lousy scan of a lousy IR neg

jgcull · Nov 23, 2009

I was in the chat last night, asking about my HIE negatives. They're sorry, and I don't know just why. PE suggested I scan a negative so all can see what I'm talking about, but this scan doesn't show it like I see it. I don't even know if I'm doing the scan right - never tried to show a negative like this.

About 7 frames on each roll are sort of alright. The rest are fogged. One roll has nothing on it at all except for 2 or 3 frames that are fogged.

I'm using a Nikon FM2 with a yellow-orange filter. Developed the film in d76 1:1 for 15 min.

A man with a lab nearby told me I should rate it at 80.

Thanks for anything you can do to point me in the right direction.

keithwms · Nov 23, 2009

Do I remember correctly that you said you hadn't seen this before with HIE and the FM2? You have had successful rolls previously?

How you rate it will depend on the light you had... not only the filter. Assuming sunny 16 light, I'd have guessed that your orange filter won't require much filter factor at all and I'd go for 100-200. But like I said, bracket, and in a big range: +2, +4 even. If it's outdated HIE then I'd also reshoot each shot several times.

Let me suggest trying Rollei superpan, it will give you easily reproducible results, and it has no storage issue (that i can tell so far) .

likemarlonbrando · Nov 23, 2009

is it possible IR light is getting in during the loading, processing procedures?

Photo Engineer · Nov 23, 2009

JG;

If this is an image of the negative, then the roll was almost totally fogged by some light or heat (IR) source. Note that even the edge markings are missing, buried in fog.

PE

winger · Nov 23, 2009

I can't really help with what went wrong with yours. It looks like large spots of either undeveloped film or that it just didn't really get exposed, unless that's been flipped into a positive, in which case it's just blown out. If the latter, then maybe a light leak? I have had more problem with HIE getting on reels incorrectly than any other film - it touches and then doesn't develop in those spots.
When I shoot HIE, I set the camera for 200ASA and meter through the filter. If it's a bright sunny day, f16 at 1/125 with the red #25 is a good bet as well. I got both of those hints from the Laurie White book on IR photography. I develop in Sprint 1:9 for 11.5 minutes so I can't really help with D76 (though I think they're similar chemistry).

jgcull · Nov 23, 2009

In some places it looks like something didn't advance properly, as if it's nearly image on top of part of another image.

Some were shot outside, some inside with good window light. In fact, the inside ones look like they may be the only printable ones - though not perfect.

The only nearly decent IR film I have ever gotten was with another camera and 120 film... though it wasn't just right either.

As said last night, I did not load it in darkness because I thought it wouldn't matter since it was 135 film in as cannister.

One problem shown here is that the image doesn't even show up though I can see it on the real thing. AND this is only a scan of a small section. I'd have to do a handful to show you the variations. There is nothing consistent within even 1 roll, and I have 3.

I did have the exposed rolls sitting on my piano for a while before I processed them. There is light all about, but I assumed (wrongly?) that the cannister protected the film. Wrong, maybe?

I have all this HIE I bought when there wasn't much left to be had. I'll try a bit more and see. Thank you all.

Photo Engineer · Nov 23, 2009

The cannister, alone, will NOT protect IR film from fogging if it is sitting in a bright spot, even in room light.

This is most likely your source of fogging.

PE

jgcull · Nov 23, 2009

Oh good. Really. It actually sat at the base of a lamp. That could be an easy answer... gives me hope!

mooseontheloose · Nov 23, 2009

JG,

I have rolls of HIE that look exactly like that. Your roll is fogged, fogged, fogged. However, it is possible to get decent (if grainy) prints out of it using a hard filter (4 or 5). I have some photos in my gallery with that effect.

Even though HIE is in a canister, the felt trap at the beginning of the roll can let in IR. Especially when you are loading your film in light. However, that usually only accounts for the beginning or ending of the roll to be fogged. When the majority of the roll is fogged, it is probably an issue of the film being fogged while loading onto reels (I think). All the rolls I developed while in Japan have this look. I don't understand it, as I changed the film in a dark changing bag as usual, but it's the only explanation I can come up with as everything else (loading/unloading) was done in total darkness.

