Shooting Infrared FILM with Rollei Infrared

[@wanderpup]

Hey Bay Area neighbor! I hope you had good luck with the Retro 80. I was shooting snowy landscapes up at Pinecrest with my f300 6*17 pinhole and light bleed through the paper was frustrating, despite advancing frames in the shade. Thank you for the IR Rollei 400 tech breakdown, i've got ten rolls of 35mm and 120 chillin for a day i'm feelin brave with strong sun. Your video is priceless. Appreciated.

[@dirtywater5336]

Those older FD mounts with the silver ring are a PITA. Canon updated the lens mount shortly after these debuted. They are known as the nFD. The N standing for "new", and are similar to the mounts we know how to use today. I would check the light seals on the camera door. Your information about exposure and metering is very helpful. Trying to find a good starting off point is challenging with this film because Hoya doesn't list a filter factor for the R72. I remember hsooting a couple roll of this a few years ago and I'm pretty sure I accounted ofr 4 stops and it was waaaay too contrasty. Absolutely no shadow detail at all and skies were jet black so I was likely underexposing the film. Having just bought another roll, I'm going to give it five stops this time. I might even bracket and do one with six stops. One more thing. You mentioned taking a picture of the top of the camera to remember the settings. It reminds me of an app I used a few years ago that helped me remember the settings. It's called Analog. You can set the film, camera, lens, camera settings, and add notes about the frame

[@robshea]

Thanks for sharing!

[@roberttaylor8488]

I've been shooting Rollei IR films for quite some time, here is a few things about Film Infrared. First the cameras auto film advance using an IR beam for film advance will fog the film. Rollei Infrared film is not the same film as Rollei 400s. (I don't care what the specs say) Also Rollei iso 400 Infrared film is more like an iso 200 without an IR filter same for the 400s. I'm about to start shooting again with the Rollei 80s, the 80s with the R72 filter ISO for my personal preference is ISO 25 with the IR filter if a darker scene I'll use ISO 12 (Darker meaning under foliage) The Rollei 80s as an IR is smooth yes there is grain but not much. Now using either of these two films in Medium Format is just priceless smooth and awesome. Cameras I've use have been Canon EOS 620, EOS 650 and a Canon EOS 1n non of which have the IR beam. I've also used Nikon EM with the standard 50mm F1.8 E lens, Nikon FM3a with older prime Nikon AI lenses. I'm about to use a Pentax K1000 this year and my original Nikon EM but need to find a 50mm manual focus lens for it. The medium format camera I used was a Pentax 645n with manual focus 75mm lens. Speaking of lenses manual focus, older lenses don't seam to produce hot spots/ghosting as do a few of the zoom lenses. The Pentax I'm going to use this year is lacking in a couple things one is a times shutter release and the other is there is not mirror up so might prove interesting. Focus is or can be an issue if shooting with F5.6 or wider because you will miss the focus My go to is F8, 11 and 16. Personal note I process my own Rollei 400 films will work well with Rodinal but there are better developers which will produce a smoother grain Ilford Microphen is choice for Rollei 80s I can't see any reason it wouldn't do the same for the 400 films. Ending note I'll be shooting Adox HR-50 very soon this is processed in Adox HR-50DEV also exposed at EI 25 or 12. I know this post is 2 years old but hey, can't hurt maybe I filled in a few gaps.

[@robshea]

Thank you so much for this information! I'm sure it will help others who find this video. I'd love to see some of your images. Maybe they would inspire me to do more film shooting. Thanks!

[@Narsuitus]

Thanks for the video. I found it very interesting. I shoot black and white infrared with 720 and 950nm filters on digital cameras but have never tried infrared film.

[@67ratsrule]

You should get another roll and give IR tri chromes a go. I have been obsessed with them. Love the video.

[@MTimWeaver]

I started shooting digital infrared portraits in 2015, and started shooting film (again) in 2018. In 2021, I finally picked up some 35mm Ilford SFX200, which is sensitive up to about 730-750nm. Since I never do things the easy way, I decided to use it in my studio, using flash. Since the R72 filters run 5-7 stops, I decided shoot it as a 5-stop change, meaning EI6. I decided to use a 35mm rangefinder, since I wouldn't have the focus/sight issue you might have when using a DSLR...being able to focus with the filter attached is a game-changer (same with the TLR as someone wrote below..I tried this also on another session). Using a light meter, I metered for EI6 (I used a 600ws strobe, two 200ws flashes and a single speedlight in a fresnel for the subject's face). My camera settings were about 1/80 @ f/5.6 (though I tried 4, 8, and 11, too). I self-develop and scan my own film. The images came out better than I had any reason to expect, with the f/5.6 being the best overall images. I shot handheld, and my model was great about holding still. Images were sharper than I expected, esp with the "bloom"/wood effect you get using IR sensitive film and a 720nm filter. I later tried using SFX200 in my Minolta Autocord TLR for an outside portrait. The Autocord actually has an IR focus mark on the focus slider, which is why I chose that over my other TLR. Unfortunately, I didn't think it through, and went the wrong way on the focus lever, so EVERY SINGLE IMAGE was out of focus. Had I left the slider where it focused in visible light, it would have been better. I've got some Rollei 400 I want to try (both 35mm and 120), which would be 1-step 'easier' in studio, so I won't have to blind the model by having the lights turned up so brightly. :) Great channel here, and am glad to see someone putting this all down for folks.

