Re: Ilford SFX 200 film

[Bertha Adamson <badamson@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

siteseer wrote:
> 
>         A lot of people knock Ilford SFX for not being a true IR film.  I
> like its subtle effects at making a tinge of difference from regular B/W
> film.  It doesn't hit you over the head screaming "I am an infared photo",
> so sometimes an SFX photo would catch your attention by being different
> without looking overly so.

I, too, agree.  I look at it more as a B&W film with a difference!  Using a
red filter adds a subtly different effect.  I did a nude shoot with it and it
gave a nice little glow to skin, not as strong as regular IR (although I like
that, too.)  On another subject, a historical site, it added a touch of drama
to the sky and the subject. However, it is not something I recommend if your
subject would benefit from a true IR treatment. It also has the advantage of
being a 200 speed film.  I like the Konica, but darn, it's slow!

Bertha
*
****
*******
******************************************************
*  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  *
******************************************************