Is B+W 092 Filter Still Good With New Rollei Infrared Film???

[Marko]

Actually, B&W would be *easier* to accomplish, and most cameras do it already, via in-camera conversion (they'll also do sepia). Of course, then you have the same pixel count you'd have in color, instead or 4x the count from the same chip (assuming the chip is capable of reading out single pixels rather than the Bayer array).

But let's say a manufacturer spends the money to make an IR version of a popular camera (perhaps a D20, just to pick one of the few model designations I recall). If you add $600 to the retail, you'd be paying 20% to 50% *more* for a camera that's only of use where you'd load a roll of IR film in a film SLR. I predict their marketing folks would squash that notion about ten seconds after it was brought up at a planning meeting. Given what it costs to retool and make a different version of a mass produced item, I wonder if they could do it for what the converters get -- though certainly, if they had the volume of the color model, they could sell it for the same price.

Or maybe it's just a conspiracy to force everyone to shoot in 24-bit color, and stifle creativity worldwide preparatory to some evil plot to enslave humanity.

Nah, conspiracy takes additional thinking and effort. I'm more inclined to bet on sheer lazyness or even carelessness.

I was not talking about converted B&W but the real one, with a non-Bayer, full resolution, B&W only chip. I can see where that kind of camera would have limited market, and hence be more expensive and thus have limited viability. Although, given the number of fine art photographers or just plain hobbyists, I tend to think a dedicated model could be pretty profitable for the first company to do it. Kodak did it, after all, and I'm not sure they killed it because it wasn't profitable but because they couldn't make a profit with it. There's a lot of things Kodak can't seem to make a profit with lately, which is not to say those things are not profitable per se...

Seriously, with digital, the manufacturers seem to have become so cost-conscious that they ended up catering only toward the absolute middle of the road, either in the consumer or the pro category and increasingly disregarding enthusiast and hobby segments as not profitable enough. And not just in photography.

[Jonathan Brewer]

I shot David Romano's machine wound Aerographic equvialent of Kodak HS Infrared until that ran out, with excellent results using an 89b until that film ran out, go to my website, go2 galleries, go2 infrared, every shot in this gallery is the Aerographic version of the Kodak infrared film, except the first shot, 'Out of Ivory', which was shot with my Cooke PS945, Maco infrared, and an 89b. I fournd the Maco's speed to be next to nothing, somewhere 4-8 ISO if that, with the 89b.

I'm having absolutely no success with the Rollei/Maco infrared film, I've had Alan Wedertz of 'Alan's custom Lab', do all my Infrared, and I've collaborated closely with him on shooting the Rollei film, using the 89b, and with bracketing +3/-3 stops, the film is dark, featureless, and 'muddy', Alan has processed this film any number of several ways, and feels that the spectral response of the film is not up to the 89b, I agree, I've seen the results, and the 89b just isn't going to work with this film.

I've talked with Alan about a test to give this film one more chance, I've run through 9 rolls of this film, I've got three rolls left, I'm sending Alan one unexposed roll for him to test, and I'm shooting 3 exposures on one roll w/the 89b @F5.6-125sec, @F8-125sec, @F11-125sec, and then the three remaining frames shot the same way w/a 29 or 25 red filter, I'll be using my Silhouette 612 w/250-Schneider Tele Apo Xenar and shooting on a bright cloudless sunny day.

I love the look of infrared film with the 89b, but I fear that using this filter w/the Rollei, is throwing away money, Alan believes the film just isn't as sensitive to infrared as the Kodak film, If the tests I do later confirm this, I may shoot another box with the 29 filter to see if I like the results, if I don't like the results, I may just table my infrared shooting until they 'tweak' this film for better performance. Alan believes the speed of the Rollei film to be closer to 200ISO rather than 400ISO and I agree with him.

Infrared film is a very 'iffy' proposition from the 'getgo', but at least with Kodak Hie, you had a fighting chance to come up with something good, it might take you a roll to do it, but I don't think the Rollei film is up to the 89b, I will however report on my test results which I will probably do in about 2 weeks.

[Andre Noble]

The original Maco IR 820C film was wonderful. If this new film is not as good, then the message will get back to Rollei through weaker sales.

[Michael S. Briggs]

The IR responses of these three films shouldn't be a mystery -- the spectral response curves are published in the datasheets. In my first answer I compared the new Rollei IR to the Macro IR. People don't seem to be understanding it.

You can download the Maco and Rollei datasheets from http://www.mahn.net/TAdown.htm. (The plain Maco IR820c is on the Aura datasheet). The spectral response graph on the Maco datasheet includes several other films, including Kodak HIE, though the Kodak curve is a bit simplified compared to the curve on Kodak's datasheet, publication F-13. (Another source for the Rollei datasheet is http://www.rollei.de/en/produkte/pro...326&name=Rolls. The Kodak datasheet is at http://www.kodak.com/global/en/profe.../f13/f13.jhtml with the spectral response curve at http://www.kodak.com/cluster/global/...002_0333ac.gif or in the PDF version.)

HIE has an IR response to around 900 nm. (The graph on the Maco datasheet takes Kodak curve to almost 900 nm, the graph in Kodak publication F-13 takes the curve to around 925 nm, but the difference doesn't matter much because the curve is falling very steeply.) The response doesn't start falling until around 875 nm.

The curve for Maco IR820 shows response to 820 nm with a fairly flat response to 800 nm. So this film has somewhat less response than HIE. I've used this film and excellent IR effects are possible. You may need to use a stronger filter than with HIE to keep the ratio of IR to red high.

The curve for the new Rollei IR film is very different. While it shows response to 820 nm, the curve is falling very steeply from 725 nm. The curve is plotted against a log axis, so the falloff in response if very rapid. If you use a B+W 092 filter which has a 50% cutoff point of about 700 nm, the response of the Rollei film plus filter will be dominated 700 to 725 nm. The filter will block shorter wavelengths and the response of the film is rapidly falling above 725 nm. I haven't used this film -- my prediction is a response in the very near IR compared to the other IR films. I'm not sure that this will lead to good "IR effects" such as glowing vegation. Has anyone had good results? The datasheet shows a photo with classic IR effects -- hopefully this was actually made with this film and shows that good IR effects are possible.

[Ole Tjugen]

... Has anyone had good results? ...

As I mentioned above, I have used this film in 35mm with a heliopan 695 filter. The results were not merely good, they were great beyond my expectations.