, and found someone mentioning ASA 4, so that's what I used.

And indeed, I ended up with rather thin negatives. Maybe a few images that could be printed, but it won't be easy.

Ah well... live and learn. Better luck for the next roll.

 

[walter23]

Funny that a guy from Norway would know about exposing film at f/16, though. *don't slap me*

In the summer he gets more sun than you

 

[ntenny]

My first tests with a 092 B/W filter were much more promising, good wood effect, high contrast, even a little halo/aura around highlights... but I found the ASA to be around 1(ONE).

Ouch. I can't argue with the results you're getting, but I've been happy with the Efke film at something around ASA 8-12 through an equivalent filter. (Results at <http://www.flickr.com/photos/ntenny/tags/infrared/> if you want to see; many of the images are handheld, albeit at the limits of handholdability with a TLR.)

I'm not sure it's fair to compare this film to HIE---the IR effect certainly is much less extreme, and maybe the extremely low sensitivity you're seeing is a result of trying to get a stronger "halo" look than the film is really good at.

-NT

 

[Ole]

In the summer he gets more sun than you

We also get the best sunsets, which last long enough to take a break, go in and eat a (very) late dinner, and come back out for the rest of the show.

I've even seen the elusive "green flash" once - it lasted long enough for me to find my camera, change to a longer lens, and fire off four shots with a manual-advance SLR.

 

[w9cae]

I feel like such a dumb ass after reading all over the place on Efke IR film. I have a 720nm filter & the film. But now am so confused exactly how I need to set my camera. I was under the impression this film is ASA25 my camera a Praktica MTL5 will only go down to ASA12 not ASA1 like many have mentioned in this thread. So setting my camera to ASA25 & using the sunny 16 rule of F16 aperture what would my exposure time be ?

 

[ntenny]

I feel like such a dumb ass after reading all over the place on Efke IR film. I have a 720nm filter & the film. But now am so confused exactly how I need to set my camera.

On manual?

I was under the impression this film is ASA25 my camera a Praktica MTL5 will only go down to ASA12 not ASA1 like many have mentioned in this thread. So setting my camera to ASA25 & using the sunny 16 rule of F16 aperture what would my exposure time be ?

It doesn't really make much sense to talk about ASA for IR film, because ASA is a measure of sensitivity in visible light, and the relation between visible and IR is inconsistent. I think this is the big reason that people use such different ratings for this film and get good results. But I don't think anyone manages to make it work well through a 720-nm filter as fast as EI 25.

But the Praktica just has an uncoupled meter, right?---you're setting it manually anyway, so if you take a reading at ASA 12, and want to expose as for ASA 1.5, you just add three stops of compensation to what the meter is telling you. (Or just do the sunny-16 thing: f/16 and 1/ASA exposure. I find this works just as well as metering with IR film in practice.)

-NT

 

[w9cae]

Looks like my first roll is going to be full on experimentation. As discussion of the sunny 16 rule, but in far northern locations is the sunny 11 rule & in Australia probably should read sunny 22 rule. Already end of winter sunny day sends my hand held light meter pegged to the end of its scale. In summer I only have a few morning hours & about 1 hour near sun set I call good light down here. So hopefully a slow IR film will be advantageous in this environment ?

 

[ZugPhoto]

Spring/Summer Better

I've been having some disappointing results with EFKE 820 Aura. I'm using a Hoya 072 and developing in Xtol per the instructions. But just not getting the IR effect. Would I have better results in the spring or summer when there is more IR coming from foliage, etc? Any ideas are appreciated! Thanks!

 

[AgX]

-) to obtain a strong wood effect there need to be living leaves of deciduous trees

-) the effect is to some extend dependand on type of tree and period of leaf vegetation cycle

 

[cmo]

I've been having some disappointing results with EFKE 820 Aura. I'm using a Hoya 072 and developing in Xtol per the instructions. But just not getting the IR effect. Would I have better results in the spring or summer when there is more IR coming from foliage, etc? Any ideas are appreciated! Thanks!

Apart from the amount of IR radiation as a light souce, IR films render pretty flat photos in overcast weather. My better shots with this film all have one thing in common, and that is contrasty light:

 

[paul_c5x4]

Would I have better results in the spring or summer when there is more IR coming from foliage, etc? Any ideas are appreciated! Thanks!

In winter, look for ice and snow instead of foliage...