This is the Rollei shot through a Hoya R72 - I metered the ambient light as indicated using EI 3: (there was a url link here which no longer exists)
You should have bought an eBay ir filter from china. Just a few dollars isn't a big deal if you end up not liking it. I have one and it works for those few times I do shoot ir. I guess if you are really committing to it $200 bucks may be worth it but that's a steep curve to jump onto just starting out.
Temperature has no effect on photographic IR film. The IR that constitutes hot/cold is way out of the range of photographic film.
I have seen IR shots of conifers in the snow, and it was really nifty to see white foliage with white snow. That was done with Kodak, though. Usually when I do it with a 092 filter and Efke or Ilford, the conifers will be a light grey. One time when I was underneath conifers, in the deep shade and the sunlight couldn't filter, the IR made things look like a white fairy land. You might want to look for settings like that. Remember to bracket N, +/-1, +/-2, and you should be good, especially for your first trip with it.
Hmm so, what about the sun, I've never seen an IR shot where the image was aimed at the sun...
Is this possible? Was thinking of shooting a shot where the sun is in the sky overlooking the canyon (something to do while I wait for golden hour).
Stone, I use this film all the time and in every case, ISO 6 with an R72 has proven to be dead on. I have even used it with my iPhone app called Lightmeter which is essentially a spot meter and it looks great. I would not bracket the under side of ISO 6, there is no point. Unless you are ducking into thick cover, don't do three frame brackets, one at metered value and one at 1 stop over will be fine.
I soup my IR400 in HC-110 / B and it looks great. Xtol looks good too but you need to overdevelop it a bit as well as the Ilford SFX stuff. Also, the Rollie stuff does well with a couple minutes of tempered pre-wet as it seems to be prone to streaking, FYI.....
I have no experience with Ilfosol or DDX but HC-110 is nearly as economical as Rodinal in that you mix only what you need each run. So for example, in dillution B it is 1+31 or 16ml of concentrate per 484ml of water to come up with the 500ml for a roll of 120, about .40 cents.
I find IR-400 in HC-110 to be a bit tamer in grain and contrast compared to Rodinal 1+50 but still punchy enough for striking IR effect at grade 2 and for a scan that you simply have to set black and maybe do a touch of highlight burn.
And I know some people complain about the syrupy nature of HC-110 but I simply overcome that by pouring the majority of the measured concentrate out of my small 50ml graduate into my larger 1L dedicated developer graduate first. I then have the tempered and measured amount of water in another 1L container and I just keep pouring it into the small 50ml graduate that the concentrate was in and then pour that into the developer graduate until I have gone through all the measured water. It pretty much rinses all the HC-110 into the mix by the time I have ran all the water into it, no waste, no want....
Even though I have plenty of stock of developers like D76, 1D-II and Rodinal, I have pretty much standardized with Xtol and HC-110 which work great for both tank and reel and rotary processing...
Good luck!
(And if the vegitation is like those grasses and shrubs, forget the IR "false-wood" effect. Won't happen.)
Stone:
This may be too late, but just in case it isn't ...
Your question about the effect of temperature indicates to me that there is something about (near) IR film that you are misunderstanding.
None of us use a meter that will tell us how much film sensitive radiation there is in the scenes we photograph.
All of our calculations are based on:
1) we know that the light we see reflected off our subject is accompanied by at least some IR that our film is sensitive too; and
2) we have or gain experience as we go about what the percentage is of IR light reflecting from the subject.
As an example, we learn from experience that in certain weather conditions, at certain times of day there is a relatively high percentage of ambient IR in the total ambient light available. We also learn that certain types of vegetation reflect more of that IR than other types do.
If we didn't use something like a very dense R72 filter, we would never see any IR effect on the film, because the film is much more sensitive to visible light then it is to IR.
We have no way to meter the IR. We do, however, have a way to meter the visible light, and through experience we learn how much IR is around when a certain amount of visible light around, so we do have a way of approaching the problem.
First, we put something like an R72 filter on the camera, which blocks out almost all the visible light, but transmits the IR. We do not meter through that filter - use a separate hand-held meter.
Next, based on our experience that indicates that for any level of illumination we see, there are about 6 stops less intense IR present as well, we measure the visible light, and extrapolate the IR by assuming there are 6 stops less available. We accomplish that extrapolation by metering at EI 6, which is 6 stops less than EI 400.
Finally, we expose the film through the filter, and bracket around that 6 stops less estimate, because it isn't nearly as accurate as our usual metering technology.
Hope this helps.
Sorry to hear about the trip.... I've learned the hard way, to use FedX / UPS for shipments, I want on a specific time.
It's never a good idea to travel to a location and use materials (or equipment) with which you're not familiar. This is especially true if it's very different than what you usually use, as IR is. You would have been better served by shooting about 10-12 rolls prior to your trip.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?