Rollei IR400

Messages
549
Edit My Images
Yes
Just got a box of Rollei IR400 in 5x4.

Any suggestions for what speed to rate it at when using an R72 type filter?

Also, what about developing time in HC-110? The box says 10 minutes for dilution B, which seems a bit long. If the film is what I think it is (Rollei Retro 400S, or Agfa Aviphot 200 or 400), dilution B should be more like 6.5 minutes.
 
I've shot it on 120 and rated it 12, which were a little underexposed. I'm planning on going 6 for my next roll (still in the fridge!)

And if I remember correctly, I developed it in Ilfotec HC 1+31 for 7 mins - not Kodak, but gives you a ball park at least?

Good luck and look forward to seeing the results - is a lovely film.
 
Yep, iso 6 was what was recommended to me, and it proved to be about right.
 
It’s been a while since I devd Rollie IR film but yes it is a longer process than standard negative film with the same solution.
10 mins sounds about right tbh although if constant agitating that time needs to be reduced.
 
Thanks all. 6asa is about what I was thinking, so will go with that. For dev time, I think I'll take a punt on 12 minutes in my preferred dilution X (1+49). It's a bit of a test anyway because I have two budget filters to try (Kood and Zomei).
 
When I get a box of sheet film that I haven't used before, I like to sacrifice a sheet so that I can see what it's like. Here's the emulsion side of Rollei IR400 in 5x4...

Rollei IR400 - Emulsion.jpg

The grey colour has a slight tinge of mauve, and I noticed that it discoloured noticeably when exposed to ambient light, taking on a hint of pink. The ID notch is a single large triangle...

Rollei IR400 - Notch.jpg


And the reverse side has a dark anti-halation coating...

Rollei IR400 - Reverse.jpg


When processing in a Combi-Plan tank, I pre-soaked for 2-3 minutes with a full tank (filled from a mixer tap at 20°), about 50/50 inversion agitation and standing on the counter. The water came out grey, and a second fill came out clear.
 
As mentioned, I wanted to try out two budget IR filters, by Kood and Zomei. I already had the latter in 67mm for use with 35mm gear, and got the Kood in 82mm for use with the large format gear. I shot three scenes, taking a shot with each filter. On the first, the sunlight was okay but not especially strong (late afternoon), and on the second (late afternoon the next day), it was better while I was setting up, but it went a bit cloudy when I took the photos (very thin, hazy cloud). The third was quite a bit more sunny (middle of the day, and sunny). The results were a mixed bag...


Rollei IR400 Test Negs s.jpg

The top row are with the Kood filter, and the Zomei underneath. The last shot with the Zomei was a fail - I must have loaded the film into the holder incorrectly, and only found out when I put the dark slide back in and got the sound of buckling film. The dark slide wouldn't go in all the way, so it was knackered.

All shots were metered at 6asa, and processed in HC-110 at 1+49 for 12 minutes, 10 secs agitation every minute. There is a noticeable difference between the filters - I'd say the Zomei could easily do with another stop compared to the Kood. Viewed as positives...

Rollei IR400 Filter Comparison s.jpg

The first two pairs aren't particularly IR in that there is little Wood effect. Again, the difference between the filters is apparent - in the first pair, the Kood seems to have done a bit better, although it's hard to say whether the foliage looks lighter because the image is more contrasty. The last shot does have the Wood effect, though - here's a scan of that...

Roller IR400 Test w Kood IR720.jpg

Overall, it's quite contrasty - there is virtually no detail in the shaded area of the road, while the highlights have pretty good density on the neg. The sun was coming from the left and a bit behind. The trees on the left are mostly in shadow, while the one on the right was in open sunlight. Note that bits of the foliage on the left are bright where the sun got through. The right-hand tree has plenty of Wood effect happening (note how dark it is in the shaded bit near the bottom).

So, after this first experiment, I would say 6asa was about right for exposure index, and that the development was in the ballpark. As mentioned, it's maybe a bit too contrasty, but the lack of detail in the shaded part of the road probably has more to do with a lack of IR being reflected from it. Zooming into the foliage on the full res scan, it looks fine. As for the filters, I'd have to say that the Zomei doesn't seem to be as good as the Kood, although I wasn't able to compare it in shots taken in the best conditions.
 
I'd be quite happy with that end result tbh

Yes the road won't reflect IR hence darkness but imo there's enough detail in that shadow to ensure that the overall image works.

Edit: I'm sure that you don't need me to say this but I'll mention simply for the benefit of anyone else who may drop on this thread when searching IR info

Like any different film / medium, each has it's own characteristics and i think that sometimes we ( I'm as guilty as anyone!) try to assess say an IR image ( for example) with what our minds eye sees say in a standard b&w neg film result., hence such as hoping for shadow detail .....It's not going to happen where IR doesn't exist ( in quantity) if the film used is specifically designed to "read" IR.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top