I just shot and had processed my first EIR roll today. Overall, I'm intrigued by the results, and think it's a really cool emulsion. I shot it at 160 and had them process it like it was 160. I used the Hoya "G" orange filter, and hue-wise, it was exactly what I'd hoped for. I would have intuitively thought that by dealing with brighter circumstances, one would actually want to go with the suggested EI100 with perhaps an underexposure of 1/3 or 2/3rd stop (or the equivalent of 125 or 160). What I found was that with paler skin tones, I used both spot and centre-weighted metering and shot based on that. The outcome was the faces were often washed out (using a bounced speedlight was a bigger problem I'll deal with separately).
Knowing in advance that it's an unforgiving film in terms of emulsion, would it make more sense to just underexpose by the 1/3rd-2/3rd stop at EI100, EI 160, or even EI 200 instead treating it as a high-speed film (e.g., 320?). Also, on the topic of filters, I shot three images under fluorescent tube lighting (basically, in an office). Those turned out with an exceptionally blue cast, even cerulean. Would I want to couple the Hoya G orange with, say, an FL-D filter, aware that that nixes at least about 2 stops, possibly more? Or would that be counterproductive and result in something with something even crazier? Or because the orange G should have cut out the blue sensitization generally, then perhaps I need to be looking at another filter entirely, like a #25 red? I ruled out that it's ultraviolet lighting, since the lens coating would have more or less cut that out.
(I'll have some of these scanned by the weekend if anyone needs visual reference.)