Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 70,695   Posts: 1,549,030   Online: 980
      
Page 8 of 16 FirstFirst ... 234567891011121314 ... LastLast
Results 71 to 80 of 151
  1. #71
    Roger Cole's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Suburbs of Atlanta, GA USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    3,927
    Quote Originally Posted by StoneNYC View Post
    I agree personally. I think SFX is not very useful and people only use it because it's the only thing there and they should REPLACE it with a true IR film, and no one would complain. BUT ilford also made a promise not to discontinue any films, so they are sort of stuck on a promise thy made.

    But personally I agree, get rid of SFX and bring in Ilford True IR.

    My proposal is just to keep ilford from having to cancel a film, and I think once they see the demand for the true IR in sheet film, they will understand that they need to make it in roll film, but at least make it in sheet.
    Eh, how about the Rollei/Maco IR film then? Isn't that still available?

    I've got more Efke 820 frozen than I'll probably ever be able to use at this (no shooting in ages, even less darkroom time ) rate...

  2. #72

    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    San Diego, CA, USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    2,283
    Images
    21
    Quote Originally Posted by Roger Cole View Post
    Eh, how about the Rollei/Maco IR film then? Isn't that still available?
    I think the old Maco IR film was relabeled Efke, and Rollei IR400 is a near-IR film in the same way as SFX. I experimented with it a little bit, but went back to...

    I've got more Efke 820 frozen than I'll probably ever be able to use at this (no shooting in ages, even less darkroom time ) rate...
    ...filling up my freezer. :-) That last run of sales from the guy in Croatia---a former employee or something, I suppose---was a godsend.

    It seems like HIE is out of reach, but I gather there's no basic technical obstacle to another company making a near-IR emulsion like Efke's---it's just that Ilford's scale, resources, and commitments to existing products make it an infeasible product for them. It's too bad, but the reasons make sense. If we're lucky, in the fulness of time, someone like Foma or even Ferrania will get interested.

    -NT
    Nathan Tenny
    San Diego, CA, USA

    The lady of the house has to be a pretty swell sort of person to put up with the annoyance of a photographer.
    -The Little Technical Library, _Developing, Printing, And Enlarging_

  3. #73
    Photo Engineer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Rochester, NY
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    23,067
    Images
    65
    Guys, you just do not understand the scale of the cost of making just the experiments to get set up for something like this! I've said it before. A simple experiment may cost on the order of $50 - $100 and that return must be realized in sales of the product. A failure in the experimental stage will double the cost.

    In the mean-time, digital (sorry to say) can do a quite credible job in both color and B&W.

    PE

  4. #74
    AgX
    AgX is offline

    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Germany
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    8,675
    Quote Originally Posted by Tom1956 View Post
    A good emulsion on a LOUSY base. I remember it was "Estar AH" base, whatever that is.
    ESTAR is Kodaks tradename for PET base in this case added with an anti-halation coating.

    (Agfa sometimes called their PET base GEVAR, others had no special designation.)

  5. #75
    StoneNYC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Connecticut, USA
    Shooter
    8x10 Format
    Posts
    7,363
    Images
    225
    Quote Originally Posted by Roger Cole View Post
    Eh, how about the Rollei/Maco IR film then? Isn't that still available?

    I've got more Efke 820 frozen than I'll probably ever be able to use at this (no shooting in ages, even less darkroom time ) rate...
    Yes the Maco/Rollie IR is stil available, and dare I say it seems much more IR sensitive than the SFX stuff, but it's supposed to be the same I think so perhaps I just had a bad sun day when I was testing my tests weren't extensive or anything.
    ~Stone | "...of course, that's just my opinion. I could be wrong." ~Dennis Miller

  6. #76

    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    San Clemente, California
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,101
    Quote Originally Posted by Photo Engineer View Post
    Guys, you just do not understand...
    And they don't want to. Save your "breath."

  7. #77
    MattKing's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Delta, British Columbia, Canada
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    12,466
    Images
    60
    Just a reminder.

    Ilford and Kodak use IR sensors and IR sources to locate and identify film stock on the master rolls that isn't of full quality, so it can be excluded from finishing.

    Those sensors and sources would be unusable with true IR film.
    Matt

    “Photography is a complex and fluid medium, and its many factors are not applied in simple sequence. Rather, the process may be likened to the art of the juggler in keeping many balls in the air at one time!”

    Ansel Adams, from the introduction to The Negative - The New Ansel Adams Photography Series / Book 2

  8. #78
    StoneNYC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Connecticut, USA
    Shooter
    8x10 Format
    Posts
    7,363
    Images
    225
    Quote Originally Posted by MattKing View Post
    Just a reminder.

    Ilford and Kodak use IR sensors and IR sources to locate and identify film stock on the master rolls that isn't of full quality, so it can be excluded from finishing.

    Those sensors and sources would be unusable with true IR film.
    Can you elaborate? I don't understand how an IR sensor can identify bad quality. Thanks.
    ~Stone | "...of course, that's just my opinion. I could be wrong." ~Dennis Miller

  9. #79
    MattKing's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Delta, British Columbia, Canada
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    12,466
    Images
    60
    Quote Originally Posted by StoneNYC View Post
    Can you elaborate? I don't understand how an IR sensor can identify bad quality. Thanks.
    You really should read Bob Shanebrook's book on Making Kodak Film. Or buy PE or Prof Pixel a whole bunch of lunches!

    Here is how I understand it:

    In the manufacturing process, emulsion is coated on wide and long master rolls. To be usable, the master rolls need to be cut into the individual sheets and rolls. Unfortunately, though, there will always be small areas on each master roll which which have physical defects that need to be kept out of the final product.

    The master rolls of film are scanned for those physical defects, and then any areas that appear to be defective (or at least outside of tolerance) are excluded when the roll is mapped out for finishing into individual rolls and sheets.

    The scanning is done with IR sources and IR sensors, because the film isn't sensitive to IR.
    Matt

    “Photography is a complex and fluid medium, and its many factors are not applied in simple sequence. Rather, the process may be likened to the art of the juggler in keeping many balls in the air at one time!”

    Ansel Adams, from the introduction to The Negative - The New Ansel Adams Photography Series / Book 2

  10. #80
    StoneNYC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Connecticut, USA
    Shooter
    8x10 Format
    Posts
    7,363
    Images
    225
    Quote Originally Posted by MattKing View Post
    You really should read Bob Shanebrook's book on Making Kodak Film. Or buy PE or Prof Pixel a whole bunch of lunches!

    Here is how I understand it:

    In the manufacturing process, emulsion is coated on wide and long master rolls. To be usable, the master rolls need to be cut into the individual sheets and rolls. Unfortunately, though, there will always be small areas on each master roll which which have physical defects that need to be kept out of the final product.

    The master rolls of film are scanned for those physical defects, and then any areas that appear to be defective (or at least outside of tolerance) are excluded when the roll is mapped out for finishing into individual rolls and sheets.

    The scanning is done with IR sources and IR sensors, because the film isn't sensitive to IR.
    Interesting, so how do Fuji do it with Acros100? Isn't that slightly IR?

    And heck how do they make regular IR without defects?

    Thanks for the info.
    ~Stone | "...of course, that's just my opinion. I could be wrong." ~Dennis Miller

Page 8 of 16 FirstFirst ... 234567891011121314 ... LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Contact Us  |  Support Us!  |  Advertise  |  Site Terms  |  Archive  —   Search  |  Mobile Device Access  |  RSS  |  Facebook  |  Linkedin