Final Kodak Moments

RattyMouse · Apr 14, 2015

Apologies if this has already been posted somewhere.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-3034367/The-infrared-images-reveal-hidden-world-Photographer-captures-light-humans-kind-Kodak-film.html?ITO=1490&ns_mchannel=rss&ns_campaign=1490

snapguy · Apr 14, 2015

Cap

"Captures light humans cannot see." -- Balderdash.

Ricardo Miranda · Apr 14, 2015

This is a better article: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/in-pictures-32128280

Nodda Duma · Apr 14, 2015

I used to have an image hanging in my office titled "Washington D.C. as Seen by an ICBM" which had a similar cast of colors. The article reminded me of it...shadows of the Cold War era.

TheFlyingCamera · Apr 14, 2015

The thing that really rankles is the false association between IR and radiation. He may have photographed "the most irradiated forest on the planet", but the photograph doesn't show that in any way shape or form - no radiation from the pulverized uranium discharge from the reactor is being recorded. Kind of reminds me of the BS that was in Theresa Airey's book - an otherwise excellent guide to hand-coloring and manipulating prints. In the chapter on using Infrared film, she talks about wrapping the developing tank in aluminum foil and dedicating a tank and reels to IR only because of contamination from the IR radiation.

snapguy · Apr 14, 2015

If

If I wanted to capture light humans could not see I'd shoot the darn things on Kokachrome. Nobody would ever see the light/images.

Nodda Duma · Apr 14, 2015

TheFlyingCamera said:
. Kind of reminds me of the BS that was in Theresa Airey's book - an otherwise excellent guide to hand-coloring and manipulating prints. In the chapter on using Infrared film, she talks about wrapping the developing tank in aluminum foil and dedicating a tank and reels to IR only because of contamination from the IR radiation.

Now that's funny. I had to share that one with the guys in the office...got a good laugh out of it

See BS is good for something..in this case for good humor

Photo Engineer · Apr 14, 2015

snapguy said:
"Captures light humans cannot see." -- Balderdash.

The human eye sees what we call light between 400 and 700 nm. Everything above and below is radiation due to its nature. You feel IR on your skin from a fire and you feel UV on your skin as you get a sunburn.

I agree that no nuclear radiation has been apparently recorded unless he can show a glow at night! But to say "humans cannot see" is correct with this IR film. It is not light though, it is radiation in part.

PE

heespharm · Apr 14, 2015

I wish I could see infrared light.. Maybe then I could get my tv remote control working properly

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Nodda Duma · Apr 14, 2015

PE I hate to say it but that's not quite true, or your definition of infrared is the astronomical one?

Most imagers operating in the UV/VIS/NIR/SWIR bands (150-2000nm) are reflected energy detectors...operating similar to film, eyeballs, etc.

You actually don't start using emissive energy for imaging purposes until you get up into the mid-wave / long wave bands , 3-5 um and 7-12 um and beyond. There's just not enough stuff emitting energy below 2um to form useful imagery from.

There are exceptions...ie the glow of a hot stove but for the most part near-infrared and short-wave infrared cameras are reflected energy imaging systems just like visible.

In either case, nuclear radiation does not directly show up.

Traditional "heat" cameras ie FLIR cameras operate in the 7-12 um (7000-12,000 nm) realm.

bsdunek · Apr 14, 2015

All I know is, I miss the IR Ektachrome I used to use back in the 60's and 70's Real fun stuff, although it was already getting hard to find E-4 processing.

Theo Sulphate · Apr 14, 2015

heespharm said:
I wish I could see infrared light.. Maybe then I could get my tv remote control working properly

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Pretty much any phone with a camera can show you the IR pulses from a remote.

MattKing · Apr 14, 2015

heespharm said:
I wish I could see infrared light.. Maybe then I could get my tv remote control working properly

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I have an older Wein remote flash receiver that I can trigger with my PVR's remote control.

The false colour IR film was special, industrial/scientific purpose film that was also interesting to use for general photography.

As was HIE.

The films were supplanted with other technology in those special, industrial/scientific realms.

The general photography uses were never even close enough in volume to economically support continued production.

Sad, but realistic.

Photo Engineer · Apr 14, 2015

I hate to say it but you can get some pretty decent IR photos using a digital camera. There are web sites devoted to this. That is what killed IR films pretty much.

PE

dwross · Apr 14, 2015

TheFlyingCamera said:
The thing that really rankles is the false association between IR and radiation. He may have photographed "the most irradiated forest on the planet", but the photograph doesn't show that in any way shape or form - no radiation from the pulverized uranium discharge from the reactor is being recorded. Kind of reminds me of the BS that was in Theresa Airey's book - an otherwise excellent guide to hand-coloring and manipulating prints. In the chapter on using Infrared film, she talks about wrapping the developing tank in aluminum foil and dedicating a tank and reels to IR only because of contamination from the IR radiation.

Scott,
Are you sure it was Theresa who said that? She speaks very cogently and knowledgeably about the spectrum in her chapter on IR photography in "Creative Photo Printmaking". The only time she mentions foil is with the advice to wrap boxes of IR film in foil, and then a plastic freezer bag, for long term storage. I think that is standard advice to make sure moisture doesn't at any film stored in a freezer. For processing, she used regular Paterson plastic tanks.

