Re: Myth of Heat exposing IR film

[Andrew Davidhazy <ANDPPH@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

> I just ordered some Kodak HIE film from Camera World...  I've always used
> Konica.... I know there is a difference of 700nm to 900nm so is there much of
> a difference as far as visually?  And which one is better in you're opinion?
> Let me know  ;-)

~Holly~

Better is a matter often of the context in which the films are used and the
subjective opinions of a particular user that are colored by their personal
preferences. Much like this note.

Both are good films. They are both good for what they are intended. If you
definitely want to images made through visually opaque filters, well, the Kodak
film responds further out than the Konica. The Konica can be loaded in subdued
daylight ... not so with the Kodak. Want grain? Kodak. 120? Konica (although I
am not positive about this), etc.

BTW, since we can't see the near infrared, as far as visually is concerned
there is no difference! ;-)

well, I guess this is not much of a message ... I guess the reference to
"better" is what did it. They are both good. They are different. 

regards,

Andy  o o  0 0 o . o  Davidhazy, Imaging and Photo Tech
       \/\/\/\/\/\/          http://www.rit.edu/~andpph
________|        |_____________________________________

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