Re: konica deveopment - or lack thereof

[Goff Photography <jdgoff@xxxxxxxx>]

At 07:10 PM 6/12/97 +0200, you wrote:
>hannu.jarventaus@xxxxxxxx wrote:
>>=20
>> >From:  curtis byers[SMTP:jetman@xxxxxxxxxxx]
>> >Sent:  12. kes=E4kuu 1997 0:48
>> >To:    infrared@xxxxx
>> >Subject:       konica deveopment - or lack thereof
>> >
>> >Hello. I have experience with Konica 750 in the past and have gotten
>> >good, if not contrasty, results from it. But recently I shot a roll
>> >using flash (nothing new), a red #29 filter over the lens, (normally
>> >use
>> >a #25) and exsposed normally like I have in the past. I did use a new
>> >developer, the X-tol. 10 minutes @ 70 degrees, 1:1 dilution. What I got
>> >
>> >was vveerryy thin negatives, as well as a bizare look in which the
>> >models viens really popped out. Why the thin negs? Thanks for any help.
>> >
>> >Curtis
>>=20
>> My developing time for Konica IR 750 with undiluted XTOL
>> is 9 minutes at 20C, so I guess you should have developed
>> longer using 1+1 dilution.
>>=20
>> Hannu Jarventaus
>> Espoo, Finland
>> hannu.jarventaus@xxxxxxxx
>>=20
>> >I haven't looked at the transmission curves for the red 29 filter so
what follows is generated from my memory---which is increasingly unreliable
as I age. But I believe the cut off for the 29 is further out into the red
end of the spectrum than the 25. You may wish to compare that curve to the
sensitivity of the Konica. The point I driving toward is that by using the
29, you may be reducing the 'light' that is in the sensitivity range of and
impinges upon the film, thereby causing an underexposure. This spectral
cutoff further out into the IR would account somewhat for the increased
visibility of the veins, since the spectral energy closer to the visible
would no longer mask IR penetration as recorded on the film.As I said above,
I may be in error here. You may wih to check the filter curve, as I
suggested.  Good Luck, James Goff, C.P.P.
>> *
>> ****
>> *******
>> ******************************************************
>> *  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  *
>> ******************************************************
>Re:dev. Konica:
>to go from XTOL undiluted to 1+1 you should add about 33% in developing
>time. So in your case 9 minutes x 1,33 =3D 12 minutes. You got thin
>negatives at 11 minutes, so I would start from 13 minutes! Please let me
>have your further experiences. Success!
>Jaap Los
>Holland
>*
>****
>*******
>******************************************************
>*  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  *
>******************************************************
>

*
****
*******
******************************************************
*  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  *
******************************************************

------------------------------