Quote Originally Posted by timbo10ca View Post
I wouldn't increase exposure just because it may have "lost IR sensitivity" due to storage-Keep in mind that this is slide film with IR *sensitivity*, causing a color shift. You expose based on the rating of the film. you may just lose some of the color shift craziness due to lack of sensitivity. Being long expired though, *that* may require a bit more exposure. Definetley bracket this one, as you have 2 things going against you in an already tricky film.

Personally, I rate it at 200 for "bright" days with some light haze and 320 for "blazing bright days with lots of reflection (sand, white, etc) and no cloud" at sea level, around the 53 parallel N, middle of summer. This was based on what I found in Begleiter's book, who is in the USA so it probably depends more on equipment than geographical location. I use the Cokin #'s 1 and 2, depending on the look or effect I'm after. I posted samples in another EIR thread here somewhere. I approach FF for HIE and EIR the same as I do for non IR films- meter through the filter with your ISO set. I don't add a Hutching's Factor for HIE though and I do for non-IR, but that's totally OT. It works fine for the EIR as long as you meter carefully (I blew a roll by being lazy and going "sunny 16", regardless of the sun's direction over the course of an afternoon and I underexposed everything by about a stop. Mind you, this was at high elevation in Utah and weird things happen there ). The #1 is about 0-1/2 stop and the #2 is about 2/3 - 1 stop added exposure in my hands.

I'm picking back up this thread with some questions, because I'm not clear about a couple of points.

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.)