NJH · Apr 14, 2015

Leica M8 did it without modification which was not a great thing if one didn't want odd colour casts to their digital images.

Someone I worked with years ago told me about 'seeing' nuclear fission when he experienced some eye ball scintillation whilst working with a research reactor. I found that pretty terrifying to be honest and had though it was a myth maybe he was pulling my leg.

OptiKen · Apr 14, 2015

snapguy said:
If I wanted to capture light humans could not see I'd shoot the darn things on Kokachrome. Nobody would ever see the light/images.

Dr Croubie · Apr 14, 2015

TheFlyingCamera said:
He may have photographed "the most irradiated forest on the planet", but the photograph doesn't show that in any way shape or form - no radiation from the pulverized uranium discharge from the reactor is being recorded.

Not directly of course, that's what geiger counters are for, but there would certainly be differences shooting this particular forest with IR film compared to another forest.
For a start, the trees are all dead and have been for 30 years, so no moisture in the leaves / needles will give rather different effects.

But the coolest / strangest / worst thing (depending on how you look at it) is that there are no microscopic living things there either.
No bacteria nor fungus nor slime moulds (and barely even any insects) eating and helping to decay all the dead vegetation.
It's all just one dead dry tinderbox which, if it caught fire, would go up like a roman candle, and spew (slightly) radioactive smoke and ash in whatever direction the wind is going. Now that's the scary thing.

Ken Nadvornick · Apr 14, 2015

NJH said:
Someone I worked with years ago told me about 'seeing' nuclear fission when he experienced some eye ball scintillation whilst working with a research reactor. I found that pretty terrifying to be honest and had though it was a myth maybe he was pulling my leg.

Not a myth. In the earliest days of nuclear research, laboratory assistants, often women due in part to their greater patience, would be hired to do just that. After sitting in darkened rooms for extended periods to condition their night vision they would then sit in front of zinc-sulfide scintillation screens and count the ephemeral pinpoints of light.*

A spinthariscope was a simple device used to ease the process of viewing.

Ken

* At various stages early in his Pulitzer Prize award-winning book The Making of the Atomic Bomb author Richard Rhodes describes this process in great detail. Very accessible to the educated non-scientist, this book is an absolutely fascinating must-read for anyone wishing to know "the rest of the story."

Prof_Pixel · Apr 14, 2015

Ken Nadvornick said:
* At various stages early in his Pulitzer Prize award-winning book The Making of the Atomic Bomb author Richard Rhodes describes this process in great detail. Very accessible to the educated non-scientist, this book is an absolutely fascinating must-read for anyone wishing to know "the rest of the story."

I also highly recommend his follow-up book Dark Sun: The Making of the Hydrogen Bomb

Photo Engineer · Apr 14, 2015

Search Chernobyl and Wildlife and you will find extensive documentation that animal life has returned to the afflicted area. The plant life was not affected much at all, nor were insects. In fact, insects returned first to the initial atom bomb sites in the US. This set of photos showed normal plant life in which chlorophyll shows up as red and dead plant life shows up as a variety of other colors.

As for scintillation, astronauts regularly "see" the effects of Cosmic Rays as they hit the retina of their eyeballs. They see it as minute flashes of light or sprays of light.

PE

pdeeh · Apr 15, 2015

that "iflscience" site doesn't seem very rigorous in its interpretations does it?

Ironage · Apr 16, 2015

I see extra an extra band of color beyond violet on rainbows. Are my eyes detecting ultra violet?

TheFlyingCamera · Apr 16, 2015

dwross said:
Scott,
Are you sure it was Theresa who said that? She speaks very cogently and knowledgeably about the spectrum in her chapter on IR photography in "Creative Photo Printmaking". The only time she mentions foil is with the advice to wrap boxes of IR film in foil, and then a plastic freezer bag, for long term storage. I think that is standard advice to make sure moisture doesn't at any film stored in a freezer. For processing, she used regular Paterson plastic tanks.

I'll look it up again in my copy when I get home - I distinctly remember her talking about IR contamination in the tank. It may be something she had in a previous edition and corrected. You may be right about the reference to aluminum foil and that it was just for preservation of the film.

TheFlyingCamera · Apr 18, 2015

Denise -

I found the comment in the book. It was not about the film developing tank itself, but rather about the fixer for processing b/w Infrared. On page 48, in the 1st edition 1996 printing, she says:

Any film fixer will do, but I prefer Kodak's Rapid Fix. Once you use the fixer, store it in a separate jug labeled "Infrared Film Fix". This way, you won't contaminate your other films with infrared radiation.

It almost reads as an inside joke that got left in accidentally by an editor.

Final Kodak Moments

RattyMouse

snapguy

Ricardo Miranda

Nodda Duma

TheFlyingCamera

Membership Council

snapguy

Nodda Duma

Photo Engineer

heespharm

Nodda Duma

bsdunek

Theo Sulphate

MattKing

Moderator

Photo Engineer

dwross

NJH

OptiKen

Dr Croubie

Ken Nadvornick

Prof_Pixel

Photo Engineer

pdeeh

Ironage

TheFlyingCamera

Membership Council

TheFlyingCamera

Membership Council

Final Kodak Moments

Membership Council

Moderator

Membership Council

Membership Council

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency