IR Film development

[SAShruby]

Couple weeks ago I tried Efke 820 infrared film, first time ever. Shot one scene, made two takes. It was a nice landscape scene with trees close to Vancouver airport. I made it with Cooke 13" Series VI, using IR720 filter @ ISO 3, meter measured 15 seconds @ f16 for shadows. First shot was taken as meter said - 15sec, second shot tried to compensate for reciprocity - 45sec.

I used fresh Xtol developer, dilution 1+1 @ 10 minutes. Both went good with not bad densities, second one was better but overall they were flat and… fogged. So the question I have is where they got fog on them.

Could be the time when I was removing them from the filmholder and placing them on a reel?
Could they be exposed to my body heat? (it takes me about 20 seconds to load them on the reel and close the lid)
Should I do it next time in Harrison tent?
Anything else?
Do you get flat negatives too?
If not, what’s your process?

[BetterSense]

There's no way your body heat could be causing fogging. The IR emitted from body heat is several microns long and couldn't have an effect on the film.

I'm also wondering, wouldn't ISO 3 be about 1/2s at f/16? I'm wondering how you got all the way to 15s.

[Andrew O'Neill]

I use this film and don't really like it. I guess I was spoilt by Kodak's IR film. It's not a "real" infra red film, as far as I'm concerned unless you shoot it with that opaque filter. I expose at EI 1.5 and develop in xtol undiluted in BTZS tube for 14 minutes. In a sunny summer day my exposures are usually around f/11 @ 22, reciprocity effect included. I too have noticed the occassional fogged sheet once the film approached expiry date and past it. It's important to use the box up asap. What's the expiry date on the box? How do you store it?
Hopefully someone will come along with a Kodak-like IR film...I wonder what's taking the Chinese so long...

[Robert Hall]

I shoot the film as well and I would say your exposures at f/16 might be a bit long, although the longer the better. I shoot it at 30 seconds at f/64.

I have to double the amount of developer at my normal time but don't see fogging unless I don't have the film holder in tight. I have had some plastic film holders fog around the edges when they have sat in the sun at all.

BTW, the Harrison is definitely not IR safe.

[drew.saunders]

Efke IR820 is a very "matte" film when developed, which I suppose looks a bit like fog. Maybe that's what you're seeing?

[rguinter]

I think you probably over-exposed. These shots on Efke Aura 120 film with my B&W 092 filter. Exposures in the f16 @ 1 sec. Bob G

[SAShruby]

There's no way your body heat could be causing fogging. The IR emitted from body heat is several microns long and couldn't have an effect on the film.

I'm also wondering, wouldn't ISO 3 be about 1/2s at f/16? I'm wondering how you got all the way to 15s.

I metered for shadows. It was a hazy day, not a sunny day. Went for a zone 3.5. Maybe I need to do more testing and try shorter times. As I said, densities were good, however the negative was overal dense and flat, I see some fogging on the unexposed side of the edge, meybe I overexposed and hit the upper density curve.

Update: I just realized I made a newbie error. Instead of dividing time to get to lower zone, I multiplied it. Oh my, I rely so much on my palm and BTZS, I completely forgot to do basic stuff. I'm so red faced right now.

[SAShruby]

I use this film and don't really like it. I guess I was spoilt by Kodak's IR film. It's not a "real" infra red film, as far as I'm concerned unless you shoot it with that opaque filter. I expose at EI 1.5 and develop in xtol undiluted in BTZS tube for 14 minutes. In a sunny summer day my exposures are usually around f/11 @ 22, reciprocity effect included. I too have noticed the occassional fogged sheet once the film approached expiry date and past it. It's important to use the box up asap. What's the expiry date on the box? How do you store it?
Hopefully someone will come along with a Kodak-like IR film...I wonder what's taking the Chinese so long...


Andy, want to go out this Sunday and shoot some IR?

[al olson]

Couple weeks ago I tried Efke 820 infrared film, first time ever. Shot one scene, made two takes. It was a nice landscape scene with trees close to Vancouver airport. I made it with Cooke 13" Series VI, using IR720 filter @ ISO 3, meter measured 15 seconds @ f16 for shadows. First shot was taken as meter said - 15sec, second shot tried to compensate for reciprocity - 45sec.
. . .

I agree with Andrew and Bob that EI=1.5 works well for exposing under bright sunlight. In fact according to the Sunny Sixteen Rule, this comes out to around 1 sec @ f/16 when using filters with 50% cutoff at 720nm.

