hieslide.htm
Number of hits on this page:
Two formulas for Kodak HIE slide processing
In the German magazine Foto & Labor the author Harald Leban wrote how to modify the Kodak D-67 reversal process (not 'D-76'!) to develop Kodak HIE b&w infrared as a slide film. After some first tests, he discovers severe overexposure. It appears that this reversal process results in a stunning 1600 ASA!
I translated the German article, but be warned: I have no technical/chemical
German/English dictionary, so there might be errors in it! If you see such an error (or a non-existing chemical....:-)) please notify me!
Date sent: Tue, 16 Sep 1997 02:28:56 -0400
From: leban
Subject: HIE Reversal Developing
To: ir list
Send reply to: infrared@a1.nl
THE D-67 HIE-REVERSAL PROCESS
MODIFIED BY Harald LEBAN (Sep. 1997)
FIRSTDEVELOPER
D-67 HIGH SPEED
480ml destilled Water (approx.)
2,5g Metol
45g Sodiumsulphit (waterfree)
5g Hydroquinon
25g Sodiumcarbonat (waterfree)
2,5g Potassiumbromid
2,5ml Potassiumthiocyanat 50%-solution
2,5ml Potassiumiodid 1%-solution
or alternative:
AGFA NEUTOL
495ml AGFA Neutol (1+9)
2,5ml Potassiumthiocyanat 50% sol. (Potassiumrhodanid 50g +50mlaquadest.)
2,5ml Potassiumiodid 1% solution (1g in 100ml aqua dest.)
BLEACHBATH
VARIATION A
980ml dest. Wasser
10g Coppersulphate (CuSO4
20ml Sulphuric Acid (98%)
VARIATION B
980ml dest. Water
10g Coppersulphate
50g Sulphuric acid mono Potassium salt
VARIATION C
980ml dest. Water
10g Potassiumdichromate
20ml Sulphuric Acid (98%)
CLEARING BATH
90g Sodiumsulphit (waterfree)
in 1l dest. Water
SECOND-DEVELOPER
Each strong active positive-developer (Dektol, Neutol, Dokumol etc..)
FIXAGE
Not really important, ordinary filmfix is O.K.
Processing Times for HIE b&w:
In minutes at 24øC (equal to 77øF)
First Developer 10-12min
Bleach 3-4min
Flushing 3min
Clearing 3min
Flushing 3min best in destilled Water 3-4 times)
Second exposure 2-3min best while flushing in water with high intensive
light
source (halogen,sun...)
Second developing 3min
(Fixage) 3min
Final rinse 15min
FILMSPEED
In this case the reachable filmspeed depends on
A.)The scenery you are photographing (and light-metering so )
B.)The first developer you use
To A)
I am always metereing the scenery through the redfilter (WR25) and reach
for average tonal landscape a speed of 1600-3200 ASA.
If the amount of ir-radiation parts grows up you have to set a higher
speed because you measure with an instrument that only "sees" "the visible
radiation .. for example forest scenes.
(3200-4000 ASA) equals a correction of minus 1 f-stop
Very hard (for me) to get are floral sceneries in shadow where the light
meter shows completly different terms than the really ir-situation. Here I shot
sometimes with 6400 ASA. Equals a correction of minus 2 f-stops
But take care: these are not the "really " filmspeeds, more it is a
correction to the light metering with a conventional TTL light meter in order to the
IR-radiation.
To B)
I normally use the D67 first developer. But it works with the Neutol
version too. The film speeds are then lower (1/3-1/2 f-stop).
Summed up (what I used): Reversal Developing of HIE in D-67 process -
lightmeter settings - TTL through WR25
Average distant landscapes (ground, sky, clouds)
1600 ASA
Scenes with higher ir-radiation (normal visible contrast)
1600-3200 ASA
Floral scenes (in shadow) low visible contrast - 6400 ASA
I know, this is not a very scientific definition but it works - the rest is
personal "bracketing".
I hope everyone can get his own advantage of this process.
CHEMICAL APPENDIX:
Name engl. Chem. Formula
Name german
Potassiumthiocyanate KSCN
Kaliumrhodanid
Potassiumiodid KI
Kaliumiodid
Sodiumsulphite Na2SO3
Natriumsufit
Coppersulphate CuSO4
Kupfersulfat
Sulphuric acid mono Potassium salt KHSO4
Kaliumhydrogensulfat
Potassiumbromid KBr
Kaliumbromid
Sulphuric Acid H2SO4
Schwefels"ure
Potassiumdichromate K2Cr2O7
Kaliumdichromat
Good luck and take care with the chemistry
Harold (Harry) Leban
hlebanphot@compuserve.com
Date sent: Wed, 31 Jul 1996 18:04:29 +0200
Send reply to: infrared-photography@a1.nl
From: jim Henderson <74023.723@CompuServe.COM>
To: w.j.markerink@a1.nl
Subject: Reversing HIE
Hi,
Several people on the Infrared Photography group have expressed interest and curiosity about reversing Kodak High Speed Infrared film directly to slides.
By way of introduction, I have been using infrared films for scientific as
well as for fine arts applications since 1975. I have found its diversity of developmental effects obtainable fascinating with different developers. The information I have seen on this list is most useful and I would like to share some information with you about reversal directly to a black-and-white
transparency.
Kodak introduced a new and improved reversal process with the introduction of their TMax series of films several years ago. The process comes in kit form. One unique advantage of this kit is that the user can increase film contrast by adding up to 50gm sodium sulfite to the first developer. The information listed below is based upon the addition of 45 grams sodium sulfite to the first developer.
The kit costs about $28 (US) and can process up to 12 rolls of 36 exposure 35mm, 70mm or even 4x5. The kit has good instructions and once mixed will last for at least 6 weeks when stored in amber glass bottles.
There are several advantages to reverse processing. One significant advantage of a positive is the ease with which you can scan it into a computer using a film scanner or through Photo CD Rom. Two other advantages are the very high film speeds and the
lack or grain.
Please note that the film speeds listed below do not compensate for through
the lens metering systems. You will have to calibrate your system first.
Light Source Filter Film Speed (ISO, E.I.)
Daylight--------------------none-----------------------1200
Daylight--------------------#25 red---------------------640
Tungsten------------------none-----------------------2400
Tungsten------------------#25 red--------------------1200
Enjoy!
Jim Henderson
Applied Scientific Photography
74023.723@compuserve.com
From: "Rolland Elliott"
To: infrared@a1.nl
Subject: Kodak HIE as a slide Wow! Mirror at the film plane.
Date sent: Sun, 05 Mar 2000 15:36:48 EST
Send reply to: infrared@a1.nl
O.K. I finally tried it. I developed two rolls of Kodak HIE as a slide via
Kodak's TMax Reverals Kit. After looking at the slides, all I can say is, "Why
didn't I try this sooner?"
I guess I haven't tried it sooner because I hate testing film & developer
combinations and was rather skeptical of past posts that claimed a 2 to 3
stop gain in film speed. Well, after looking at my results, I can confirm
that this is true. I used Kodak HIE with an 87 filter mounted at the film
rails. I also replaced my typical film pressure plate with a mirror.
Typical daylight exposure was about 1/200 at f/11 in bright daylight with
the 87 filter. Developing it as a negative film, my typical exposure would have
been about 1/30 at f/11, about a 2 & 2/3 stops gain in speed. Very nice.
As far as using a mirror goes, I believe it increased halation slightly, but not
to any great extent; the regular pressure plate I use, is pretty reflective
already , and looks like the dull side of aluminum foil when viewed with an IR
camcorder. (many camera pressure plates that are anodized black have this
property) I'll probably leave it in the camera. Past posts on this list have
speculated that using a mirror would give you an overexposed useless image. My
testing proves this is not so.
The benefits I see are as follows:
1) increased film speed
2) I don't have the time to make many prints, so slides are the easy way
out.
3) I can display my work at the local camera club I joined during our slide
competitions. 4) Not that hard to do, since the chemistry can be used at room
temperature.
Peace Rolland Elliott
Date sent: Sun, 05 Mar 2000 20:27:10 -0700
To: infrared@a1.nl
From: Stan McQueen
Subject: Re: Kodak HIE as a slide Wow! Mirror at the film plane.
Send reply to: infrared@a1.nl
At 03:36 PM 03/05/2000 -0500, you wrote:
>O.K. I finally tried it. I developed two rolls of Kodak HIE as a slide via
>Kodak's TMax Reverals Kit. After looking at the slides, all I can say is, "Why
>didn't I try this sooner?"
>
>I guess I haven't tried it sooner because I hate testing film & developer
>combinations and was rather skeptical of past posts that claimed a 2 to 3 stop
>gain in film speed. Well, after looking at my results, I can confirm that this
>is true. I used Kodak HIE with an 87 filter mounted at the film rails. I also
>replaced my typical film pressure plate with a mirror.
Can you provide time and temperature information for the process? Also, I
guess I must have missed the discussion on using a mirror for a pressure
plate. What does that do?
Stan
=======================================
IR and other photos by Stan McQueen at http://www.smcqueen.com
From: "Rolland Elliott"
To: infrared@a1.nl
Subject: Maco IR film base compared to Kodak HIE and Antihalation layers
Date sent: Sun, 05 Mar 2000 15:15:52 EST
Send reply to: infrared@a1.nl
I've been developing Maco 820 IR and Kodak HIE as slides over the past
couple of weeks. Just wanted to post a few quick observations for anyone's
benefit.
1) When you strip off the emulsion from the Maco IR 820 you have a crystal clear
base , just like they claim. When you strip off the emulsion from Kodak HIE, you
have a crystal clear base TOO! Therefore, Maco doesn't really have any real
advantage here. In addition Maco IR is about 6 stops slower (Yes you read that
correctly, about 6 stops slower!) than HIE when both are developed using Kodak's
Tmax reversal kit. This difference in sensitivity is based on using an 87 filter
with Kodak HIE and an 89b filter with Maco 820 IR. Typical daylight exposure for
HIE is 1/100 @ f/16, for Maco 820 IR it's 1 second at f/16. Big difference!
2) Under normal light HIE has a bright green color and Maco 820 IR has a
dark blue color due to it's antihalation layer. I then looked at Maco 820 and
Kodak HIE unexposed film through my IR camcorder (with 88A filter over the
lens). Surprisingly both of them look the same, a very light gray tone. Both of
these bases allow IR light to pass freely through them. It is my conclusion
that Maco IR film's anti-halation coating is only effective for deep red
wavelengths of light, not near IR light.
Furthermore, I think the reason Kodak doesn't have an antihalation coating, is
that it wouldn't be effective in blocking IR light! Afterall these antihalation
coatings are just dyes, and many people have noted that the dyes used in darkly
colored clothes don't block IR light at all; instead of showing up dark in IR
photographs many clothes are light colored/toned. Is there a dark colored dye
out there that blocks IR light? Probably. Is there one that can economically be
used in an antihalation layer? Maybe not?
Peace Rolland Elliott
______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
Date sent: Mon, 6 Mar 2000 17:20:47 -0800 (PST)
From: Rolland Elliott
Subject: Re: Kodak HIE as a slide Wow! Mirror at the film plane
To: infrared@a1.nl
Copies to: stan@mcqueen.org
Send reply to: infrared@a1.nl
> > Well, after looking at my results, I can confirm
> > that this is true. I used Kodak HIE with an 87
> > filter mounted at the film rails. I also replaced
> > my typical film pressure plate with a mirror.
>
> Can you provide time and temperature information for
> the process? Also, I
> guess I must have missed the discussion on using a
> mirror for a pressure
> plate. What does that do?
Time and temperature were straight out of the book.
Just follow Kodak's reveral processing instructions.
Mirror seems to increase halation very slightly. One
day I'll make a comparison miror compared to black
backing paper.
Peace Rolland Elliott
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Talk to your friends online with Yahoo! Messenger.
http://im.yahoo.com
From: "Rolland Elliott"
To: infrared@a1.nl
Subject: RE: Maco IR film base compared to Kodak HIE and Antihalation layers
Date sent: Mon, 06 Mar 2000 13:12:50 EST
Send reply to: infrared@a1.nl
I thought MACO's reply to my recent post would interest people on this list,
Check it out. Peace Rolland Elliott
Dear Mr. Elliott
your eMail in regard of technical aspects of the MACO IR film has
been passed to us.
