terry_rory Posted April 7, 2007 Share Posted April 7, 2007 http://www.silverprint.co.uk/News_05.htm Information for any Leica IR film shooters. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andrew robertson Posted April 7, 2007 Share Posted April 7, 2007 Ouch. I think this is a bad omen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
terry_rory Posted April 7, 2007 Author Share Posted April 7, 2007 Many digital cameras including (especially) P&S models perform well with IR in B&W and false colour. No need to panic.... <a href=" title="Photo Sharing"><img src="http://farm1.static.flickr.com/94/248619109_533fe518af_o.jpg" width="750" height="500" alt="Leigh Park gardens" /></a> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
terry_rory Posted April 7, 2007 Author Share Posted April 7, 2007 <a href=" title="Photo Sharing"><img src="http://farm1.static.flickr.com/80/248599927_545afa6323_o.jpg" width="750" height="500" alt="Leigh Park gardens" /></a> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
terry_rory Posted April 7, 2007 Author Share Posted April 7, 2007 Please excuse the reference to Leica. This was originally posted in the Leica forum then moved here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oskar_ojala Posted April 7, 2007 Share Posted April 7, 2007 HIR hasn't been available in 120 for a long time and all pics I've seen were so grainy that I didn't bother to try it in 35 mm. Maco has its issues, but at least it's available in larger formats. EIR is a different matter though, but I think digital IR killed it. Digital IR is very good, but too expensive for amateurs in larger formats. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobatkins Posted April 7, 2007 Share Posted April 7, 2007 HIE is/was wonderful in 35mm (assuming you like the grainy glowing look). You can't really get anything like it with digital capture. Just another nail in the coffin of film (at least from Kodak). Luckily there's still Maco. SPX200 may be back soon (see http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=00Kbqk), though it's no substitute for HIE and it's not very IR sensitive. Konica 750 seems dead and buried. You can'y even find it on Ebay, which means it's REALLY gone. Excepct for the brick I have in my freezer...along with two rolls of HIE. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
john_shriver Posted April 7, 2007 Share Posted April 7, 2007 I'm not surprised. I was just browsing Kodak's aerial film site, and noted that there was no monochrome infrared. Figured that was an omen. HOWEVER, please don't rag on Kodak about this. Rag on the United States Department of Defense. They're the folks that all the IR films were always really manufactured for, that consumers could get the stuff was just a side-effect. Without the DoD, it never would have been available in the first place. The DoD must have stopped ordering it, so Kodak has stopped selling the couple of extra master rolls they made each time to consumers. The 120 size was probably discontinued when the DoD stopped ordering thin 4 mil film, but they must have kept ordering something on the thicker base used for 35mm. The DoD has probably converted to digital technology. Fast processing of your IR imaging is a real necessity to the military, so they're probably happy as clams with IR sensors. Plus, IR sensitivity is just about "free" in CCD sensors. They could replace the Beyer matrix with R, G, B, IR, or even more complicated arrays with various narrower wavelength bandwidths. Of course, it would also not surprise me if the DoD was still ordering IR films for YEARS after they stopped using the stuff. The DoD supplies purchasing automaton doesn't always look at consumption, efficiency not being a hallmark of the DoD. The DoD was buying HUGE numbers of vacuum tubes well into the 1980's, and not using them anywhere. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pico Posted April 7, 2007 Share Posted April 7, 2007 What keeps others from making the same emulsion as HIE? The deep IR and speed is unique. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NK Guy Posted April 7, 2007 Share Posted April 7, 2007 >What keeps others from making the same emulsion as HIE? The absence of a lucrative market. I love HIE as much as anybody. It's always been my favourite filmstock - I love its ability to transform the mundane into the magical. But I also knew it was pretty well inevitable that its death was nigh. Sad. I don't really have a reason to keep my film cameras around now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fotohuis RoVo Posted April 7, 2007 Share Posted April 7, 2007 Available (B&W) IR films in the market: Ilford SFX 200: 35mm and 120 roll film. Rollei IR820/400 (iso 400) and a new announced IR850/100 (iso 100): 35mm, 120 roll film and sheet film. Efke IR820C (iso 100): 35mm, 120 roll film and sheet film. best regards, Robert Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
