Efke IR820 and Rodinal questions

[MrMushroomMan]

I recently bought and shot a few rolls of IR820 and I'm having a few problems. I'm getting really low contrast, dense, and difficult to print negatives. I developed the first roll in D76 for 8.75 mins and the second at 8 mins. Both shot as a 100ASA film and taken down 5 stops because of the R72 filter. It doesn't really look like the typical overexposed negative, but then the values aren't like regular pano film that I'm used to....

As for Rodinal, I finally ordered a bottle of it and I'm wondering what the benefits of stand and semi-stand developing are? how would you figure out the dev times for each dilution for your film?

 

[xtolsniffer]

I've been looking into alternatives for Kodak HIE for infra-red and the Efke IR820 seems about the nearest equivalent. If it's similar, my advice based on using Kodak HIE is to bracket like mad. The R72 filter is roughly 4 stops, but you can't really meter infra-red very well, so I usually meter without the filter, put the filter on, adjust for about four stops, then bracket from -1 stop to +2 stops as well. You should get some useable images, but infra-red is not an exact science, and I haven't found many tables for development of Efke either. Kodak HIE develops well in XTOL, but I have no idea what the times would be for Efke.

 

[2F/2F]

Are you sure the negs are dense, and not thin and flat? This film is near impossible to get overly dense, in my experience. Starting with EI 100 and applying the 32x (5 stop) filter factor for an R72, then developing in D-76, your negs should be nowhere near dense, and should, in fact, be pretty underexposed. The speed of 100 is only obtained when the film is shot unfiltered and developed in a speed-enhancing developer, according to the data sheet.

Also, take a look at the film's characteristic curve. It is a weird one; EXTREMELY flat, until you get to that threshold where the film's response to light spikes like mad. This film is slow as molasses, flat as paper, and needs to be given a very healthy dose of exposure and very heavy development to get a lot of contrast. When using D-19, I need to rate it at the most EI 1.5 in bright sunlight to get a halfway decent exposure, and even then it is very flat. I would venture to guess that your negs are not dense, but thin. Of course, you are the one with the negs in hand, so what do I know without actually seeing them?!

With an R72 in sunlight with a speed enhancing developer (D-19, X-Tol, etc.), I would suggest bracketing a five stop range with EI 1.5 as the TOP end. For instance: Sunny 16 conditions call for an exposure of '125 at f/16. Say you decide that f/8 is what you need for the D of F you want. That takes care of two stops to put you at EI 25. Slowing your shutter stop by stop, you find that you are at EI 1.5 when your camera is set to f/8 at '8 sec. So, start there, then also expose at '4, '2, 1, and 2 sec. The 1 and 2 sec. exposures need to be extended to combat reciprocity failure during long exposures. Ekfe recommend 2 sec and 4 sec. actual times when 1 and 2 sec. exposures are called for, respectively.

Keep in mind that this is for a bright and clear day. Anything other than that will likely significantly reduce the amount of IR present and make your film dreadfully thin. In anything other than sunny weather, I personally recommend making a double exposure: one with no filter, in order to "shore up" the density, then one quite long exposure with the filter to capture the low levels of IR which are present on a cloudy day or in the shade.

With this film with R72 in D-19, my average exposures are generally from 2 sec to 120 sec. in decent weather, and are not all that high in contrast, although it does start to build a bit better with this much exposure.

With D-76, HC-110, etc., I find this film even slower and even more flat.

In short, expose the hell out of it, and develop the hell out of it and see what happens.

 

[xtolsniffer]

That sounds like useful advice, I was going to try this film for the first time now that my supplies of Kodak HIE from the fridge are gone.

 

[glarsson]

A couple more data points...

I get printable negatives (straight prints at grade 2.5 on Ilford MGIV FB) with Efke IR820 4x5 sheet film developed in Rodinal 1+25 for 9 min in a rotary processor. Can't say what my EI is because I'm shooting pinhole (~f128) and I'm waaaay into the reciprocity failure. A 20 minute exposure with an R72 filter over the pinhole is about right in bright sunlight, more than an hour in shade. I haven't tried stand or semi-stand development yet, that's my next project.

I shot one roll of 35mm Efke IR820 with an R72, developed 8 min in D76 stock with manual inversions. The best exposures were 1-2 seconds at f8 in bright sunlight, which was an EI of about 0.25. Bracket, bracket, bracket!

 

[MrMushroomMan]

I've been looking into alternatives for Kodak HIE for infra-red and the Efke IR820 seems about the nearest equivalent. If it's similar, my advice based on using Kodak HIE is to bracket like mad. The R72 filter is roughly 4 stops, but you can't really meter infra-red very well, so I usually meter without the filter, put the filter on, adjust for about four stops, then bracket from -1 stop to +2 stops as well. You should get some useable images, but infra-red is not an exact science, and I haven't found many tables for development of Efke either. Kodak HIE develops well in XTOL, but I have no idea what the times would be for Efke.

Well...in the box it came it it says "Kodak D 76 koncentrat 7-8 min", and I thought the filter brought it down 5 stops?

