Nabble - Infrared Photography

Re: Happy New Year - New IR Film? Kodak Reconsidering?!?

2008-01-01T09:39:22Z

On 1 Jan 2008 at 8:21, Jimmy Williams wrote:

> Greetings and Happy New Year!
>
> I have been watching the thread for the Save HIE
> campaign at APUG grow and many interesting posts have
> turned up in the past couple of weeks.
>
> One member, PHOTO ENGINEER, in Rochester, posted:
> "As for Kodak, rumors I get from within EK say that
> Perez has begun to backpedal a bit on analog after
> seeing some of the results of the survey of
> professionals, and the problems with storing digital
> archivally. He is also impressed by the income from
> film, as it is selling well.
>
> "So, stand by and hold onto your hats, there may be a
> change in the wind at EK. The story is that something
> is up!"
>
>
> Robert Vonk, owner of Fotohuis in Netherlands, posted:
> ".........Due to the fact Kodak has discontinued HIE
> our Fotohuis has organized >all int. Partners,
> Rollei/Maco (Germany)- Foma Bohemia S.R.O. (Czech
> Republic) - Moersch Photochemie (Germany) etc. to
> introduce a new high sensitive IR film on ALL formats.
> The risk for such a film project is high, it's
> difficult to make and more multi-language technicians
> are involved. However two main EU manufacturers have
> this technology, so we will not ask Kodak for
> assistance."
>
> I emailed Robert and asked if he could share more
> detailed information and his reply:
> "Gevaert (the former R&D lab from Agfa Photo) in
> Belgium is able to do it and Foma (Czech Republic) is
> also able to make these kind of films but their
> packing line is not able to wrap up for the 120 roll
> films. Ilford/Harman is in Europe the only company who
> can make 100% nice 120 I.R. film packings and
> therefore Ilford/Harman is making the 120 roll film
> packing for the Rollei/Maco I.R. 820/400 120 roll
> film.
>
> "If our company decide to let make an 850nm-900nm high
> sensitive I.R. film it will be together with the
> Rollei/Maco company because it's useless to compete
> them in this small market. It must be an IMPROVEMENT
> for their existing I.R. film and such a project is
> carrying high risks.

I have been talking to Mr. Schröder from Maco about taking over from HIE since
PhotoKina 2004, possibly even 2002; first in the context of 120/220/320[*] &
70mm, later as complete backup, even for 35mm HIE.

The analysis why, according to him, it can't be done in any feasible way, is
here:

http://www.a1.nl/phomepages/markerink/ir_infrared-sensitive-component.txt

(note the slightly different main-directory currently, 'phomepages' vs the
previous 'phomepag'....provider screwed up in a restructuring session of
websites, putting the oldest directories/customers back on the wrong place;
stay tuned)

[*] '320', only film, no paper backing, is my favorite since the film requires
darkloading (so hardly any need for paper, neither in the camera nor in the
cannister), and without paper backing, one can put more film onto the reel,
requiring less darkload sessions (and yes, on some camera's, like the Noblex
150, you can easily upgrade from the default 120-only to 220, and also to
320....:))
(you loose one shot inbetween, while the counter=film-winder goes around for
the next set of 6 images)

> "Whatever the intention is there and all partners are
> searching for other industrial areas to sell such a
> new production I.R. film because only the few amateurs
> worldwide (even on APUG) have not a too much impact on
> overall sales worldwide."

The moment the industrial/agriculture/geographic/academic world switches over
to digital, it won't be feasible any longer for the microscopic small market of
art/amateur....at least not in the current economy of scale & chemics....see
above URL.
If a new chemical/method is found, all possibilities are open of course....even
film costing 1/10 what it costs now, if it can also produced somewhere in China
or India....;))

The only alternative left, IMO, is an infrequent production run of this film,
and people storing the stuff in the fridge themselves....once every 1/2/5
years.....but for any company, that would border on philantropical management,
not economic....;((

>
> So, we may have a future for HIE, either from Kodak
> and/or EU manufacturers! It will be interesting to see
> which way the wind blows.