[@robshea]

Thanks for the tips! I picked up a roll of SFX200 after the shoot in this video, but have yet to get back to film. At some point...

[@MTimWeaver]

@@robshea Yeah.."at some point..." is exactly right. I went the other way...SFX200 first, and now I have Rollei 400 I need to try.

[@ralphgonz]

Thanks for the assessment -- a friend just gave me a roll of the Rollei 400 B&W Infrared film so now I know how much to compensate for the IR720 filter I already had. FYI I recently picked up a Ricoh XR7 film camera which uses the Pentax K-mount system. They're only about $30 on eBay, and you can pick up nice Pentax prime lenses of the era (or the very nice Rikenon 50mm f/2) for $20-$100 thanks to the large supply from decades of K-mount lenses. The XR7 is a fantastic camera with full information viewfinder, DOF preview, manual and aperture-priority mode, shutter speeds from 16 sec to 1/1000, compatible with modern batteries. I've been using it in preference to my all-manual Pentax MX.

[@robshea]

Excellent, thanks for the recommendation!

[@chrismaher1729]

Hi, great video thanks. I recall infrared film cassetes are more prone to light leaks compared to standard visible films. It is recommended the the infrared films are loaded it subdued light conditions. The light leaks you saw were in the early frames, so could be this. Light seals on cameras are also easy to get replaced on many cameras. Happy photographering. Chris

[@johnbrekke2081]

Wow, excellent. Very informative.

[@stefan_becker]

Great video. Thank you! I think you could try the Yashica Mat 124 G. It's not that expensive and a TLR so that you can even see through the viewfinder while the dark infrared filter is on the shooting lens.

[@robshea]

Excellent suggestion! That camera looks quite affordable.

[@PeckhamHall]

Interesting about the movement between shots, may it's the heat on the metal camera body warming the neg up and making it expand on how hot it gets.

[@ernyr516]

Hi Rob , when i used IR film 20 + years ago I used Kodak high speed IR film and if I'm not mistaken it was asa or iso 3200 which you could hand hold , and get a very grainy but moody shot with ,that boat would be awesome to have shot. I used a canon F-1 it was more of a pro camera in its day compared with the AE-1 , on the back of the prism I have a lock for the view finder if you remove the eye piece rubber, you might find a lock which will help with possible light leak . the other tip was you might have the load the IR film in a change bag or in a completely blacken room or closet , under a blanket so that there is no light getting to the film even though its in its canister . Any small amount of light that got in would partially expose the film ie light leak . and it would be evident in the first couple of shots . Mind you that was the case with the KODAK .Due to its higher sensitivity . I cant quiet remember, that the little red dot on the lens meant that it was good for IR, and either the sweet spot for aperture was where the dot was, or you had to move the focus there after finding focus , it was 20+ years ago after all . That's my excuse . As far as the earlier FD lens you have they can be a bit fiddly to say the least . On the back of the lens there are Two Pins one looks like a L and the other a short straight pin , make sure the small straight pin is seated all the way to the right side of its groove . As you turn the silver lock ring back all the way , the straight pin should move back as well if the silver ring moves around it sometimes gets stuck and doesn't sit all the way back . hope this makes sense. The later FD lenses work more like the modern lenses, as the locking lever is on the lens instead of the body.The silver ring is the only thing that rotates on the earlier lens . Don't give up on film it can be a lot of fun and frustrating . Its amazing how far cameras have come . Cheers Mate.

[@robshea]

Thanks for the tips and for sharing your experience. It's certainly a challenging medium that forces you to take extra care.

[@AlexandrosTGreat]

Hi Rob! I think the problem with the higher bracketed images you shot turning out lower contrast was because you may not have accounted for reciprocity failure of the film after around 1 second

[@robshea]

That sounds right, thanks for pointing that out!

[@mynewcolour]

Are you implying that reciprocity was causing under exposure? The aperture remains throughout so the slower speeds are giving more exposure, more info on the neg. This film is ~ iso 200 so a bit pull-processed here - hence quite a flat curve.

[@AlexandrosTGreat]

@@mynewcolour Hi! Yes that is what I was implying. Lots of film used in the 8m since then 😊. I'm still technically correct on the reciprocity failure as it kicks in at 1s on that film. But you are too, it doesn't really matter because his first 'correct' exposure is his first at 1/8th and past that is just adding too much information as you stated. If anything, Rob could have shifted the starting exposure of his bracketing to see how how the these scenes looked with slightly less exposure!

[@mynewcolour]

@@AlexandrosTGreat Yeah. In my opinion it would have been best to actually scan positives to assess the exposure. Scanning software is doing an auto exposure, a dumb ‘best guess’ rather than a straight invert. The only way to be consistent there is locking exposure… but then that isn’t going to be optimum for each neg. In other (more concise) words. If you want to know how your exposure went, learn to read the negative.