Also -- if you really want to get the best use out of HIE, you need to use at least a red 25 filter. Yellow-orange will not be enough to give you an infrared effect.

jgcull · Nov 23, 2009

>>Also -- if you really want to get the best use out of HIE, you need to use at least a red 25 filter. Yellow-orange will not be enough to give you an infrared effect.<<

Have a look at this photographer's portraits. In much of his older work he used IR film with yellow or orange filters. I *love* his IR work.

I'm experimenting. I did get some pretty nice inside IR images on 120 film with a deep yellow filter. There's nothing pretty on these rolls, but I'm not giving up.

Thanks so much for your replies.

http://normanrileyphotography.com/page1.html

ann · Nov 23, 2009

not to beat a dead horse, but fog fog fog,

Ir film is best IMHO handled in complete darkness.

keithwms · Nov 23, 2009

jgcull said:
>>Also -- if you really want to get the best use out of HIE, you need to use at least a red 25 filter. Yellow-orange will not be enough to give you an infrared effect.<<

Have a look at this photographer's portraits. In much of his older work he used IR film with yellow or orange filters. I *love* his IR work.

I'm experimenting. I did get some pretty nice inside IR images on 120 film with a deep yellow filter. There's nothing pretty on these rolls, but I'm not giving up.

Thanks so much for your replies.

http://normanrileyphotography.com/page1.html

Very nice work. I can see why you like it.

There is some halation there, but not all that much, and the effect I see has more to do with how IR renders skintones. If halation isn't what you're after, then you really might do better with a current and fresh IR film. My concern is that even if you do get the occasional roll of the HIE to work out for you... if the hit rate is low then your remaining stocks will quickly disappear. Perhaps best to learn how to get what you want by other means. Let me suggest superpan or sfx with a soft focus lens (e.g. the rb 150 SF or an imagon).

glbeas · Nov 23, 2009

You also need to remember that IR film will pipe light the length of the film like a fiber optic if the end is exposed to fairly bright light. Do it in the dark!

keithwms · Nov 23, 2009

We discussed light piping ad nauseum in the chatroom last night, you should come join in, Gary!

IIRC one of my aerial films has a warning about light piping. Methinks it has more to do with the base material being estar than the emulsion itself. It is indeed quite fiber optic.

Photo Engineer · Nov 23, 2009

The base support for the infra red films contains carbon. This is an effective barrier for light piping after about the first foot or less. The big problem is the fibre barrier at the opening in the 35mm cartridge. The IR can get through that and extend the light piping up the edges. So, under normal conditions there is no severe problem, but with a bright surround, the condition becomes very much worse.

PE

2F/2F · Nov 23, 2009

It just looks like leakage in to the cassette to me. You must load and unload this film in complete darkness, and also keep it as cold as possible. The same goes for any 35mm IR film, but especially for the ones with higher IR sensitivity, such as HIE and Efke IR820. The light trap on 35mm cassettes is not a reliable way to keep out IR radiation! The 120 light traps are much better at this, and you can get away with loading them in the shade of your body. Data sheets usually state this plainly. It is good practice to read the data sheet for your films.

donbga · Nov 25, 2009

Photo Engineer said:
The cannister, alone, will NOT protect IR film from fogging if it is sitting in a bright spot, even in room light.

This is most likely your source of fogging.

PE

The light would have to be extremely bright. I used HIE for 15 years and never had a roll fogged by exposing the canned rolls to light. I used a changing bag to load the camera and stored the exposed film in the Kodak cannister it was sold with and never had fogging issues.

I did have 10 rolls that had age fog that I purchased from a camera store in Charleston years ago. That was totally different from what this user seems to be experiencing.

Don Bryant

Photo Engineer · Nov 25, 2009

Don;

I meant the cartridge with light trap, not the black can with gray top. Sorry for the unclear post. See my post #15 for clarification.

PE

lousy scan of a lousy IR neg

Attachments

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency