I've only got a handful of EIR transparencies, and so far I've only scanned them. In fact, I'm not even setup for color printing, but I'm making progress on a dye-transfer scheme.
A 2-hole punch can work for registration, and you can find pins at the hardware store to hold the pieces together, but it's much easier w/ large format negs. 35mm would be a bear indeed. Historically though, hand-eye registration has worked and worked well. I guess it's a question of how patient are you?
But projecting onto RA-4 would most certainly require a pin registered carrier or some ingenious scheme. I shudder at the thought...
The color transparencey plus b&w IR film is a good idea. That'd be really easy to manipulate in post.
Another totally different approach. Custom CCD sensor. Instead of the R/G/G/B Bayer matrix, make one with R/G/B/IR. The CCD sensors have inherent IR sensitivity, so you just need one of each four locations to have an IR-only filter. We know the CCD vendors can do this, since all the film scanners with an IR channel have the same thing.
Then it's just a matter of how to map those colors into the part of the spectrum we humans can see.
There are vendors who remove the IR filters from digital cameras, but that just causes all IR to map into the red channel, rather than be a distinct channel.
The custom CCD is probably less capital cost (given a minimum order for CCDs with custom filters) than paying Kodak to bring up EIR production again. (Remember that the US DoD had deep pockets to pay for production runs of EIR.)
But, like Kodak's short-lived attempt at a true monochrome digital camera (no Bayer filter at all), I suspect that an R/G/B/IR camera is too much a niche market to be produced in a consumer product.
Of course, someone is making R/G/B/IR CCD sensors for the spy satellites, and for the current digital camera in the U-2 spy planes. You don't think they lack an IR channel, do you? You want to be able to use the IR channel to spot camouflage.
I suppose if you had total software control over a flatbed scanner with IR-based ICE, you could use it as a scanning back on a view camera without any hardware development. But an Epson V750 would make a very heavy back on an 8x10 view camera...
(Of course, this is a digital solution, so I suppose it's off-topic on APUG.)
Last edited by John Shriver; 03-23-2011 at 09:59 PM. Click to view previous post history.
Dean Bennici has a new batch of color infrared film in 120 format!
I just acquired a new supply of Aerochrome Color Infrared Film. I now have a few hundred rolls in 120 format. The material is all dated 2011 as its coming from the last production run.
I do expect to get a few hundred more rolls in the next 2 months, but I can’t yet see beyond that.
USD $25.00 per roll
USD $8.00 shipping
Thanks for all the support and interest so far. There have been so many amazing results over the past year!
I couldn't find that information on his (Flash = evil) web site and gave up. I could write directly of course and might.
Originally Posted by holmburgers
But question - I remember at one time color infrared was still process E4 when that was long obsolete and E6 was the standard. If I get some of this stuff is it E6 process? I can get that done by anyone who does E6 and doesn't use a machine with infrared positioning LEDs or just do it myself in the Jobo.
I think AR-6 is the official processing but e-6 should work too. It could probably also be cross-processed in C-41 to create some crazy looking negs.
Sponsored Ad. (Subscribers to APUG have the option to remove this ad.)
I think it might be AR-5 actually... but that's splitting hairs and going off memory. At any rate, E6 produces very nice results and some people are indeed doing C-41.
If you're interested, I would email him asap; he could already be bought out.
AR-5 is indeed the official one, but apparently E-6 works well enough (it's just that the false colors are no longer scientifically accurate if you were trying to use it for its original aerial mapping purposes...) And C-41 cross processing is officially supported.
Kodak's data sheet on it:
I like to act as the conduit for Dean Bennici's emails on Aerochrome stock:
I’m getting many mails about Aerochrome film sensitivity to heat and transport. The most often asked question is about the film being a long time in the post.
Some of my photos just went through the ultimate test. I took fresh 2011 film out to Death Valley for a 5 day shoot at temperatures as high as 90° F (33°C). The film went the entire time without cooling. The film then spent a further 3 days without cooling in transport.
I then sent the film from Los Angeles to Munich, Germany. It got lost in the post for nearly two months! I finally developed the film and it looks fine! See attachments.
It is recommended to keep film cool when you can. Still, I found that Aerochrome is much more robust than originally thought. It seems that it can handle transport time in the post and leaving the film out for a few days is also not a real problem. Older stock may react differently, but all my current film is fresh 2011 and I keep it frozen from time of manufacturing until time of shipping.
But one aside.... is 90°F supposed to be hot??
I've done separations like this as a hybrid process: shoot E6, change backs and add R72, shoot IR820. Obviously only good for static subjects.
Doing the registration manually is pretty hard even digitally (you have to tweak rotation AND position, hopefully not scale/shear due to a non-flat scanner carrier), though there are pano stitching tools that can make a high-quality automated job of it. And choice of colour is interesting too, I didn't want crazy colouration so I put the IR equally into all three channels, i.e. as white, so it looks like like the usual snowy greyscale IR image showing through a colour scene with no artificial-looking hues. You can also use the IR layer as a multiplier, which means you get black skies again, foliage and concrete/brick appear but a few other things go dark; contrast is insane with that approach because the image is effectively a quadratic of the illumination unless you do a lot of curves-mangling.
Once I get RA-4 working (don't hold your breath; my home darkroom doesn't have a bench or sink yet!), I'd like to print pin-registered C-41 and IR separations onto the same print but I'm not yet sure how that will work. If you print through both negs in the carrier, you get the quadratic effect and super-high contrast. If you make two exposures (assuming you can get a neutral exposure onto RA-4 without a mask; maybe I'll have to shoot through some blank Portra or whatever), you'll sum the density instead of summing the light, which is the opposite approach to what I want, which is a reversal paper. Might look good anyway...
Is a #12 filter required or will a #15 do? I know #12 is the recommended minus blue filter but happen to have a #15. I found at least one report that #15 works; any disagreement?
Anyone cross processing in C-41? That's my plan since I don't project much anymore but love making wet optical RA-4 prints.