william john smith Posted April 8, 2007 Share Posted April 8, 2007 There is if one doesn't shoot digital..........nor plan to! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pico Posted April 8, 2007 Share Posted April 8, 2007 <i>No need to panic.... There is if one doesn't shoot digital..........nor plan to!</i><p> Infrared is not just for making strange images. It is excellent for cutting atmospheric haze. There is nothing like large format Kodak IR for certain work. <p> Robert Vonk - we do know of those IR films, but none are as deeply sensitive to IR as Kodak's film was, nor are they as fast. <p> Maybe I'll float a box of 4x5 HIE on that auction site to see what happens. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rustys pics Posted April 8, 2007 Share Posted April 8, 2007 I don't think that cutting IR films has much to do with Kodak's profit margin. They always lost money on IR manufacture from my understanding. It has more to do with Kodak's "war on film". Look for them to stop making motion picture film in 35mm in the next year or so. HIE is one of the few Kodak films I buy regularly, along with Tri-X and occasionally PLus-X. Digital IR is a good tool, but nothing like HIE in terms of tonality and speed. Luckily Efke has started making IR 820c again. I prefer KODAK, but it looks like Efke is the only game in town for true IR film. Rather than horde HIE and reward Kodak for cutting my throat, I will horde Efke IR820c and learn how to use it well. Within a few years the only thing we'll see carrying the Kodak name will be crummy printers and camera bags sold at Wal-Mart. Sad.<div></div> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kng Posted April 8, 2007 Share Posted April 8, 2007 "Look for them to stop making motion picture film in 35mm in the next year or so." A bit OT, but I think that's premature. Sales of MP film for Kodak are still strong; in fact, orders for 16mm have doubled in the past few years. I've been told by a Kodak rep that they will be releasing at least one new emulsion this fall; whether it's to expand their Vision2 line or a new platform entirely is unknown. Even Fuji, whose MP film market share is much, much smaller than Kodak, just introduced a new emulsion this month. Clearly R&D is still being done on film. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
engelgrafik Posted April 8, 2007 Share Posted April 8, 2007 As a film and digital IR shooter, I can say that digital simply doesn't approach the quality and aesthetic that Kodak film created. The fact that it had no anti-halation layer on the negative is what created the mysterious aura effect... the light would go through, bounce off the back plate and hit the film again. That's why it's sad, even though you can do IR in digital. Because digital IR isn't quite the same. And neither is any of the near-IR films! SFX200, Konica 750, Maco 820... none of it approached the effect created by those big grains of Kodak. Well, the Maco 820 Aura stuff did.. but who can find it these days? Gone. Very very sad. Also, as a Photoshop user since 1990 (I used a beta of Photoshop before it was even owned by Adobe, when it was Knoll Software... just wanna make it clear I'm not an anti-digital, anti-Photoshop person), I can also say that I'd rather do the real thing in the field than spend hours in Photoshop making things look "sorta" like the real thing. I can usually tell when it's "faked" (actually I hate that word, but you know what I mean) and I honestly can't develop the same amount of appreciation for a photograph that has been heavily Photoshopped. Well, I can, but at a certain point it is no longer a "photograph" but rather a "photo illustration", which is fine if that is what you do. But simply "emulating" a look is kinda wimpy if you ask me. You either do the real thing or do your own thing, know what I mean? PS is a great tool which I love, but it is *only* a tool. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kelly_flanigan1 Posted April 8, 2007 Share Posted April 8, 2007 With a Phase One 4x5 scan back and no IR cuttoff filter one gets mostly IR response; or at least 1/2 is a wild guess. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oskar_ojala Posted April 8, 2007 Share Posted April 8, 2007 I never liked the "aura" effect of HIE, I want my I like my panchromatic: with good tonality and with low grain. Of course, there's always space for high-grain, I have TMZ in the freezer, but IR options are seriously limited right now. Pico comes up with a good point regarding large format IR and spectral response. Oh well, I'll probably order Rollei IR in 120 next week... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rustys pics Posted April 8, 2007 Share Posted April 8, 2007 Have a look at this fellow's work, shot mainly on HIE and tell me that it's not a wonderful creative pallet that digital can never match. http://www.marsdenarchive.com/library/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
al_divenuti Posted April 9, 2007 Share Posted April 9, 2007 >>I don't think that cutting IR films has much to do with Kodak's profit margin. They always lost money on IR manufacture from my understanding Your understanding is flawed. The primary customer of HIE was the DoD, specifically the USAF. Few military contractors lose money. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now