PDA

View Full Version : Kodak Infrared Film In 4x5 In Size???



mq57user
20-Sep-2006, 02:13
Hello,
anybody know of a source which still has some Kodak Infrared in 4X5in. sheet film in stock. I even called Kodak in Rochester, but it seems this film is completely extinct. Any help will be appreciated.
Cheers, Duschan

Diane Maher
20-Sep-2006, 09:57
Ebay is where I got mine. That's the only way I know of to get some.

mq57user
20-Sep-2006, 14:53
Hi Diane,
thank you for the tip. I have been looking in Ebay on and off but, so far, haven't been lucky to find such an offer. I'll keep on trying. By the way, how was your experience with this film? I am only familiar with the 35mm version and find it quite fascinating for certain subjects, but the 4X5 tickles my fancy.
Thank you again and have a nice day, Duschan

Diane Maher
20-Sep-2006, 16:58
Hi Diane,
thank you for the tip. I have been looking in Ebay on and off but, so far, haven't been lucky to find such an offer. I'll keep on trying. By the way, how was your experience with this film? I am only familiar with the 35mm version and find it quite fascinating for certain subjects, but the 4X5 tickles my fancy.
Thank you again and have a nice day, Duschan

It's been a while since I shot any, but it works the same as the 35 mm version.

Andrew O'Neill
22-Sep-2006, 00:55
Kodak IR sheet film was a great product. I used it extensively until it was no more. I just used my last sheet a couple of weeks ago. It was very sensitive to fingers therefore had to be handled carefully at the edges. That's the only thing that took a while to get used to. It had farely fine grain. I made several beautiful 16x20 prints and grain was never an issue.
I've ordered a box of Rollie's IR. Wonder what that's like....

Diane Maher
22-Sep-2006, 04:48
Kodak IR sheet film was a great product. I used it extensively until it was no more. I just used my last sheet a couple of weeks ago. It was very sensitive to fingers therefore had to be handled carefully at the edges. That's the only thing that took a while to get used to. It had farely fine grain. I made several beautiful 16x20 prints and grain was never an issue.
I've ordered a box of Rollie's IR. Wonder what that's like....

I have some 120 of this film but haven't shot it yet. I did shoot some of what I believe was the Rollei film is in 35 mm (pre-release test rolls). I treated it like my Maco 820c IR film and used an 88A filter with it to get the IR effect. You don't get it with just a red filter.

Andrew O'Neill
22-Sep-2006, 07:38
You don't get it with just a red filter.

...but I heard that you get some, and some is all I am after. I never really liked extreme infrared effects in my own work anyway.
What was the grain like in 120?

mq57user
22-Sep-2006, 08:06
Hi Andrew,
thank you for the info. I'll keep looking. Perhaps I can get my hands on some unused package. As to the Rollei Infrared, I have been using it extensively now for more than a year and I can share the following experiences: It is a superb film when used as a panchromatic at ISO400. The tonalities are very good, handling is easy and you get great bw prints with showing hardly any grain considering the film speed. As to using it for infrared, I find it a bit limited. First of all, a red filter doesn't give any infrared effect like the Kodak. It enhances contrast but no wood effect, let alone the classic effect on vegetation and sky. You need an infrared filter and preferably bright sunlight to get some infrared effect. Again, I keep saying some since the Kodak is and remains the epitome of BW infrared photography. The only film close to it, giving much finer grain, is the MACO 820 IR. To obtain the infrared effect at its best you need to measure at ISO 6 which makes for very long exposures, even on a very bright sunny day. Best regards, Duschan

Andrew O'Neill
22-Sep-2006, 15:21
mq57user,

thanks for that info! I'll guess I'll have to get my hands on one of those #87 filters...

PMahoney
8-Oct-2006, 19:52
Macophot was supposed to release a faster version of the 820c that was more in line with stated ISOs. Anyone know if it ever came out?

