Trying Rollei IR400 again, want a warm fuzzy
Alright, here's my setup:
Pentax Spotmatic, R72 filter, tripod, bag-loaded Rollei IR400
First two tests metered everything at 25 and got just about nothing. Most of the shots I bracketed. I had one really faint frame on what should have been the darkest shot. First roll failure I blamed on developing, second one...started to realize my math had failed somewhere. The experience was so painful I made a rage comic: http://cheezburger.com/View/5277164032
OK...fast forward to today. FedEx will be dropping off more IR film, I grabbed 4 rolls of Rollei and two Efke. My plan today is meter the rollei at 6. At least if I blow all the frames out I will have accomplished more than last time. 2 stops aren't THAT massive on normal film, but I have come to respect the evil voodoo in IR film and wouldn't be shocked by much at this point.
Oh, all shots were with the R72 on, tripod'd
So plan is: Bag load the spotmatic (no IR sprocket sensors), meter at 6, develop in, well...anything really. Last time I used rodinal for the first roll then ID-11 for the second. I have a selection of chemicals so if someone has an epic recipe for this film, I would appreciate that too
In my experience, Rollei with R72 just start to produce acceptable images at about ISO 3. I'd say start at 6, but bracket down couple of stops: ISO 6, 3, 1. Also, it needs quite a bit more development compared to normal b/w films.
What would you suggest for development?
As far as I remember I was processing it in my sidekick with TMAX developer 1+4 for 6:30 at 75 degrees. This is more than twice the dev time compared to TMAX film.
Ok, that jives with the massive dev chart. They're saying 12 minutes for film shot at 25 not using a processor.
Sponsored Ad. (Subscribers to APUG have the option to remove this ad.)
Yeah. I find it's rather hard to overexpose this film, but very easy to underexpose. And pushing the film does
not help much with underexposure. I'm saying is with so much confidence, which is funny since I only processed two rolls grand total ;-)
I love your cartoon, by the way!
Well, thank you for all your help. If I succeed I will post photos here. If I don't, expect another angry cartoon
EI 6 has worked for me in conditions where I'd expect high-to-moderate levels of IR relative to visible (late afternoon on a sunny day, &c.) I generally develop IR films in Diafine, for the compensating effect.
Despite the much higher nominal speed, I don't find that the Rollei film used with an R72 has much if any advantage over Efke IR 820. The Rollei's IR response tails off very quickly and that seems to obviate most of the speed advantage.
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_
ntenny makes a good point, I shot a bunch of the Rollei material last year and found it took a lot of exposure, speed is relative. I generally used an incident light reading at 400 and added 6 or seven stops with a 720 filter (about 12 or 13 stops with a 760!). My last run used HC110 Dilution E (1+47) for about 11 minutes @ 68ºF.
The EFKE 820 film I used 7 stops over ISO 100 incident with a 720, but it only required an additional stop with the 760; ie, the IR range goes out farther. I used HC110 Dil E for about 9.5 minutes with that.
I'm convinced that since we're dealing with a spectrum we can't see, intuitive adjustment is dubious - bracket, bracket, bracket! Certain lighting situations seemed to act like black holes for IR radiation.
And oh yeah an SLR with an opaque filter is unhandy!
I guess I have been very lucky...
These were exposed at ISO 12-25 and developed normally by a lab at their reference ISO 400 times (t-max 400) using the house's standard developer Ilfosol (don't know if 3 or s).
I shot 2 rolls (filter and no filter) and mixed up the tags... long story short this which was meant to be the filterless, was obviously sent out to be developed as a normal 400... I guess it was the filtered one instead.