rollei ir film

Discussion in 'B&W: Film, Paper, Chemistry' started by AnselAdamsX, Aug 28, 2012.

  1. AnselAdamsX

    AnselAdamsX Subscriber

    Messages:
    101
    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2007
    Location:
    Middletown,
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    I tried my first roll of IR film this weekend and it all came out completely blank. I was shooting Rollei IR film at ISO 25 based on the Massive dev chart. Although I read other posts about Efke film at ISO 3. Does Rollei need to be exposed at ISO 3 as well? Shouldn't I have seen at least a faint image at ISO 25? Also I am using an IR780 filter instead of the usual IR720.
     
  2. hmzimelka

    hmzimelka Member

    Messages:
    29
    Joined:
    Jul 17, 2010
    Location:
    Cape Town
    Shooter:
    Medium Format
    I love this film!
    I expose it for ASA 6-12 usually and develop in Rodinal 1:50.
    I use a Heliopan RG715 filter on my Rolleiflex. I think, for a IR780 filter, you'll have to give it one more stop. Start at an ISO 3 equivalent expsoure and bracket both ways.
    Make your first shot a unfiltered shot metered for ASA 400. This way, you can check whether the developing time is right for the speed of the film, then you can determine if your IR exposures are correct.

    You can find my recommended developing times as PDF download HERE.
    My review can be found HERE
    My Flickr set can be seen HERE
     
  3. anikin

    anikin Subscriber

    Messages:
    896
    Joined:
    Nov 16, 2009
    Location:
    Capital of O
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    Rollei does not have very extended IR band. With 780 filter you'll need way more exposure than 25. Just like hmzimelka, I use ISO 3-6 with 720 filter. I would bet that 780 needs a few more stops of light.
     
  4. mablo

    mablo Member

    Messages:
    389
    Joined:
    Mar 2, 2009
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    I took advice from hmzimelka's excellent review mentioned above and have been bracketing through EI 3-6-12 using Hoya 720 IR filter. I usually find I like the EI 6 negs more than the others but that varies according to the lighting situation at hand.
     
  5. iulian

    iulian Member

    Messages:
    69
    Joined:
    Mar 26, 2011
    Shooter:
    Medium Format
    The man said 720, not 780. I also used it with a 720 (cokin z007) and it works OK around ISO 6. I never tried 3, but it might be an improvement. The recommended by the manufacturer ISO25 is a joke, in my opinion.
     
  6. scheimfluger_77

    scheimfluger_77 Subscriber

    Messages:
    506
    Joined:
    Mar 21, 2006
    Location:
    mid-Missouri
    Shooter:
    Pinhole
    Here's what I've found. An EI of 1 is the bare starting point with this film with a 720 IR filter, maybe lower. I used a 760 filter and got fairly stunning results, but I had to use a speed setting that I call -5. That's five stops below .8, the lowest setting on my Luna Pro. If you look at the the spectral sensitivity curve in the data sheet at Freestyle, you'll see it peaks at 675nm and peters out down to 820nm. It's barely sensitive to IR. Your 780 filter should work but it will require tons of exposure. My developer was Rodinal 1+50.

    hmzimelka, very nice set of photos.
     
  7. DWThomas

    DWThomas Subscriber

    Messages:
    2,911
    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2006
    Location:
    SE Pennsylvania
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    I pretty much agree with scheimfluger_77. With a 720 filter I increase exposure about 7 stops over an incident reading at 400 and usually bracket +/- 1 stop. With a 760 filter I had to use an additional 6 stops. I expect at 780 you will really be down in the mud.

    But when you say completely blank -- were there frame numbers and the like along the edges? If not there could be some additional problem. An excellent suggestion for a first test roll is to take one exposure without a filter, metered at 400. That gives a reliable check of film handling and processing. If that works and subsequent IR shots don't, it's a wrong filter, or gross underexposure. If it doesn't come out, it's perhaps a roll loaded backwards or processing problem.

    It's all fun when it works!
     
  8. hmzimelka

    hmzimelka Member

    Messages:
    29
    Joined:
    Jul 17, 2010
    Location:
    Cape Town
    Shooter:
    Medium Format
    Now I have learnt something also. I will give it it a try to give more exposure and I'll pull a little in developing.


    Thank you!
     
  9. AnselAdamsX

    AnselAdamsX Subscriber

    Messages:
    101
    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2007
    Location:
    Middletown,
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    I did get it to work. My meter only goes to ISO 3. It looks like I need to give 8-9 stops to get good density. I also have a bad flare problem.
     
  10. DWThomas

    DWThomas Subscriber

    Messages:
    2,911
    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2006
    Location:
    SE Pennsylvania
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    For my IR work, I typically use my Gossen Digisix meter. This gives an EV reading on an LCD display which you then set on a ring. The ring is concentric with a scale that shows the whole gamut of shutter speed and F-stop combinations for that exposure. I usually set the ISO for the nominal 400 and mentally subtract 6, 7 or 8 when I transfer the EV reading. I suppose one could also pick an ISO to make the deduction 10 for easier subtraction.

    Another alternate is to make a little table, a matrix of meter readings and adjusted camera settings for the likely range of interest. When I do pinhole stuff, no meters go to f/250 or the like, so there I make a little table that also includes reciprocity adjustment.

    Both techniques are a long way from point & shoot, but they get the job done.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Sep 1, 2012
  11. scheimfluger_77

    scheimfluger_77 Subscriber

    Messages:
    506
    Joined:
    Mar 21, 2006
    Location:
    mid-Missouri
    Shooter:
    Pinhole
    What camera/lens are you using? Does the flare appear to creep in along the edges of the film, or is it a general over all fogging? General light-tightness in your camera/lens system is the first place to look. Also depending on the age and maker of your lens it may not be well corrected for flare.

    Mental calculation is usually what you have to do with your meter. I'm fortunate in that the Luna Pro has an LV/EV scale on the other side of the dial. Once I set at .8 I go that scale and move the speed setting down from there.

    I'm glad to hear it's working for you, how are your results other than the flare?

    Steve