Re: Maco IR820 article

[Steve Homer <shomer@xxxxxxxxxx>]

I shot just one roll of the Maco in 120 format: test shots of a model in the
studio with flash. I was very disappointed. I would still consider testing it
for landscape photography but it seems as slow as the Konica under studio flash.
The model's eyes were dark, but we did not see any veins (something I've found
to vary a lot from person to person with Kodak infrared also).

I set my flash meter to ISO25 and used a Red #25 filter. Processing was in Xtol
1:1 for 7.5min at 24 degrees C. That speed and processing combination
underexposed the film by about 3 stops, so I had an effective ISO of 6. I
bracketed the exposures, and the +3 exposure yielded a fine-grained but rather
flat negative. To me (and I'd love some advice from you darkroom experts on the
list) that suggests a fairly big "push" could yield a good negative. Next time,
I'll try increasing the development time by 40-60%. If that doesn't work, I'll
try TMAX developer.

I was annoyed that the manufacturer does not provide development time
recommendations for most of the developers that are popular in North America.
__________________________________________________________
-- Steve Homer  shomer@xxxxxxxxxx   Santa Cruz, CA  USA

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