I get it that life gets in the way. Still a few days left, a bit of extra time may manifest. If not, hope you post some of your Efke photos whenever they're ready.
He looks like a cool dude, but definitely not my dream......
I'm still waiting for Stone's entry. I dreamt about it last night, and can still see the photo my sub-conscious ascribed to him. C'mon Stone! Am I psychic?
Me too! Ever since Polyglot mentioned this assignment would be good for IR, I've been wondering about it. I've never shot IR so I don't know why noon would be good. I'm really curious now, and I want to know if some of the neat-looking IR photos I've seen were shot at mid-day.
Stone, I hope you will post the E-6 IR even if it isn't ready in time for the contest. I think the MSA is more than just the contest part.
Me too! Ever since Polyglot mentioned this assignment would be good for IR, I've been wondering about it. I've never shot IR so I don't know why noon would be good. I'm really curious now, and I want to know if some of the neat-looking IR photos I've seen were shot at mid-day.
It works well because there's plenty of light (IR films tend not to be very sensitive, I shoot IR820 at EI1 = f/16 1s in full sun including the R72 filter) and for some reason you don't seem to get the horrible starkness of shadow that you do with shorter wavelengths, so it's not as bad for downsides at noon as a normal film. Obviously it can work really well with evening light too, but that's harder to estimate exposure for.
Some examples shot around noon, not in-month: new growth, private bay, big lake (only a week early!), lake near Peggy's Cove (again), cabot trail, Terelj, Terelj Fence, moonscape.
And in evening light, showing that that's good too, but not dramatically better than at noon. So if you're wandering around in the noonday heat thinking "damn this light sucks, what a waste of my travel", bust out the IR film.
Those are exquisite. That island out in the distance in "private bay" is like some kind of dream, and so many of those skies have wonderful character even without clouds. I'm stunned by these. I love the way foliage seems to come alive in IR. There is something subtle and appealing about the evening light one, but I sure see what you mean!It works well because there's plenty of light (IR films tend not to be very sensitive, I shoot IR820 at EI1 = f/16 1s in full sun including the R72 filter) and for some reason you don't seem to get the horrible starkness of shadow that you do with shorter wavelengths, so it's not as bad for downsides at noon as a normal film. Obviously it can work really well with evening light too, but that's harder to estimate exposure for.
Some examples shot around noon, not in-month: new growth, private bay, big lake (only a week early!), lake near Peggy's Cove (again), cabot trail, Terelj, Terelj Fence, moonscape.
And in evening light, showing that that's good too, but not dramatically better than at noon. So if you're wandering around in the noonday heat thinking "damn this light sucks, what a waste of my travel", bust out the IR film.
Some examples shot around noon, not in-month: new growth, private bay, big lake (only a week early!), lake near Peggy's Cove (again), cabot trail, Terelj, Terelj Fence, moonscape.
And in evening light, showing that that's good too, but not dramatically better than at noon. So if you're wandering around in the noonday heat thinking "damn this light sucks, what a waste of my travel", bust out the IR film.
Hmm I have the B+W #92, it's a 650 cutoff but says passes 50% from 650-700 and 90% from 730-2000
The next step up is a #93 but it starts at 1% at 800 so 800 is beyond the Rollei as far as I understand?
Did I get the wrong version? I know people use the R72 but I don't like the Hoya filters and thought the B+W 92 was the same filter?
Sent w/ iPhone using Tapatalk
I think your problem is as much with your exposure choices as it is with filter choice. Although that 50% cutoff between 650-700 lets in a lot of visible light.
Of course, you may just be unlucky in your choice of subjects.
Hmm I have the B+W #92, it's a 650 cutoff but says passes 50% from 650-700 and 90% from 730-2000
The next step up is a #93 but it starts at 1% at 800 so 800 is beyond the Rollei as far as I understand?
Did I get the wrong version? I know people use the R72 but I don't like the Hoya filters and thought the B+W 92 was the same filter?
Yeah, you got the wrong version. You're letting in so much red light that the IR exposure is swamped by the visible exposure.
All this discussion is just increasing my grief for the disappearance of HIE. I have a single roll left in the freezer. Just needed a red 25. Could compose and focus with the filter on and hand-hold the camera. Back in the day, it was my favorite summer film. Nothing else worked on those blazing days. Will never be able to take photos like this with Rollei or Efke.
http://silverlilly.zenfolio.com/p547650965/h2cd99ae5#h2cd99ae5
This is a high noon shot, but over a decade old.
Sigh....
It looks like B+W don't make an appropriate filter. The 092 and 093 are gradual-cutoff filters like Hoya's RM series whereas what you want is a sharp-cutoff filter like the R72.
Hoya specifications, noting (from the graph) that the R72 transition band covers only ~710-740nm.
I'll sneak in a last-minute entry.
Pentax 6x7 MLU
Pentax 67 45/4.0 @ f/8.0
Kodak TXP 320 at 200, 8 mins in HC110 1:49
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?