[@AlexandrosTGreat]

@@mynewcolour haha true! The age old battle of converting media from analog to digital 😊 reading negatives is always a "fun" time

[@fandyus4125]

I find it funny that everyone seems to be taking IR pictures of this boat. Jason Kummerfeldt aka grainydays has a shot of this very same boat on Aerochrome. I think I'll have to roll up there next and do a 720nm shot on like Fomapan 400 or something lol

[@robshea]

It's a popular subject. It just happened to be where I was traveling to at the time.

[@fandyus4125]

@@robshea I figured. I don't blame you! I'd take a pic too if I was there.

[@LeendertCordemans]

Hi Rob, i'm using Ilford sfx 200 IR filmrol. Working also great. Perhaps to try.

[@robshea]

I will check that out. Thanks!

[@peterkay9050]

Hi Rob. Thanks for the brilliant IR tutorials. You are my oracle where IR is concerned. I have Rollei retro 400s in my Pentax Spotmatic. This is M42 so lenses are cheap. A decent spotty will cost you $70, & $30 for a nice Takumar 55mm f2. That's cheap photography. The maximum stops I can drop using the iso is 4⅓ as the lowest iso is 20 but that may well be enough. We will see tomorrow, if we get some sun

[@robshea]

Thanks! 😀

[@JanneRanta]

Any change of a video about what lenses are good for IR and what IR hotspots are etc?

[@robshea]

Absolutely, this is on my list. Are you interested in a particular system or lens mount?

[@JanneRanta]

@@robshea I'm generally interested but shoot nikon myself.

[@joeycoston7692]

Thanks a lot of this insight!

[@seanmccarthy5216]

Very helpful

[@Brenby]

On my Canon AE-1, I get noticeably more grain on my 28mm lens vs 50mm- even on finer grain films like Ektar 100.

[@prancypooch9694]

Very cool that you are covering IR film. B&W film is so easy to develop and inexpensive when you do it yourself. Yes, there is a cost of a developing tank, developer, fixer and photoflow solution, but ends up being very economical per roll. Your results will generally be better than what a lab can do especially with the ability to underexpose and overdevelop for added contrast. Developing temps only need to be 68°. Yes, you will have to scan your negatives, but get a small loop to view them. It will be easy to see highlight density clipping. Looking at negatives really helps to understand exposure control and lighting conditions. Light meters do not measure IR the same as visible light, but I found that my old Pentax Digital Spotmeter still did a good job of guiding exposure values. Rollei Infrared IR400 D-76 Developer 1+1 shot at ISO 250 9.5min development www.digitaltruth.com/devchart.php?Film=Rollei+Infrared+IR400&Developer=&mdc=Search&TempUnits=C This is very similar to the great discontinued Kodak HSIR film that was also ISO 400 rated. I did a lot of photography with this film back in the day, and ISO 250 was my light meter value. D-76 developer gives finer grain, but Kodak HC-110 (still available) gives higher accutance and a straighter (higher) gamma curve before clipping in highlights. Might have to get some of this film. I still have my Canon F1 and FD lenses. There is nothing more rewarding (and instructive) than taking a roll of film out of the developing tank and looking at beautiful greyscale negatives. I would use a coat hanger and clothespins to hang the film to dry. Most people in today's digital world would not take the time and expense to get an enlarger and make prints, but the final print on a beautiful silver rich fiber based paper are unequaled by ANY inkjet or laser printer not to mention their archival qualities.

[@robshea]

Thank you for sharing your experiences and tips! I look forward to shooting more IR film shooting in the future.

[@mistercheetah9717]

Could you theoretically shoot IR film without a filter on a point and shoot?

[@robshea]

B&W IR films capture both visible and IR light. Without an IR filter, you will be capturing mostly visible light with some IR. Nothing wrong with that, but it you want _mostly_ IR light, you will need a 720 nm (R72) filter.

[@FTropper]

And I thought I'm just too stupid for the FD mount ^^

[@robshea]

🤣

[@depotmsa2362]

try some lomo pruprle film , its not infrared but has the ir feel . as for that ghosting image , it appears that is a developing error , as i did not see those highlights in your normal frames

[@robshea]

Thanks for the tip, I'll check that out!

[@ralphgonz]

I've also heard that light seals (in the film canister or even the camera) may be less effective at IR wavelengths, so it is important to load/unload the film in subdued light and to keep the canister in an opaque container when not in use.

[@robshea]

Written summary: blog.robsheaphotography.com/2020/08/03/rollei-infrared-film-first-look.html

[@chrismaher1729]

Hi, great video thanks. I recall infrared film cassetes are more prone to light leaks compared to standard visible films. It is recommended the the infrared films are loaded it subdued light conditions. The light leaks you saw were in the early frames, so could be this. Light seals on cameras are also easy to get replaced on many cameras. Happy photographering. Chris

[@rossmansell5877]

IR is best loaded in complete darkeness......