However, there are other factors that attenuate IR light. One appears to be a low sun angle where the atmosphere attenuates IR. At least this is the conclusion I came to when I started a thread about a year and a half ago complaining about the thin negatives I was getting in late November light. In June I exposed some more IR film at the above exposures and they were right on.

I suspect that your situation with the haze is why your negatives look flat, although because of the haze your longer exposures were right on. On a bright sunny day, 15 sec. at f/16 would be way too long. A haze that is mainly dust seems to be penetrated more readily by IR than a haze that is mostly from humidity.

Under bright sunny conditions I can rely on my exposure meter at EI=1.5. Under other conditions I have to add an additional 2-3 EV to the meter reading, maybe even more. This is pretty much a guess.

With bright sunlight my IR negatives come out perhaps a little too contrasty, but I like them that way.

By the way, Bob, those are very nice images. I prefer the first of the four.

[rguinter]

...By the way, Bob, those are very nice images. I prefer the first of the four.

Al: So I guess I didn't really need to wade-in that day. Oh well. It was a hot sunny day and the water was cool so the wading was fun.

This one shot the week before on Efke Aura 4x5-inch. Similar exposure. And such a bright day that the infrared energy was just about everywhere... even in the shadows. Man was I sweating.

So the Efke has been working well for me and giving me good infrared characteristics. Probably the best of the currently available IR films although I do have quite a bit of Kodak HIE in the freezer. But there is no more of that to be had fresh.

Regarding the OP's original post: I suspect you are trying to be too precise. I find infrared shooting is a kind-of "wing-it" and hope for the best technique. Taking eV readings and trying to compensate with a visible light meter probably won't always work. Although I have thought about buying a screw-on 87 filter to fit my spot meter and working out an exact exposure value with it. But frankly till now I've been too lazy to do the testing and my results have been good enough without all that fuss.

My advice is to keep trying and bracket a bit. I love the B&W infrared images and when the system works the images are awesome. Cheers. Bob G.

[Brian C. Miller]

The Kodak HIE film was/is very good, and the Efke is like the Konica or Ilford film. I use a B+W 092 filter, and IIRC I give it +3 stops exposure.

Deciduous trees (and similar plants) will be the most reflective, and evergreens will reflect a radically different level of IR light, depending on the species.

[rguinter]

P.S. I would like to find an IR filter with cut-off characteristics about half-way between my B&W 092 and Tiffen 87 filters.

I suspect this is somehwere around 760 nanometers.

Anyone have any suggestions?

Bob G.

[SAShruby]

Bob,

I used IR720 filter with my Sekonic 558 Cine meter. I was able to get readings when I pointed into tree shadows. When I think of it right now, I'm not sure if meter read infrared wavelength, or it simply reads the intensity of the very very deep red light goinh through. When I looked through the filter, I was able to see siluette of the landscape.

Also what I found interesting was that if I metered contrast range for visible light I got 7 stops difference, but with IR filter only 4 stops.

[Brian C. Miller]

I have a Hoya RM72 (720nm) filter, and it produces essentially the same scene as a B+W 092 (650nm).

[al olson]

. . .
So the Efke has been working well for me and giving me good infrared characteristics. Probably the best of the currently available IR films although I do have quite a bit of Kodak HIE in the freezer. But there is no more of that to be had fresh.
. . .
I am right there with you. I still have about 20 sheets of HIE in the freezer that I have been hoarding, waiting for the supreme opportunity to use it. Meanwhile I am using EFKE and Rollei IR until that opportunity transpires.



. . .
Regarding the OP's original post: I suspect you are trying to be too precise. I find infrared shooting is a kind-of "wing-it" and hope for the best technique. Taking eV readings and trying to compensate with a visible light meter probably won't always work. Although I have thought about buying a screw-on 87 filter to fit my spot meter and working out an exact exposure value with it. But frankly till now I've been too lazy to do the testing and my results have been good enough without all that fuss.
. . .

Actually I am not being very precise at all. Only for the bright sunny days of summer where there seems to be a good correlation of IR with the visible light am I able to meter at EI=1.5 (a reduction of about 7 EV) and obtain a consistent negative.

My experience with low sun angles (early morning, late afternoon, or winter time) is purely guess work, based on a meter reading as a starting point. Likewise, I have not had the consistent results with my attempts to meter through the IR filter (720nm) as I have had in the past using HIE with a Wratten A.

