ilford sfx, filters or no

jim appleyard · Apr 27, 2005

I recenlty picked up the last two rolls of Ilford SFX at the camera store and I'd like to go to a ghost town near here and shoot the abandoned and falling down old houses. Do you users of this film still recommend the use of red filters even tho' there will be no sky, just old buildings, in the photos.

BradS · Apr 27, 2005

If you don't use a fairly strong red filter, your results will look a lot like HP-5 or, FP-4.

colrehogan · Apr 27, 2005

To get the IR effect with this film, I use an R72 (Wratten 89B) filter.

jim appleyard · Apr 27, 2005

Well, I've got #'s 25 and 29 for my red filters. I guess that'll have to do.

Terence · Apr 28, 2005

I use a #25 with good results. Weathered wood and half rusty/half shiny metal are where SFX shines for me (since black skies aren't an option for you.).

panchromatic · Apr 28, 2005

in my part of town(country) the SFX sits on our shelves...

maybe i should pick some up and try it.

jim appleyard · Apr 28, 2005

Terence said:
I use a #25 with good results. Weathered wood and half rusty/half shiny metal are where SFX shines for me (since black skies aren't an option for you.).

That's good news. I'm photographing the old buildings at Adirondac (ghost town) and the place just screams for b/w. I thought the SFX would be just different enough. Thanks.

titrisol · Apr 28, 2005

Jim, check here: http://www.ilford.com/html/us_english/prod_html/sfx200/sfx200.html
A 25 filter (RED) helps with SFX, even though they reccomend a deep red filter for maximum effect.

Panchromatic: Lucky you!
here it dissapeared from the shelves right after the Ilford news hit.....

panchromatic said:
in my part of town(country) the SFX sits on our shelves...

maybe i should pick some up and try it.

PS. if you find a good deal send me some

BradS · Apr 28, 2005

After the Ilford scare, all the SFX200 quickly disappeared from local shelves here too. It seems to have been recently restocked however...with a whopping 50% price increase. Now $12 per roll of 135-36exp.

titrisol · Apr 28, 2005

Jim, run a SFX200 red 25 filter in google.
A couple good pages:
http://www.apogeephoto.com/mag1-6/mag2-2sfx200.shtml
http://www.pauck.de/marco/photo/infrared/comparison_of_films/comparison_of_films.html

pentaxuser · May 15, 2005

Ilford SFX filters or no

jim appleyard said:
I recenlty picked up the last two rolls of Ilford SFX at the camera store and I'd like to go to a ghost town near here and shoot the abandoned and falling down old houses. Do you users of this film still recommend the use of red filters even tho' there will be no sky, just old buildings, in the photos.

As stated by another member, SFX without a red filter will look a lot like HP5+ or FP4+. The advantage is that the film is in that sense dual purpose and can be loaded in subdued light as it is extended red sensitivity not true infrared. However the downside is that, based admittedly on my one and only experience of using it, then unless the sky is included and even then it has to be a sunny day then a red filter makes little difference to the appearance of the picture i.e. compared to Kodak the white ghostly effect on foliage is hardly noticeable. The other ghostly effect provided by Kodak's lack of anti-halation backing is of course also missing.

However in the right sunny conditions the effect is clearly infrared like, giving an effect which causes the print viewer to wonder whether it is brilliant sunlight or brilliant moonlight and creates that slightly ghostlike atmosphere which brilliant moonlight does .

Lee Shively · May 15, 2005

The first few rolls of SFX that I shot were with a Hoya R72 filter and they had excellent IR effects--black skies, white foliage, etc. I later shot several rolls of flower close-ups using #15, #25 and #29 filters and got no IR effect. That's been my only experience with this film. Your experience may be different.

Bob F. · May 15, 2005

Get it while you can... now discontinued by Ilford (I know lots of us already know that, but I thought I'd mention it...).

Bob.

pentaxuser · May 16, 2005

Ilford sfx,filters or no

Lee Shively said:
The first few rolls of SFX that I shot were with a Hoya R72 filter and they had excellent IR effects--black skies, white foliage, etc. I later shot several rolls of flower close-ups using #15, #25 and #29 filters and got no IR effect. That's been my only experience with this film. Your experience may be different.

I had a look at High Milsom's book on Infra red "Infrared Photography A Complete Workshop Guide" which is a UK publication. I find it more comprehensive than Laurie Hayball's book "Advanced Infrared Photography Handbook". However each seems to back up your experience of filters which largely is mine also. The problem with a Hoya 72 is that to get the better infrared effect than with a Number 25 or 29 Red the exposures have to be so long that a tripod is probably necessary.

If you want to use SFX without a 72 filter and be able to handhold then you have to accept a very limited infrared effect usually only apparent on sunny days and with a lot of sky. Overall Kodak HIE is preferred by both authors for its effect. However in the UK Kodak HIE is a lot more expensive than Ilfor SFX

Pentaxuser

titrisol · May 18, 2005

I was looking at the Ilford Data Guide and realized Delta 3200 has also "extended" red sensitivity up to 680nm or so

Anybody used Delta 3200 with a Red 29 filter?

Ronald Moravec · May 18, 2005

To get the IR look, you need an IR filter. Someone recommended the 89B which should be good. I use a B+W 092. Regular color filters make it look like regular black and white.

Experiment before going. The chance of sucess with film speed and processing and the correct filter factor and metering are almost nil.

Simon E · May 21, 2005

While SFX200 doesn't give the drama or otherworldliness of HIE, I quite like its subtle appearance. The images on this page were taken with a 25 red filter:

Dead Link Removed

Also: http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=1082849

Robert Hall · May 21, 2005

Ilford acutally made SFX filters. They were about $12US. I still have a couple laying around somewhere. They are equivalent to an 89b. I finally got some good IR results with an asa of 6, so yes, a tripod was necessary.

jim appleyard · May 24, 2005

I'm going to hijack my own thread here. There's another question about IR film floating at this moment and someone asked about doing IR film with staining devs. Anyone ever try SFX in a pyro/pyrocat dev? Times & temps?

blanco_y_negro · May 26, 2005

SFX

I have recently shot a roll of Ilford SFX hoping to get some IR effect but was somewhat disappointed. However, I used only Heliopan 25 and 29 filters. With these filters you get decent tones, especially on weathered wood, as pointed out earlier, but nothing like Kodak's IR film. Basically, my impression is that SFX is a good b&w film with fine grain. I checked the film with Schneider 6x loupe and found finer grain on SFX than on Fortepan 200. My developer was D76.

titrisol · Nov 21, 2005

I just burned my last rolls of SFX200 with a 89B filter.
A crude digital picture of one of my proofs is here:
(there was a url link here which no longer exists)

I was surprised at how well it worked with fall foliage.

Also the use of a rangefinder made composing so much easier. i set the light meter to EI12 for calculating exposure.

developed in DDX 1+6 (ran out of DDX and couldn't make a standard dilution) for about 15 minutes.

jim appleyard · Nov 21, 2005

Thanks. I've been using my supply with an R72 and I like what is does for foliage; not much of a change on anything else however. I'll someday get around to posting a portrait I did this way. Cool! Been souping it in HC-110 and Rodinal.

ilford sfx, filters or no

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency