How to develop Kodak Infrared Color film

[stevenjeong99]

Hello, I recently acquired a Kodak infrared color film thats been kept frozen ever since the previous owner purchased it in 2002. I'm pretty unknowledgeable when it comes to film development so I was wondering what I have to tell the film studio on how to develop it. I know that the box says to develop E-6 but from what I know it is no longer used anymore(?). Thanks for the help in advance!

 

[MultiFormat Shooter]

Hello, I recently acquired a Kodak infrared color film thats been kept frozen ever since the previous owner purchased it in 2002. I'm pretty unknowledgeable when it comes to film development so I was wondering what I have to tell the film studio on how to develop it. I know that the box says to develop E-6 but from what I know it is no longer used anymore(?). Thanks for the help in advance!

E-6 is still widely used (relatively speaking) as it is the process, for "regular" slide film. I have used similarly stored Kodak EIR, and have had the lab process it normally, in E-6 chemistry, with good results.

 

[stevenjeong99]

E-6 is still widely used (relatively speaking) as it is the process, for "regular" slide film. I have used similarly stored Kodak EIR, and have had the lab process it normally, in E-6 chemistry, with good results.

aha I see! I guess I'll ask the lab to see if they still use E-6 and then worry about alternative methods. Thanks for the reply!

 

[stevenjeong99]

E-6 is still widely used (relatively speaking) as it is the process, for "regular" slide film. I have used similarly stored Kodak EIR, and have had the lab process it normally, in E-6 chemistry, with good results.

Oh and one question, I also read somewhere that you need a yellow filter for infrared color photos. Is the outcome drastically worse if you don't use a yellow filter?

 

[MultiFormat Shooter]

Oh and one question, I also read somewhere that you need a yellow filter for infrared color photos. Is the outcome drastically worse if you don't use a yellow filter?

Yes! You need to a use a 12 Yellow or a 16 Orange filter, with color infrared film. If you don't, your images will have a blue-magenta cast to them. This cast can be strong enough to ruin the images, such that even with digital post-processing of the scans, you likely won't be able to salvage them.

 

[xkaes]

In case you haven't figured it out yet, a lot of stuff on the WEB is just "stuff" -- just plain wrong. Any photo lab is going to have E-6 chemicals.

And yes, different color filters create different effects on color infrared film. You don't have to use any filter, but depending on what filter you use, it cuts out different spectrums of light and gives different results. Too lengthy to explain here, but the results are written up in several books -- and available on the web from reputable sites.

 

[stevenjeong99]

Yes! You need to a use a 12 Yellow or a 16 Orange filter, with color infrared film. If you don't, your images will have a blue-magenta cast to them. This cast can be strong enough to ruin the images, such that even with digital post-processing of the scans, you likely won't be able to salvage them.

Aha I actually have an orange filter so i'll make sure to use that! Thanks again

 

[xkaes]

Aha I actually have an orange filter so i'll make sure to use that! Thanks again

Try it with and without -- and with any other filters you have, or can borrow.

 

[stevenjeong99]

Try it with and without -- and with any other filters you have, or can borrow.

I'll make sure to take a few frames with different filters or no filters! I just wish color infrared films were a bit more cheaper and easier to find I've been looking for it for years in my country and I finally gave up and just bought one from ebay. Kodak better bring back aerochrome!

 

[xkaes]

Oh Oh. If you bought 35mm Kodak Color Infrared on EBAY, who knows how it was stored -- and for how long. Who knows what you will get out of it. I'll keep my figures crossed. As I recall, it only came in 36 exposure rolls. Is that correct????

 

[AnselMortensen]

Important:

Do NOT open the canister or load the camera in daylight/room light!

Inform the lab that you are sending them infrared film...NOT to open the canister in daylight/room light, NOT to load the machine with lights on, and to TURN OFF infrared devices like goggles.

 

[MattKing]

Any photo lab is going to have E-6 chemicals.

There aren't as many E6 capable labs around as there used to be, and some that used to develop E6, no longer do so. That being said, there are still lots who do.
Technically speaking the film was designed for a different process, but that process is/was sufficiently similar to E6 that the current E6 will do fine.

As I recall, it only came in 36 exposure rolls. Is that correct????

If you are speaking of the Kodak spooled films, I think you are correct.
The film was mainly aimed at military, government and industrial users, and was probably most used in aerial cameras that took very long rolls. Some of that film is around in the form of long rolls cut to individual cassette lengths by independent 3rd parties. You could conceivably find shorter than 36 exposure lengths from them.
The film is a false colour film - designed to differentiate between subjects with different IR reflectivity by rendering/displaying different colours. As an example, the forestry industry used it to evaluate things like the health of different parts of a forest. The fact that it also can provide compelling imagery was an unintended offshoot of a product that was otherwise intended for very large military, government and industrial user bases. When those uses dwindled, production ended, because pictorial users couldn't support its relatively expensive production.

 

[deanbennici]

Sorry, is this a 35mm roll or a 120 roll? They are different actually. Anyway, if you can't find E6, the film processes very nicely in C41 which every single lab still has. As for filters, you can use any filter from a #12 yellow through orange and on to a #25 red. Bascially anything past #12. The #25 is a very heavy effect, but good for some imstances. example https://www.aerochrome.shop/aero-landscape?lightbox=dataItem-jsbwrkey

 

[Sanug]

Are you sure about the Kodak Ektachrome IR film is to be processed in E6? And not in the long time discontinued E4?

 

[MultiFormat Shooter]

Are you sure about the Kodak Ektachrome IR film is to be processed in E6? And not in the long time discontinued E4?

Yes, infrared Ektachrome was changed to be E6-compatible, in the late 1990's (1996?). I think due to the addition of a hardener, in the emulsion; @laser would know better than I do.