I find that with a high, bright sun, even when I am in the shade of the woods the light seems to be rich in IR (as in your tombstone photo). Conditions that attenuate the IR (e.g. haze and low sun angle) are more difficult to judge because they do not correlate as well with visible metering, and result in my guessing (say going down to EI=0.12) and then bracketing. However, as Mr. Hruby has pointed out, the negatives appear to be much flatter even though he used a longer (15 sec) exposure.

[Andrew O'Neill]

Andy, want to go out this Sunday and shoot some IR?

Ya sure. Where? Lets see if John wants to go, to. Send me an email.

[SAShruby]

Ya sure. Where? Lets see if John wants to go, to. Send me an email.


I'll chat wit John tonight, are you on skype? Maybe we can chat all together...

[Andrew O'Neill]

Yes, I use skype. What time shall we chat?

[rguinter]

Bob,

I used IR720 filter with my Sekonic 558 Cine meter. I was able to get readings when I pointed into tree shadows. When I think of it right now, I'm not sure if meter read infrared wavelength, or it simply reads the intensity of the very very deep red light goinh through. When I looked through the filter, I was able to see siluette of the landscape.

Also what I found interesting was that if I metered contrast range for visible light I got 7 stops difference, but with IR filter only 4 stops.

Peter:

I have a very old spot meter that I bought from Adorama sometime in the late 1980s.

I've put my 87 filter over it and I get readings in bright sunlight. so I'm quite sure it has (at least some) sensitivity well up into the infrared region. But like I said, I never really got serious with trying to work up IR exposure values using the filter over the spotmeter.

Maybe I'm just lucky but early on I asked for advice here on typical IR exposures with available films and then experimented a bit. Now I just shoot with exposures that I know will be about in the middle of the ballpark. And if I want a different effect then I'll bracket a stop or two.

I don't always get great shots but I almost always get usable negatives and pleasing images. Bob G.

[Andrew O'Neill]

Peter, how was star-gazing last night? See any meteors?

[SAShruby]

Was awesome!!! We saw about 10 in a hour. Spectacular.... If I would have a motorized tripod, it would be a great photo. Milky Way,meteors, stars... lovely.

Hey, there is a air show in Abbotsford starting today until Sunday. Wanna go shoot some planes maybe?

[aporodagon]

There was an article a number of years ago in Camera and Darkroom (I believe) on modifying a spot meter for IR. You have to open the meter, remove the IR filter (it's cyan in colour) to improve IR sensitivity and replace it with a piece of IR gel filter ( I used a Kodak 87C gel on a Gossen Ultra Spot). It worked well once calibrated, then Kodak discontinued HIE. I haven't worked with IR since then, but a lower pass filter could be used instead of the 87C.

[rguinter]

Yes 87C is pretty high cutoff if I recall. Probably not much use now that HIE is no longer available fresh. But HIE does pretty well with just about any filter above yellow. So may not be necessary.

These were done two weeks ago with HIE 120, 6x4.5-cm using a yellow 2 and a B&W graduated red to darken the sky. Exposures were f16 @ 125 handheld. Bob G.

[rguinter]

P.S. This one must be a "brain-o" not a typo.

Meant to use the acronym HSI in the previous thread. I'm not completely sure where my brain conjured up HIE. Although I seem to have been using it consistently in my notebook too.

I guess this "getting old" stuff is no good. But the alternatives are not so good either. BG

[Brian C. Miller]

I too have noticed the occassional fogged sheet once the film approached expiry date and past it. It's important to use the box up asap.

I developed some Efke this weekend, and I didn't see any fogging. The film has an expiry date of 2007, and has been in the fridge, not the freezer.


but overall they were flat and… fogged. So the question I have is where they got fog on them.

When I first started using 35mm HIE, I was loading my daylight tanks in a changing bag. I went through five rolls before I realized that was my problem, and then loaded the tank in absolute dark. Perhaps your dark room isn't as "dark" as you think it is, and there is an IR spectrum leak. The other problem may be the darkslide on your film holders, and you set your holders in direct sunlight for a bit. Or maybe your camera has an IR spectrum leak.

Try this: load your holders at night, and keep them in a cardboard box. Select a scene (anything leafy) where your camera is in the shade. Make your test exposures, and then develop the film at night. Also, develop one sheet right out of the box. If the supposedly blank film is fogged, there's your problem. If only the exposed sheets are fogged, that's your problem. If none of them are fogged, then try an exposure with your camera in direct sunlight and see what happens.

[Andrew O'Neill]

Hey, there is a air show in Abbotsford starting today until Sunday. Wanna go shoot some planes maybe?

