Some weird films

[drazak]

Well, a couple months ago, Stephanie Brim sent me a bunch of film, I have some weird film here. Does anyone know about IR820c? What about Ultratek? There seems to be a roll of Panatomic-X that's either exposed or has had the leader rolled back into it. Any ideas on the IR films?

Ben

 

[David William White]

IR820c is Maco. Much greater IR sensitivity than, say, SFX200. Use anything from deep red to IR opaque for the best effect.

Panatomic-X is pretty slow, like 32 or 25 iso, so probably still viable. You need to do a clip test to see if it has been shot: Pull tongue out (or crack the canister) and develop the first 6 inches or so. If images, develop the rest, if not, shoot the rest.

Never heard of Ultratek.

 

[Poohblah]

IR820c seems to be the most popular IR film currently in production. I've used some but I'm not a huge fan of the IR effect on my own photos... that's another discussion for another thread though.

 

[ntenny]

I like the IR820c a lot, but people seem to have wildly varying experiences with it. I shoot it at about EI 6-12 through an R72 filter, which is already pushing the limits for handholding---some people find they have to rate it several stops slower than that.

Lately I've been processing it in Diafine, which controls the highlights a bit and makes IR landscapes look a bit more "normal" to my eye.

-NT

 

[AgX]

Ben,

Are there any more informations on that "Ultratek" cartridge?

 

[drazak]

SilverHalide;

No, it's a kalt casette that says ultratec (I typed it wrong before,) no other markings, but the film almost looks like undeveloped c41 film, the same antihalation backing colour.

Ben

 

[ntenny]

No, it's a kalt casette that says ultratec

Aha---I googled this spelling and found that it was a Kodak graphic-arts film. There was also an Ultratec developer---I don't know if it was a low-contrast developer intended for using the film pictorially. It looks like people have shot it at about EI 6.

-NT