HELP !!! Shooting Infrared with Mamiya 7ii

[lilmsmaggie]

I've never shot infrared film before and I'm barely familiar with my Mamiya 7ii that I purchased about 6 mos. ago.

Anywho - I'm taking a class at the local community college and one of the assignments is to shoot with infrared film. From what I understand, you have to load IR film in a darkroom.

From watching this youtube video:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mVEX9CgWC0o

It looks like you have to align arrows on the film back with an arrow on the camera body. Not sure how you would accomplish that in total darkness.


Anyone out there use Efke IR820 aura 120 film, or any type of IR film?

 

[BetterSense]

If it were me I would load the film in the darkroom and use my IR goggles to align the marks.


Oh wait...

With 120 you can probably just load it in very dim light.

 

[ntenny]

I've loaded 120 IR film in room light and been fine. Your mileage may vary and all that, but it shouldn't be subject to the light piping problem that 35mm IR can show.

-NT

 

[lilmsmaggie]

I've loaded 120 IR film in room light and been fine. Your mileage may vary and all that, but it shouldn't be subject to the light piping problem that 35mm IR can show.

-NT

If it were me I would load the film in the darkroom and use my IR goggles to align the marks.


Oh wait...

With 120 you can probably just load it in very dim light.

Sounds promising.

 

[benjiboy]

Don't forget Maggie that you need to adjust the focus on the lens when using IR film because IR rays don't focus at the same point as visible light ones, there should be a red dot on the lens to adjust the focus to after you use the rangefinder.

 

[MattKing]

What film are you using?

If you are using most of the currently available offerings, they are really "near infrared" films. They are fine to load and unload in subdued light.

With 120 film for your Mamiya 7ii, you won't have to worry about light piping (a real concern with 35mm).

Make sure you have a light-tight container for transporting the exposed film.

Have fun - the Mamiya 7 series would be superb for IR - as is the Mamiya TLR that I use .

 

[lilmsmaggie]

I ordered three rolls each of Efke IR820 aura 120 & 35 films from Freestyle, although I'd prefer to shoot the 120.

 

[olwick]

I shoot a TON of IR, almost exclusively the Efke IR 820 Aura in 120, and you definitely do NOT need to load it in total darkness. Just shade or indoors is fine - no bright sunlight It's a lot heartier than some people who haven't shot it think. In fact once the back of my Holga cam off mid-roll (surprise) with the IR 820 in it. It was indoors but in a loft with a wall of windows on a sunny day. I expected the whole roll would be ruined, but it wasn't. The frame that I was on was ruined and the frames on either side had a bit of fogging, but that was it. In otherwords exactly how I would have expected any film to react, not just IR.

As long as you're not loading it in bright sunlight you'll be fine. Trust me, I've shot hundreds of rolls of Efke IR 820. You can see some of the results here: www.olwickphotography.com

 

[lilmsmaggie]

Thanks Mark for your first-hand personal experience. I received the Efke IR820 Aura on Saturday. I have a #25 Red filter but even though the class syllabus says to use this or a #29 Red, I decided to opt for a Hoya R72.

My plan of action to load my cameras in an upstairs bathroom that's in a hallway after the sun has gone down. There is a small night-light in there but I could probably drape a towel or something over it so that it not blaring.

With 3 rolls of 120 and 3 rolls of 35, I hope to get a couple of decent IR images

BTW - liked your web site.

Dwain

I shoot a TON of IR, almost exclusively the Efke IR 820 Aura in 120, and you definitely do NOT need to load it in total darkness. Just shade or indoors is fine - no bright sunlight It's a lot heartier than some people who haven't shot it think. In fact once the back of my Holga cam off mid-roll (surprise) with the IR 820 in it. It was indoors but in a loft with a wall of windows on a sunny day. I expected the whole roll would be ruined, but it wasn't. The frame that I was on was ruined and the frames on either side had a bit of fogging, but that was it. In otherwords exactly how I would have expected any film to react, not just IR.

As long as you're not loading it in bright sunlight you'll be fine. Trust me, I've shot hundreds of rolls of Efke IR 820. You can see some of the results here: www.olwickphotography.com

 

[olwick]

Thanks Dwain,

I use an R72 filter on mine and it works great.