Peter

PMahoney
8-Oct-2006, 20:07
... or is that what the Rollei film is supposed to be?

paul stimac
8-Oct-2006, 20:08
I have some in my mother in law's freezer. I bought it but never used it. Email me if you're interested in it.

snuck
8-Oct-2006, 22:46
I have some in my mother in law's freezer. I bought it but never used it. Email me if you're interested in it.
He's not the only person who wants some! I would email you but I don't know what your email is! So please check your private messages. I left you one.
Cheers

mq57user
9-Oct-2006, 02:55
Hi Paul,
wow, that is some interesting news. Of course, I would be most interested in that film if you don't need it. If you could email me the quantity you have and a price idea, I would let you have my email address. Regards, Duschan

keithwms
10-Oct-2006, 19:30
I use the rollei 400 IR, I like it very much. I used it a fair amount in 120 size and then recently tried 4x5. Here's a pic, taken with a #72 filter metered 6 stops over normal.

http://i25.photobucket.com/albums/c76/keithwms/CP_IR1_4x5.jpg

I personally don't care for over-the-top IR effects. I have found that I can get everything from extreme IR effects to barely noticeable with this stuff. It might be my favourite b&w landscape film.

It's brutally sharp, even in this flatbed scan from a contact print:

http://i25.photobucket.com/albums/c76/keithwms/CP_IR1_crop.jpg

Hope this helps.

PMahoney
11-Oct-2006, 10:23
Keith-
Do you control the degree of 'IR effect' not only with the filter on this film, but by how much you overexpose it?
Peter

Jonathan Brewer
11-Oct-2006, 12:40
Check out my thread........ 'Rollei infrared test results', the image I uploaded which was shot @F5.6-1/30sec w/the 89b ........an image from my third test w/Rollei-Maco 400 infrared, I was interested in the wood effect/what this film would do w/an 89b, as opposed to the Kodak Hie. As was pointed out, looking at the image I uploaded, you can that the cement is somewhat blown out, so I'll be shooting this film @ between F8-11-1/30sec. Nothing w/infrared is predictable, so I try to 'hedge' my bets w/infrared film, I shoot pretty much outside the same, on very clear/cloudless days, no heavy haze, no overcast.

Most of the infrared shots on my website were shot w/the David Romano machine wound aerographic equivalent of Kodak Hie, between F11-16 @125sec w/the 89b, so two observations regarding the two films, it seemed to me from my tests, that Kodak Hie was/is WAY faster than the Rollei film shooting through the 89b, and Kodak Hie presented you with a very soft pallete as opposed the very crisp detail from the Rollei/Maco film, the implication being, at least to me that I would need to resort to diffusion w/the Rollei film to try to approach the 'look' of the Kodak film.

That said, I very much like the sharpness of the Rollei film now that I'm beginning to get a handle on how to expose it to my taste, I'll probably use it both ways, with and without diffusion/a soft focus lens.

Jonathan Brewer
11-Oct-2006, 12:43
Forgive me I forgot to mention development, this test shot was exposed @ F5.6-1/30sec through an 89b, souped w/xtol for 14 minutes @70 degrees.

keithwms
11-Oct-2006, 15:15
Keith-
Do you control the degree of 'IR effect' not only with the filter on this film, but by how much you overexpose it?
Peter

Peter, so far I am indeed controlling it with with exposure and with different filters; I have tried #87 and also a 72. The 87 works fine in medium format with faster glass; this (http://i25.photobucket.com/albums/c76/keithwms/KY_rollei400_horses_squarec.jpg) is probably my best shot so far with the #87, taken on a mamiya 6.

But so far I don't like the #87 on LF glass because it bumps the exposure times up so much that I worry about reciprocity failure. I had a few unexplainably thin negs when using a #87 so that might be it.

Two other possibilities that I plan to try:

1) The film is also a decent 400 speed b&w film so you could, I suppose, combine two exposures in one and get an infinite variety of visible/IR proportions that way, you know, one with and one without the IR filter.

2) I suspect that one could also control the contrast quite finely in the darkroom, i.e. by selenium toning the negs. That might be a safe way to keep white from blowing out excessively.

Hope that helps.