Re: 120 Konica

[Ben Kreunen <ben@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

>       your preference for the Konica may well just be that it is a "more
>         normal" b&w film than the much more IR sensitive HIE. as to the HIE's
>         grain, well - it's just part of the emulsion's "nature", to be either
>         accepted or avoided as one wishes. However, it is sensitive 
> further into
>         the IR band than the Konica, which "peaks" around 750nano(?) as 
> the name
>         implies. the kodak is more around the 900nano region. others pay more
>         attention to the specifics than these generalizations, but the 
> fact is
>         that HIE is sensitive further into the IR band.I enjoy the look 
> of both,
>         myself. You may find, when you start trying the darker filters, 
> that there
>         is a point at which they block out too much of the IR in the Konica's
>         response range. this is, of course, yields not very interesting 
> images.

I'm well aware of the differences in spectral sensitivity, and yes it would 
be pointless to use filters that do not match the film's sensitivity... but 
my point wasn't about IR sensitivity...  it's about the tonal quality of 
the image... whether it's infrared or not there is no excuse for clear film 
shadows or highlights with no details (and I'm not inferring that your 
images have them, they don't... although it would be nice to see the scans 
extended to the full density range. There are some very nice images 
there).  Granted I'll have to put up with extra grain and halation, these 
are unavoidable, I just gave up (partly laziness) trying to get a decent 
tonal range.

>You didn't give much along the lines of details concerning how you treated
>Kodak's version.  I've had excellent success with the film by metering the
>scene at EI 250 through a #25 filter and developing with D76 or Xtol.  You
>can check my Web site to examine my results.  Of course, you may be going
>for something entirely different, but HIE can deliver an incredible range of
>possibilities.

Now George is definitely in the ball park here... especially with 
<http://www2.ari.net/glsmyth/images/img63.htm> Given the contrast range of 
the subject it still holds up to the same tests very well and it doesn't 
seem to be suffering from excessive agitation at the edges (which also 
shows up under these tests) From memory I had been trialling D76 and HC110. 
I didn't give much detail as to how I had used the film because I wanted to 
see what people were using that worked for them...  I knew I was on the 
wrong track already. So you've given me your developers but what about the 
dilution?  Film speed and processing time I can work out easily enough but 
a starting dilution would definitely save me some time.
Cheers

Ben

=======================================================
Gallery and Photography Tips (including IR)
http://www.bigbenpublishing.com.au/gallery/photography/
=======================================================
*
****
*******
******************************************************
*  To remove yourself from this list, send:          *
*         UNSUBSCRIBE INFRARED                       *
*       to                                           *
*         MAJORDOMO@xxxxx                            *
*----------------------------------------------------*
*   For the IR-FAQ, IR-Gallery and heaps of links:   *
*  http://www.a1.nl/phomepag/markerink/mainpage.htm  *
******************************************************