We are interested to receive any comprehensive customer feedback
directly.
The fastest way to reach us via email:
Photo@mahn.net
Also, please visit our homepage:
www.mahn.net
Therefore, we take the opportunity to comment on some technical
aspects you reported about.
Any aspects in regard of the KODAK HIE film have to be commented by
KODAK themselves.
We will comment on some of your remarks about the MACO IR820c.
Base:
Measurements in regard of minimum fog level showed that the MACO IR 820c
has an extremely low fog level of D=0.06. Much to our knowledge this is
unsurpassed and accounts for comparatively short printing times (negatives) and
delivers high projection brilliance (slides).
Antihalation:
As you compared unprocessed MACO and Kodak film, if you would
have placed them in water, you could have seen, that the water will
get a greenish color cast - this is the antihalation dye
in the stage of dissolving.
Incorporating a water soluble antihalation dye, which is coated onto
the backside of the basematerial, into the MACO IR820c
has been carried out in order to keep halation phenomena to a minimum.
Halation will affect any type of film emulsion, regardless of their
sensitization - whether orthochromatic, panchromatic or infrared.
Ratio of Resolving power / IR sensitization:
Practical tests carried out in typical pictorial as well as technical/
scientific applications showed that the MACO IR820c under different
lighting conditions such as ambient (sun), tungsten or studio flash will
deliver high overall sharpness in combination with very fine grain.
Furthermore, halation phenomena are kept to a minimum. This is especially
important in application areas where high quality recording is necessary,
such
as for criminal investigations in regard of counterfeit or forgery.
Depending on the type of camera filter being used, the incorporated
antihalation layer is also responsible for the comparatively high
resolution.
Many photographers use infrared films with deep red instead of true IR
filters.
Especially then, but of course in a.m. applications as well,
the antihalation will be a major technical advantage.
Also, it reduces the potential of camera film plate induced halation.
Film speed:
If film speed comparisons are carried out, it is important to install
a setup allowing for exact and identical testing parameters.
If you compare - compare with the same filters, the same effective
exposure values etc.
The MACO IR820c has an effective speed of ISO 100/21° without filter.
Depending on the type of filter used, film speed will drop by far.
The statement you made in regard of our film's speed vs. Kodak's lacks
major information (you mentioned different filters; type 87 vs 89b)
Direct visual comparisons between Kodak HIE and MACO IR820c show a
big difference in terms of graininess in favor to the MACO IR820c.
This is perhaps a hint that the KODAK HIE has a higher effective
speed than officially stated.
Of course this accounts for shorter possible exposure settings.
Reversal processing:
It is a known fact, that films reverse processed in Kodak's reversal
kit will deliver some kind of color cast !
In order to achieve best results in reversal processing by using
the KODAK reversal kit, it is important to carry out an optical
reversal (by light). This showed to deliver superior results
without the strong color cast you have encountered.
Since November 1999, practical tests have proven that all our
crystal clear polyester based films suited for reversal processing
(MACO ORT25, successor to the Agfaortho 25; PO100c, high res.
normal grade and our IR820c) will not show any strong color cast
if optical reversal is applied.
Moreover, the second problem in regard of reversal processing is
the fixing stage - we recommend to use LABOR PARTNER LP-FIX SUPRA
with high speed additive.
However, from our friends at TETENAL we have the information, that
a new reversal kit with optical reversal is currently under preparation.
It is supposed to be available in second half of April.
Best regards,
Markus Kohorst
MACO PHOTO PRODUCTS
6/3/2000+++
From: "Hellfire"
To:
Subject: HIE reversal
Date: Thu, 14 Feb 2002 02:12:28 -0700
I noticed the article on your site about HIE reversal processing, and I
am taking up your offer to proofread it. Mainly fixed up the poor
translation, and one of the chemicals was wrong (I think it was the
Potassium Sulfide). Anyway, the file is attatched as plain text.