 

[MrMushroomMan]

Are you sure the negs are dense, and not thin and flat? This film is near impossible to get overly dense, in my experience. Starting with EI 100 and applying the 32x (5 stop) filter factor for an R72, then developing in D-76, your negs should be nowhere near dense, and should, in fact, be pretty underexposed. The speed of 100 is only obtained when the film is shot unfiltered and developed in a speed-enhancing developer, according to the data sheet.

Also, take a look at the film's characteristic curve. It is a weird one; EXTREMELY flat, until you get to that threshold where the film's response to light spikes like mad. This film is slow as molasses, flat as paper, and needs to be given a very healthy dose of exposure and very heavy development to get a lot of contrast. When using D-19, I need to rate it at the most EI 1.5 in bright sunlight to get a halfway decent exposure, and even then it is very flat. I would venture to guess that your negs are not dense, but thin. Of course, you are the one with the negs in hand, so what do I know without actually seeing them?!

With an R72 in sunlight with a speed enhancing developer (D-19, X-Tol, etc.), I would suggest bracketing a five stop range with EI 1.5 as the TOP end. For instance: Sunny 16 conditions call for an exposure of '125 at f/16. Say you decide that f/8 is what you need for the D of F you want. That takes care of two stops to put you at EI 25. Slowing your shutter stop by stop, you find that you are at EI 1.5 when your camera is set to f/8 at '8 sec. So, start there, then also expose at '4, '2, 1, and 2 sec. The 1 and 2 sec. exposures need to be extended to combat reciprocity failure during long exposures. Ekfe recommend 2 sec and 4 sec. actual times when 1 and 2 sec. exposures are called for, respectively.

Keep in mind that this is for a bright and clear day. Anything other than that will likely significantly reduce the amount of IR present and make your film dreadfully thin. In anything other than sunny weather, I personally recommend making a double exposure: one with no filter, in order to "shore up" the density, then one quite long exposure with the filter to capture the low levels of IR which are present on a cloudy day or in the shade.

With this film with R72 in D-19, my average exposures are generally from 2 sec to 120 sec. in decent weather, and are not all that high in contrast, although it does start to build a bit better with this much exposure.

With D-76, HC-110, etc., I find this film even slower and even more flat.

In short, expose the hell out of it, and develop the hell out of it and see what happens.

Honestly I don't know whats going on with the film; I'm not used to looking at IR negs. Comparing it to pano negs that have under and over exposed frames on it, IR820 looks under exposed.....but I could be wrong. I don't have a way to upload my negatives.

Guess I'll have to buy a few more rolls soon and bracket a ton....why do you have to be ten dollars a pop?

On a side note...is there a chance its heat fogged? Or would that take more than 5-6 days in warm weather?

 

[Poohblah]

heat fogging would cause the entire negative to be fogged, not increased density in the exposed section of the film.

for the record: a dense negative is a dark negative (generally due to overexposure). a thin negative is a clear negative (generally due to underexposure).

 

[MrMushroomMan]

heat fogging would cause the entire negative to be fogged, not increased density in the exposed section of the film.

for the record: a dense negative is a dark negative (generally due to overexposure). a thin negative is a clear negative (generally due to underexposure).

Well, there is some strange stuff outside the frame...looks like it bled and the emulsion flaked off a bit. It does look dark to me, but then like I said before, I'm not used to looking at IR negs. More testing is needed

 

[MrMushroomMan]

I think my school has some D-19....that may help with the contrast a bit....

 

[2F/2F]

Honestly I don't know whats going on with the film; I'm not used to looking at IR negs. Comparing it to pano negs that have under and over exposed frames on it, IR820 looks under exposed.....but I could be wrong. I don't have a way to upload my negatives.

Guess I'll have to buy a few more rolls soon and bracket a ton....why do you have to be ten dollars a pop?

On a side note...is there a chance its heat fogged? Or would that take more than 5-6 days in warm weather?

So, as I expected, they are thin, not dense. Heat fog is unlikely, and it would add density, and likely do it unevenly.

Yes, you do have to experiment with IR, and often quite a bit.

Remember that even with no filter, you need D-19 or something "hot" to get the ISO to 100. (Freestyle recommend starting with EI 25 instead of 100.) Also remember that IR films have no real ISO as we define it when they are being shot through near-opaque filters like the R72. A good exposure is solely determined by how much IR is present, and that's it. You can't see it, and you can't measure it with a light meter, so you just have to learn when lots of IR is there and when it isn't. It really helps to have a good grasp of color photography, so you know what atmospheric conditions and/or times of day/year are warm in color when photographed, and which ones are cool. The warm ones will have the most IR.

Do not fear overexposing this film! Bake it in a way that would give you nothing but a black blob on a normal film. I am telling you, EI 1.5, and no higher with an R72 to start, and probably significantly slower in the end.

Also, don't forget the unfiltered-then-filtered double exposure trick. I use it a lot with this film. I have also shot it a lot with a blue filter first, to boost the shadows and the sky, then an R72 to boost the green plants in the sun. Great high-key effect with bright shadows, bright plants, and bright sky!