BTW, I still think you're being too cautious with the film. I've changed rolls in the middle of sunny Monument Valley just using my shadow or the shady inside of the truck, but it's up to you.

 

[Niall Bell]

lilmsmaggie,
I shoot a reasonable amount of Efke 820 aura 120 in my Mamiya 6 (the 'modern' predecessor to the Mamiya 7).

I have never loaded it in darkness and frequently do so in bright sunshine but in shade of my body. It works perfectly.

HIE, however, does need to be loaded in a darkroom. Bitter experience here!!

Hope this helps,
Niall

 

[lilmsmaggie]

Thanks Dwain,

I use an R72 filter on mine and it works great.

BTW, I still think you're being too cautious with the film. I've changed rolls in the middle of sunny Monument Valley just using my shadow or the shady inside of the truck, but it's up to you.

Well, I've never used IR film before BTW - what ISO are you shooting at?
The Efke literature says ISO 100-200 (I guess depending on lightinging conditions).
I would imagine that some may shoot at a slower ISO because of the results they've obtained.

I haven't received the R72 yet but its on its way. It doesn't appear that there is a listed filter factor for it. I've seen older internet posts saying to use a factor of 5.
But no explanation as to why.

lilmsmaggie,
I shoot a reasonable amount of Efke 820 aura 120 in my Mamiya 6 (the 'modern' predecessor to the Mamiya 7).

I have never loaded it in darkness and frequently do so in bright sunshine but in shade of my body. It works perfectly.

HIE, however, does need to be loaded in a darkroom. Bitter experience here!!

Hope this helps,
Niall

Well sounds like I can safely load/unload in subdued light.

Kodak HIE is no longer available - at least here in the states.

 

[olwick]

I shoot it at between ISO 6 and 25. It's very slow when shooting IR with the R72.

 

[L Gebhardt]

BTW - what ISO are you shooting at?
The Efke literature says ISO 100-200 (I guess depending on lightinging conditions).
I would imagine that some may shoot at a slower ISO because of the results they've obtained.

I have found that Maco 820C Aura with a 720nm filter the correct speed was ISO 3 for me in bright sun. But I still bracket most shots by over exposing 1 stop. Sometimes this has save a shot where there wasn't as much IR light as I thought.

Even more of the Wood effect can be achieved with an 87 filter. There the ISO of 1.5 seems best.

I have no issues loading into a Mamiya 7 in daylight by keeping my back to the sun and shading the camera.

 

[lilmsmaggie]

Does the Mamiya allow you to set an ISO that low? I believe my 35mm goes down to ISO 25 not sure about the Mamiya 7ii.

How do you achieve such a low setting :confused:

I have found that Maco 820C Aura with a 720nm filter the correct speed was ISO 3 for me in bright sun. But I still bracket most shots by over exposing 1 stop. Sometimes this has save a shot where there wasn't as much IR light as I thought.

Even more of the Wood effect can be achieved with an 87 filter. There the ISO of 1.5 seems best.

I have no issues loading into a Mamiya 7 in daylight by keeping my back to the sun and shading the camera.

 

[L Gebhardt]

Does the Mamiya allow you to set an ISO that low? I believe my 35mm goes down to ISO 25 not sure about the Mamiya 7ii.

How do you achieve such a low setting :confused:

I use an external light meter (pentax digital spot, if that makes any difference). Then I set the speed manually. I usually end up in the one or more second range, so I always use a tripod. You could also just manually adjust the shutter speed after noting the camera's reading by x number of stops based on the set ISO on the camera.

 

[lilmsmaggie]

An external light meter makes sense but isn't it calibrated to read visible light not IR just like the camera's internal meter?

I'm wondering if that's where that "factor of 5" for the R72 filter factor comes into play.

I was actually thinking of using a tripod mounted camera with an ISO of 25 at f8 f11 as a starting point.

I use an external light meter (pentax digital spot, if that makes any difference). Then I set the speed manually. I usually end up in the one or more second range, so I always use a tripod. You could also just manually adjust the shutter speed after noting the camera's reading by x number of stops based on the set ISO on the camera.