-Regards, Matt
"When you come to a fork in the road, take it." -Yogi Berra
"I should have been a plumber." -Albert Einstein
Why drown in .QWKsand when you can ride the Blue Wave?
>>>>>>>-->>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>-->>>>>>>>
>>>
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Reversal processing for Kodak HIE in D-67
Written by Harald Leban (Sep 1997)
Revised by Matthew Saunier (Feb 2002)
Note: All formulas make 500mL of solution.
First Developer:
D-67 Developer
480mL Distilled Water
2.5g Metol
45g Sodium Sulphide (Anhydrous)
5g Hydroquinone
25g Sodium Carbonate (Anhydrous)
2.5g Potassium Bromide
2.5mL Potassium Thiocyanate (50% solution)
2.5mL Potassium Iodide (1% solution)
Agfa Neutol Based
495mL Agfa Neutol (1+9)
2.5mL Potassium Thiocyanate 50%
2.5mL Potassium Iodide 1% solution
Bleach Bath:
Variation A
490mL Distilled Water
5g Cupric Sulphate
10mL Sulphuric Acid (98%)
Variation B
490mL Distilled Water
10g Cupric Sulphate
25g Potassium Hydrogen Sulfate
Variation C
490mL Distilled Water
5g Potassium Dichromate
10mL Sulphuric Acid (98%)
Hypo Clearing Solution:
45g Sodium Sulphide (Anhydrous)
500mL Distilled Water
Second Developer:
Use a highly active developer such as Dektol. Any developer containing
Hydroquinone should work.
Fixer
Any fixer should work.
Processing times at 24° Celsius (75° Fahrenheit)
First Developer 10-12min
Bleach 3-4min
Rinse 3min
Hypo clear 3min
Rinse 3min
Second exposure 2-3min
For second exposure, expose to a strong light source while rinsing. It
is not possible to overexpose the film at this point, but underexposure
will give a solarizing effect.
Second developer 3min
Fixer 3min
Final rinse 15min
The effective film speed depends on two factors:
A. The scenery you are photographing.
B. The first developer you use.
Through a Red 25 filter, the average obtainable exposure index is EI
1600-3200. Due to the fact that 99% of TTL light meters do not pick up
infrared light, you should bracket by two stops in either direction
(i.e. if your light meter reads f/11, take a series of exposures at
f/5.6, f/8, f/11, f/16, and f/22). Low contrast scenes will tend to
have much more infrared illumination that is indicated on the meter.
In regards to the first developer, normally D-67 is used, but the
Neutol based solution may be used to decrease the effective film speed
by one-half to one-third stop with the same development times. This is
due to the fact that the D-67 developer is made highly active by the
presence of Hydroquinone and Metol.
Appendix:
Potassium Thiocyanate KSCN
Potassium Iodide KI
Sodium Sulphite Na2SO3
Cupric Sulfate CuSO4
Potassium Hydrogen Sulfate KHSO4
Potassium Bromide KBr
Sulphuric Acid H2SO4
Potassium Dichromate K2Cr2O7
Good luck and take care with the chemistry.
Harold (Harry) Leban
hlebanphot@compuserve.com
Matthew Saunier
mattsaunier@starband.net
From: "Willem-Jan Markerink"
To: infrared@a1.nl
Date sent: Sat, 22 Jun 2002 12:50:45 +0100
Subject: Neg->slide reversal by Ilford
Send reply to: infrared@a1.nl
Not sure if this version to turn b&w neg's into slides is already
known on this list:
http://www.ilford.com/html/us_english/pdf/reversalproc.pdf
Anyone tried?
--
Bye,
Willem-Jan Markerink
The desire to understand
is sometimes far less intelligent than
the inability to understand
[note: 'a-one' & 'en-el'!]
From: "Jon Witsell"
To: infrared@a1.nl
Subject: Re: Neg->slide reversal by Ilford
Date sent: Sun, 23 Jun 2002 04:53:02 +0000
Send reply to: infrared@a1.nl
>Date: Sat, 22 Jun 2002 12:50:45 +0100
>From: "Willem-Jan Markerink"
>Subject: Neg->slide reversal by Ilford
>
>Not sure if this version to turn b&w neg's into slides is already
>known on this list:
>
>http://www.ilford.com/html/us_english/pdf/reversalproc.pdf
>
>Anyone tried?