Not at $30 a head... and then there's the heat stroke that usually follows. So, did you go?

[Cor]

I too have noticed the occassional fogged sheet once the film approached expiry date and past it. It's important to use the box up asap. What's the expiry date on the box? How do you store it?


Just last weekend I shot some MACO AURA (aka EFKE 820ir without anti-halo layer, not that it gives you the glow as seen with HIE), which expired in 2003..no fog except a bit higher B+F which is easily printed through..

I have used quite a few expired boxes (Got a couple of boxes for testing which were then close to the expiry date) without problems, apart form the nice factory build in pin holes which inadvertently are in the highlights..

I do store the film at -20degC though, and keep a working stock at 4degC..and about 4-6 holders ready at room temperature

Best,

Cor

Oh btw..I shot at 1.5 ASA, with a 70 red filter, overcast day,some sunlight through thinner clouds: 90mm SA at f22 for 4 seconds, a tad over exposed.. I use a Gossen Lunasix Pro lightmeter which serves me surprisingly well for IR

[SAShruby]

Not at $30 a head... and then there's the heat stroke that usually follows. So, did you go?

Yeah I did, was awesome but too hot. F/A-18 Super Hornet was great. Loud.

[SAShruby]

I developed some Efke this weekend, and I didn't see any fogging. The film has an expiry date of 2007, and has been in the fridge, not the freezer.



When I first started using 35mm HIE, I was loading my daylight tanks in a changing bag. I went through five rolls before I realized that was my problem, and then loaded the tank in absolute dark. Perhaps your dark room isn't as "dark" as you think it is, and there is an IR spectrum leak. The other problem may be the darkslide on your film holders, and you set your holders in direct sunlight for a bit. Or maybe your camera has an IR spectrum leak.

Try this: load your holders at night, and keep them in a cardboard box. Select a scene (anything leafy) where your camera is in the shade. Make your test exposures, and then develop the film at night. Also, develop one sheet right out of the box. If the supposedly blank film is fogged, there's your problem. If only the exposed sheets are fogged, that's your problem. If none of them are fogged, then try an exposure with your camera in direct sunlight and see what happens.


Brian, thanks. I shot some IR last weekend, plan to develop them tonight, I will keep you posted.

[612tom]

BTW, the Harrison is definitely not IR safe.

I use a Harrison tent with this film, have loaded holders and dev tanks at home and in the field with no problems - have I been lucky?!

I rate the Efke 820IR at ISO 3 when using a 720nm cut opaque filter. Then add reciprocity of about 2 stops giving bright sun exposures of about 4 or 8 seconds at f22 or f32. Developing in Ilfosol 3 1:9 for 8.5mins at 20deg c.

Pretty happy with the results...

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4140/4860019798_45f2e03ddb.jpg

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4096/4859399591_766a870b7a.jpg

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4143/4859399407_9d2f3de303.jpg

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4060/4372160771_3fc23a5de6.jpg

[BetterSense]

I shot my first IR yesterday using Lee color gels as the IR filter. It worked surprisingly well, although I can't find any cheap way to buy R, G, and B color gels now. My swatchbook samples are getting a bit tattered. I used Efke IR820 and developed in Xtol 1+2 at 20C for 15 min with agitation every other minute.

It's not LF, but it will be. I was just shooting 35mm to test if the color gels actually worked.

chazmiller.com/projects/leeir.html
(chazmiller.com/projects/leeir.html)

[D. Bryant]

I use a Harrison tent with this film, have loaded holders and dev tanks at home and in the field with no problems - have I been lucky?!



The Harrison tent is IR proof.

Don Bryant

[Maris Rusis]

Here's a synopsis of a recent shoot involving several hundred frames of Efke IR 820 and Efke IR 820 Aura in 4x5 and 120 roll film formats.

The "Aura" feature does not do much on big film as the image "halation" or "flare" is quite small. I imagine in the 35mm format where the enlargement ratios are greater the "Aura" would be more prominent. Bunches of green leaves which "glow" in the infrared tend to merge into fuzzy blobs with significant over exposure. This effect is worse with the Aura version of Efke IR 820.

There is a loose correlation between conventional meter readings and infrared exposures. My Pentax spot meter was set at EI=1.5 for sunlit scenes, EI=0.75 for sunny day subjects where shadow detail was important, EI=0.3 for cloudy overcast days. Exposures were through IR680 and IR720 filters. Surprisingly it did not matter which filter was used. The results looked much the same!