 

[L Gebhardt]

I think some external meters read a bit of IR, but usually it's dwarfed by the amount of visible light. I don't know of any common meters designed to read only IR, but I imagine putting a filter on the Pentax spot could make it only IR sensitive. So far I haven't felt I need to bother with this. If I shot this film in other lighting situations an IR meter would probably be needed.

I think your best bet is to go out with a roll of film and meter with both the external meter, and the in camera meter. Record the results of both and bracket from ISO .75 to 25 (.75, 1.5, 3, 6, 12, 25) and then develop and print them. Pick a scene with some shadows with detail and lots of foliage, blue sky, and a few clouds. Do this close to noon. From this you should be able to correlate your camera's meter to the handheld meter and find the ideal film speed for both in bright sunlight.

Just for your reference, I should add my speeds are based on taking a shadow reading and placing it on zone 3. This is the same as I shoot all negative film. Gives me negatives with good shadow details that print nicely. Most of the regular black and white films come out best using half box speed with this method and my equipment if that helps you relate it to your normal exposure methods.

 

[MattKing]

An external light meter makes sense but isn't it calibrated to read visible light not IR just like the camera's internal meter?

I'm wondering if that's where that "factor of 5" for the R72 filter factor comes into play.

I was actually thinking of using a tripod mounted camera with an ISO of 25 at f8 f11 as a starting point.

If you have ever looked through an R72 filter you have probably said to yourself something like: "I cannot see anything through this filter".

That is because the filter blocks almost all the visible light.

All the estimates you will read about what EI you should set on your meter are based on two factors:

1) In order for the IR film to work and give results that show IR illumination, you have to block out some or all of the visible light; and
2) There is, generally speaking, a rough correlation between the amounts of visible and IR light in a scene.

So the way the metering works is that you meter all the light (visible and IR), use a filter that cuts out the visible portion, and then use the information you have about the correlation between the total amount of light present (as measured by the meter) and the proportion of same that consists of the IR light to which the film is sensitive.

So when someone says they have had most success exposing a film with a nominal ISO of 200 with an EI of 3 when using an R72 filter, they are essentially saying that the available light consists of a mixture of IR light and visible light that is 6 stops brighter than the predominantly IR light that is left after the R72 filter has done its work.

Hope this helps.

 

[lilmsmaggie]

Thanks Matt!

If you have ever looked through an R72 filter you have probably said to yourself something like: "I cannot see anything through this filter".

That is because the filter blocks almost all the visible light.

All the estimates you will read about what EI you should set on your meter are based on two factors:

1) In order for the IR film to work and give results that show IR illumination, you have to block out some or all of the visible light; and
2) There is, generally speaking, a rough correlation between the amounts of visible and IR light in a scene.

So the way the metering works is that you meter all the light (visible and IR), use a filter that cuts out the visible portion, and then use the information you have about the correlation between the total amount of light present (as measured by the meter) and the proportion of same that consists of the IR light to which the film is sensitive.

So when someone says they have had most success exposing a film with a nominal ISO of 200 with an EI of 3 when using an R72 filter, they are essentially saying that the available light consists of a mixture of IR light and visible light that is 6 stops brighter than the predominantly IR light that is left after the R72 filter has done its work.

Hope this helps.

 

[lilmsmaggie]

The Efke has arrived. Still waiting for the Hoya R72

I've noticed a lot of inconsistency in responses as to loading in total darkness vs. subdued light if that makes any sense. Which, when considering this stuff is $11.99a pop :eek: makes one want to err on the side of caution.

I'm really, really hoping I get some promising results.

I'm also considering having LifePixel convert a Canon G12 to either full spectrum or 720nm with several recommendations to go with 590nm. I'm thinking that if I like film B&W IR then shooting digital IR will be a bit easier to accomplish.

So in a way, the coincidence of taking a photography class that requires a B&W film IR image will actually help me decide if I want to do the digital conversion or not.

Thanks Dwain,

I use an R72 filter on mine and it works great.

BTW, I still think you're being too cautious with the film. I've changed rolls in the middle of sunny Monument Valley just using my shadow or the shady inside of the truck, but it's up to you.