Hmmm interesting. I haven't tried this kit, but I have used the Kodak Tmax kit
with HIE. It works well. I took one of my HIE "slides" in to have it scanned and
the scanner operator took one look at it and said "wow...".
I just picked up some Maco and I'm going to try it here:
http://www.dr5.com/main.html
He can do HIE/Maco, but says he hasn't had time to test Konica.
Jon
From: "Neil Malton"
To:
Subject: HIE as a slide
Date: Sat, 24 Jan 2004 21:12:57 -0000
Hi WJ
I've used the formula for developing Kodak HIE as a slide film and it works
fine. I use Neutol developer and dichromate bleach and it works exactly as
stated.
I have attached an example of the results
Neil Malton
From: Willem-Jan Markerink
To: "Neil Malton"
Subject: Re: HIE as a slide
Date: Sat, 24 Jan 2004 22:33:06 +0100
On 24 Jan 2004 at 21:12, Neil Malton wrote:
> Hi WJ
>
> I've used the formula for developing Kodak HIE as a slide film and it
> works fine. I use Neutol developer and dichromate bleach and it works
> exactly as stated. I have attached an example of the results :- Neil
> Malton
Hi Malton,
You mean you used the formula as shown in an article on my homepage?
Exact same spec's/dilutions/times?
And what was your effective exposure index?
(or average shutterspeed/aperture)
Btw, in case you were not aware of it, see attachment for
info/instructions about the Infrared Photography Mailinglist.
In case you have more samples online somewhere, let me know, and I'll
add your site to my list of gallery links.
Attachments:
D:\PEGASUS\IR_POINT.TXT
From: "Neil Malton"
To:
Subject: Re: HIE as a slide
Date: Mon, 26 Jan 2004 20:12:12 -0000
----- Original Message -----
From: "Willem-Jan Markerink"
Sent: Saturday, January 24, 2004 9:33 PM
> On 24 Jan 2004 at 21:12, Neil Malton wrote:
>
> > Hi WJ
> >
> > I've used the formula for developing Kodak HIE as a slide film and it
> > works fine. I use Neutol developer and dichromate bleach and it works
> > exactly as stated. I have attached an example of the results :- Neil
> > Malton
>
> Hi Malton,
>
> You mean you used the formula as shown in an article on my homepage?
> Exact same spec's/dilutions/times?
> And what was your effective exposure index?
> (or average shutterspeed/aperture)
>
> Btw, in case you were not aware of it, see attachment for
> info/instructions about the Infrared Photography Mailinglist.
>
> In case you have more samples online somewhere, let me know, and I'll
> add your site to my list of gallery links.
The attached .txt file is the recipe I use for developing Kodak HIE and it
works fine, although I have lately bought a digital camera and have started
using that for infra red pictures. Thanks for the offer of putting a link,
but I do not have my own web site. Bye
Neil
FIRST DEVELOPER
Agfa Neutol (1+9) 495.0ml
Potassium Thiocyanate (50%aq) 2.5ml
Potassium Iodide (1%aq) 2.5ml
BLEACH BATH
Potassium Dichromate 10g
Sulphuric acid (98%) 20ml
Deionised water 980ml
CLEARING BATH
Sodium Sulphite 90g
Deionised water to 1 litre
DEVELOPING TIMES AT 24?C
First Developer 10 - 12 min
Bleach 3 - 4 min
Flush (Deionised water) 3 min
Clear 3 min
Flush (Deionised water) 3 min
Second exposure to light
(High intensity - Sunlight, Halogen lamp) 2 - 3 min
Second Developer (Agfa Neutol) 3 min
Fixer 3 min
Final rinse 15 min
This should give a film speed of Approx 1600ASA but bracket exposures.
If you have any question, remark, comment, want to share some
philosophy or just want to express your opinion about these pages,
feel free to send email to:
w.j.markerink @ a1.nl
Back to main page & table of contents:
Main Page