Re: Kodak HIE film in a 120 format?

[George L Smyth <GLSmyth@xxxxxxx>]

Theo Benson wrote:
> 
> No, I'm not wrong.You're playing a semantics game. Almost all films could be
> considered IR film if the only requirement was a slight sensitivity beyond
> red. Yes, Konica peaks at around 700nm, and though it extends further, it's
> pretty "numb" by the time you get to 800nm. A film whose sensitivity
> diminishes severely at the edge of my filter's cutoff is pretty much useless
> to me. Of course neither the filter nor the film range stops dead at a
> certain point -- they're both continui -- but both have pretty steep curves
> as they approach each other.  [Theo Benson]  Even Konica eventually admitted
> to me that their IR film wasn't really. If it was, then how could you load
> 35mm canisters in the same subdued light that obliterates Kodak HIE?

I'm properly corrected by Joe who stated that Konica IR peaks at 750nm (not
720nm).  No, I'm not playing a "semantics" game, I believe that you are.  I
think that you'll need to explain how films that do not record infrared
radiation might be considered infrared films.  I know of none that make that
claim.  Of the major film manufacturers, only Konica and Kodak say that they
provide infrared film.

Konica IR records infrared radiation, thus it is an infrared film.  Infrared
radiation begins at 700-720nm (depending upon your definition).  That's pretty
straightforward.  The fact that the film is useless to YOU has no bearing on
whether or not it is an infrared film.

I'm not certain with whom at Konica you may have spoken, but I would be
interested to understand why one would think that a film called "Konica Infrared
750" that records infrared radiation might not be an infrared film.

To answer your final question, Konica IR can be loaded in subdued light because,
unlike Kodak HIE/HSI, it has an antihalation layer that prevents light piping. 
This has nothing to do with its sensitization.

If you wish to make the claim that Konica's infrared film does not extend as far
into the infrared spectrum as Kodak's film, I don't think that anyone will
disagree (after all, this is fact).  But to ignore fact obviates meaningful
discussion.

george

- -- 

Handmade Photographic Images
http://www2.ari.net/glsmyth/
*
****
*******
******************************************************
*  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  *
******************************************************

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