The IR680 and IR720 filters, 77mm diameter, came from China via Ebay. They cost about $20 each. It is possible, for me at least, to see through these filters and preview the infrared effect. The filter has to be held close to the eye, extraneous light carefully excluded, and the eye "dark-adapted" for about 30 seconds. I suspect that with the iris of the eye wide open looking at the sun through an IR transmitting filter would be a very bad thing indeed.

Efke IR 820 film shows significant reciprocity failure but the following corrections worked well:
1 second metered, give1.5 seconds
2 seconds metered, give 3.5 seconds
4 seconds metered, give 8 seconds
8 seconds metered, give 24 seconds
15 seconds metered, give 1 minute
30 seconds metered, give 3 minutes
more then 30 secs, give up.

Infrared focus shift is real and horrible. Everything I shot with the 360mm lens on my Mamiya RB 67 is out of focus. I suspect I have to rack this lens out about 5mm to compensate the difference between the visible and IR focii. More exact measurements are planned. Wide angle lenses well stopped down yielded sharp images but only because increased depth of focus forgives imprecision.

Some development variations were tried including hot paper strength Dektol! This was supposed to cure the reputation IR negatives have for low contrast. Cure indeed! The resulting super-contrasty negatives still made acceptable (sort of) pictures on grade#0 and grade#1 paper. Optimum development for my film turned out to be 7 minutes at 20 Celcius in straight Xtol. YMMV, naturally.

In practice Efke IR 820 like other IR films I have tried both disappoints and exhilarates. A lot of subject matter I had high hopes for yielded unremarkable schmutz but some plain things turned to visual magic. That's the deal.

[Brian C. Miller]

Infrared focus shift is real and horrible. Everything I shot with the 360mm lens on my Mamiya RB 67 is out of focus. I suspect I have to rack this lens out about 5mm to compensate the difference between the visible and IR focii. More exact measurements are planned. Wide angle lenses well stopped down yielded sharp images but only because increased depth of focus forgives imprecision.

For focusing using non-bellows cameras, look at your lens for a red dot or line, and this signifies the IR focus point. The focus point shifts "forward" depending on your lens length. On a 135 it is just a smidgen forward (3mm?) and is covered by f16, and more for longer lenses. (I just looked at a small picture of a Mamiya lens, and I didn't notice a red dot or line to the left of your normal focus point. Pentax has it, but maybe Mamiya doesn't.)

Metering for IR is a real guessing game. Usually the light I use is pretty bright, but one time I was under a tree canopy in deep shade. I guessed that the light was very dim in the IR spectrum, and boy was I ever wrong! All the shots were overexposed, and it was just a question of overexposed by how much. Good test for Farmer's Reducer.

[BetterSense]

On a 135 it is just a smidgen forward (3mm?)

In the HIE datasheet, Kodak recommends moving the front standard forward by .25%, which is about .4mm for 135.

[Brian C. Miller]

Yes, BetterSense, you're right, I measured it with a ruler after I posted. Usually I don't bother with moving the lens when shooting LF, I just stop down.

[rguinter]

...In practice Efke IR 820 like other IR films I have tried both disappoints and exhilarates. A lot of subject matter I had high hopes for yielded unremarkable schmutz but some plain things turned to visual magic. That's the deal.

Probably one of the best comments I've ever seen about IR photography in my opinion.

When shooting a roll of 120 IR film (or an equivalent number of 4x5 sheets) I tend to get the extremes... absolute magic or absolute trash. Seems to be little in between.

But with experience I am getting better about prediciting what subject matter will work the best.

Bob G.

[SAShruby]

It seems that there so much inconsistency using IR films, they're probably much less forgiving than regular films and some days (too cloudy or rainy) are not meant to be for IR photography.

[Brian C. Miller]

Well, the problem is measuring IR light. I suppose you'd have to have a meter devoted to it. A few photographers on this forum have modified their meters for that purpose. Usually my problem has been overexposure.

[rguinter]

It seems that there so much inconsistency using IR films, they're probably much less forgiving than regular films and some days (too cloudy or rainy) are not meant to be for IR photography.

My guess is the inconsistency is in our eyes and not in the film. Or perhaps I should say "in our minds" since we don't see the IR and only extrapolate toward what we "think" we will see when the film is developed.

These taken on one of the hottest most miserable days of our unforgiving summer out here in the East. I was crazy to even be out.

I shot the Efke Aura (first one) in the shade but the sun was so intense I can see from the photo that the IR was literally everywhere. Bob G.