 

[deanbennici]

Is it Kodak Ektachrome IR or Aerochrome? What's the date on it? Anything before 1997 may need E4 processing which has been discontinued.

 

[pentaxuser]

In the last few posts I am now confused.

So all Kodak IR film is in fact "slide/chrome called Ektachrome and needs E6 so does that mean you end up with a slide and if you want prints then presumably labs fine this an easy and perfectly good transition? However one post says not to worry about finding a lab that does E6 as it can be processed very nicely in C41 which all labs have?

Can anyone clarify?

Thanks

pentaxuser

 

[MattKing]

In the last few posts I am now confused.

So all Kodak IR film is in fact "slide/chrome called Ektachrome and needs E6 so does that mean you end up with a slide and if you want prints then presumably labs fine this an easy and perfectly good transition? However one post says not to worry about finding a lab that does E6 as it can be processed very nicely in C41 which all labs have?

Can anyone clarify?

Thanks

pentaxuser

Nope.
The more recent versions of the film were designed for a process close to E6 - close enough that you can develop it in E6 and get similar results. Perhaps you might think even better results, unless your goal is to obtain the scientific - rather than pictorial - results that the film was mainly designed for.
As the colours one attains from this film are false in any event, it is up to you whether you want transparencies or negatives - each will give you their own version of false colour.
You can cross process all E6 intended films in C41 and get interesting negatives.
IIRC, I think Photo Engineer posted on a few occasions that some of the very famous shots from space that he was involved in when he was with NASA were actually slide (E4) film cross processed in negative (C-22) developer.

 

[pentaxuser]

Thanks Matt I have seen pics of Kodak IR film as prints and all had a "look" that were close to each other in the colour green being a bright magenta which is the shift that I most closely associate with Kodak Colour IR

So from what you know of the results of the two processes which one gíves this look or do both have the same effect on green to magenta but perhaps render other colours differently?

Interesting colours can cover a wide spectrum of colours and this being the case it might not matter what you get as false is false whatever you get and certaínly in the U.K. labs doing E6 are getting scarce so much easier to have it processed in C41

pentaxuser

 

[MattKing]

So from what you know of the results of the two processes which one gíves this look or do both have the same effect on green to magenta but perhaps render other colours differently?

I'll leave this question to be answered by the "false colour" fans here.

 

[koraks]

if you want prints

If you want prints to be made commercially, then this will be done through a digital intermediate in 99.9999999999999999999999999998 of the cases. It doesn't really matter how the original was exposed, developed etc; as long as you can get a scan (made) that you like, it can be printed OK.
The main problem you might anticipate is if you walk into a lab with some cross-processed film, the lab may not be able (for lack of expertise and/or equipment) to properly scan it, so the final print will come out horrible. Of course, E6 film processed in C41 always has a 'peculiar' look and an automated scanner that 'thinks' it's scanning color negative will generally output an image with solid blacks and/or massively blown out highlights, and very strong colors. If you scan yourself or have a trained operator do the job for you, you may be able to get a decent result especially after some manual color tweaking.
If you happen to walk into one of the handful of labs running an actual optical minilab (as opposed to a digital one), your prints will also come out horrible if you feed cross-processed E6 into the machine. If you feed properly processed E6 into the machine, they will also come out horrible - and inverted.

So the remark/concern related to printing needs to take into account the scanning bit, since that's an inevitable step in the process of going from film to print today.

 

[pentaxuser]

Thanks for #21, koraks. I was simply thinking of those who may still optically enlarge and darkroom print via the RA4 process . In those few cases of that happening it would appear that C41 is the way to go with Kodak IR colour

Just as a humorous aside I sometimes wonder how secondhand enlargers still seem to command such high prices if their use has díminished to almost zero as everybody or almost everybody is using what we call the hybrid process

pentaxuser

 

[koraks]

In those few cases of that happening it would appear that C41 is the way to go with Kodak IR colour

Not really; cross-processed E6 film in C41 developer will give a very high gamma. The negatives will be no fun at all to print.
Best way to get prints from an E6 film is process as E6, scan, print digitally. If desired, you can get digital prints made onto RA4 paper; that's what it's made for after all.

I sometimes wonder how secondhand enlargers still seem to command such high prices

Some do, some don't. It's especially medium format and larger, and it depends a lot on where you are and who you know. Moreover, keep in mind that a good 95% of the enlargers in existence up to around 2002 or so have since been scrapped, so what's left is a tiny fraction of what was around. If you then see a small uptick in demand, prices soar.
What you see now is that the old generation still hanging on to the equipment they got, in part cheap or for free when it was dumped en masse, while a tiny minority of the younger generation warms up to darkroom printing. Predictably, in a few years the older generation will start releasing their equipment as they become too old or simply to dead to use it. Some of that stuff will end up on the market and it may give the younger generation a little breathing room as they can take over. Much of it will again be dumped/scrapped by heirs who don't know what to do with it and who mostly can't be bothered to sell it off; carting it to the scrapyard is so much easier & quicker.

as everybody or almost everybody is using what we call the hybrid process

The vast majority of the present generation shooting film never sets foot in a darkroom or touches a darkroom print made from their own film. So "almost everybody" is indeed correct.
The other day I tried to warm some people up to a Colenta RA4 processor in perfectly functioning condition; the owner was about to sell it for a pittance and I'm pretty sure that if someone genuinely interested in it would have shown up, he might have given it away for free. In reality, nobody actually did show up - there were some nibbles, but the lady couldn't figure out whether she had a room with the required plumbing or not. That's the analog revival for you - "I don't know if I want this". The Colenta ended up being scrapped.