Rollei infrared 400 & Hasselblad 500c
Wow- I'm sort of confused... I just bought a roll of Rollei infrared 400, mostly to try out and goof around with. I was thinking of taking some portraits with it, to see what kinds of effects/results I can get with it...
Anyhoo... As I'm doing some more in-depth research, now that I've actually got the film in hand, it seems like the more I read, the more questions I have.
1. Do I NEED to use my red filter with this film??? What about other filters???
2. Can I develop and print this just like any other b&w film??? I generally use Ilford Ilfotech DD-X, but also have a bottle of PQ Universal...
3. Any other advice/tips that I should know about???
If anyone could give me some basic pointers, I would really appreciate it. Thanks, fellow APUG'ers
The standard Red 25 filter isn't sufficient to give you the infrared effect. You need a very dark red filter (B+W Type 092).
You can use most developers with this film. I'm using Adox ATM 49, which gives a very fine-grained negative.
I think your exposure will be in the 1/2 second to 1 second range. Although it's rated as ISO400, the filter requires an adjustment of 20 to 40 stops, possibly more, [THIS IS WRONG -- SEE MEA CULPA BELOW] resulting in an effecting ISO between 10 and 20. I've read of some people setting their meter to ISO6 or less.
As with other infrared film, you should handle it in total darkness, although from my understanding, it's not nearly as sensitive to "light piping" as the older Kodak HIE.
Take a look at Freestyle. They have a spec sheet on their site for this film.
And of course, the requisite photo samples:
In this shot, my home made lens shade + the filter caused vignetting. This is with a Zeiss Ikon Contax IIa and postwar 35mm Biogon.
Just the filter, only, with this shot. Different lens. Contax IIa and 21mm Biogon.
Last edited by elekm; 10-18-2010 at 09:43 PM. Click to view previous post history.
I thought the Rollei 400 IR film was capable of regular panchromatic shots without a filter. However, using an IR filter will require you exposing it at around ISO 5 or 6. Now using a regular red filter may work, but I am not sure what exposure you would rate the film at, and what the image would look like. As I understand it, it's very similar to Ilford's SFX film and not that high up in the IR range in sensitivity like some others. It will print like any other film does.
OK... So I NEED to use the standard Hassy red filter??? I guess I'm just unsure of WHY.... And, more importantly, what effect will I get if I DO and DO NOT use this filter???
Thanks for the prompt replies, by the way...
Without the filter, the photographs will look no different from panchromatic films. With the filter, photographs look like the ones in post #2.
Warning!! Handling a Hasselblad can be harmful to your financial well being!
Nothing beats a great piece of glass!
I leave the digital work for the urologists and proctologists.
Sponsored Ad. (Subscribers to APUG have the option to remove this ad.)
You are not mandated to use a red filter with this film. If you don't, you might as well use a regular film.... If you use the hassy red filter, it will exentuate blue sky a lot darker (like any Pan film does!) and it might yield a very mild IR effect on foliage (YMMV).... You need to use a proper IR filter on it to filter out all other wavelengths except the IR range to get the full IR effect.
That's correct. Without a filter, I think the resulting photo is similar to regular 400-speed black and white films.
Somewhere on the spec sheet or product info page on Freestyle, it mentions that a Red 25 filter isn't adequate to result in the infrared effect. You also can't use the B+W infrared filter that blocks all visible light. It will simply result in a blank negative (I know this through experience).
I think the film is somewhere between Ilford SFX and Kodak HIE.
When processed, the film isn't nearly as curly as Kodak HIE.
There have been several discussions under the B&W film forum related to this film.
It's very nice as a pan film, but costs two or three times as much as more ordinary film. I found I needed about 6 to 7 stops compensation with an IR filter of 720 nm cutoff. An 89B at about 695 might need a stop or so less. With a 760 nm, I needed around 13 stops above the reading for ISO 400. I would expect using a 25A with about 3 stops compensation will produce something, but in the end, experimentation and bracketing are the only answer. In general I seldom do portraits, I have no idea what IR does for that.
The other little tidbit -- you can't see through an IR filter, so they are a pain with an SLR!
Does Hasselblad make an IR filter???? I didn't see one on the KEH website...
The post right above this one is right. the one suggesting 20 to 40 stops is way off base there. 6 to7 stops with an R72 filter correct. 6 to 9 stops with a R 89 is about right. Also it is now about too late in the year for much IR. You need to work mid day in bright sun around green leaves which will give you your best IR response. Once the leaves go dead and shift color, it is pretty much over till spring. Then we have to wait until May or June.