Back then, I was the only one bugging Mr. Schroeder, in a qualitative context
(other/better film).
Now it is up to others to provide the quantitative bugging, showing him that
there *is* a market, large enough for the necessary economy of scale.

PS: don't waste too much time, as Mr. Schroeder has already plans where to
settle after his retirement in a few years, and that wasn't near the
factory....;((
(he doesn't own the company, Mr. Mahn does, IIRC)
(core company is 'Hans O. Mahn', abbreviated to MaCo, IIRC)
(oh well, at least they don't have a notation on the stock exchange market, so
they wouldn't be forced into the same lunatic company strategies as Kodak)

> Whatever happens, I sincerely wish all a wonderful new
> year with great success, prosperity and happiness.
>
>
> Best Wishes in 2008!
> James C. Williams
>

--
Bye,

Willem-Jan Markerink

The desire to understand
is sometimes far less intelligent than
the inability to understand

<w.j.markerink@...>
[note: 'a-one' & 'en-el'!]

*
****
*******
******************************************************
* To remove yourself from this list, send: *
* UNSUBSCRIBE INFRARED *
* to *
* MAJORDOMO@... *
*----------------------------------------------------*
* For the IR-FAQ, IR-Gallery and heaps of links: *
* http://www.a1.nl/phomepag/markerink/mainpage.htm *
******************************************************

Happy New Year - New IR Film? Kodak Reconsidering?!?

2008-01-01T08:21:50Z

Greetings and Happy New Year!

I have been watching the thread for the Save HIE
campaign at APUG grow and many interesting posts have
turned up in the past couple of weeks.

One member, PHOTO ENGINEER, in Rochester, posted:
"As for Kodak, rumors I get from within EK say that
Perez has begun to backpedal a bit on analog after
seeing some of the results of the survey of
professionals, and the problems with storing digital
archivally. He is also impressed by the income from
film, as it is selling well.

"So, stand by and hold onto your hats, there may be a
change in the wind at EK. The story is that something
is up!"

Robert Vonk, owner of Fotohuis in Netherlands, posted:
".........Due to the fact Kodak has discontinued HIE
our Fotohuis has organized >all int. Partners,
Rollei/Maco (Germany)- Foma Bohemia S.R.O. (Czech
Republic) - Moersch Photochemie (Germany) etc. to
introduce a new high sensitive IR film on ALL formats.
The risk for such a film project is high, it's
difficult to make and more multi-language technicians
are involved. However two main EU manufacturers have
this technology, so we will not ask Kodak for
assistance."

I emailed Robert and asked if he could share more
detailed information and his reply:
"Gevaert (the former R&D lab from Agfa Photo) in
Belgium is able to do it and Foma (Czech Republic) is
also able to make these kind of films but their
packing line is not able to wrap up for the 120 roll
films. Ilford/Harman is in Europe the only company who
can make 100% nice 120 I.R. film packings and
therefore Ilford/Harman is making the 120 roll film
packing for the Rollei/Maco I.R. 820/400 120 roll
film.

"If our company decide to let make an 850nm-900nm high
sensitive I.R. film it will be together with the
Rollei/Maco company because it's useless to compete
them in this small market. It must be an IMPROVEMENT
for their existing I.R. film and such a project is
carrying high risks.

"Whatever the intention is there and all partners are
searching for other industrial areas to sell such a
new production I.R. film because only the few amateurs
worldwide (even on APUG) have not a too much impact on
overall sales worldwide."

So, we may have a future for HIE, either from Kodak
and/or EU manufacturers! It will be interesting to see
which way the wind blows.

Whatever happens, I sincerely wish all a wonderful new
year with great success, prosperity and happiness.

Best Wishes in 2008!
James C. Williams

____________________________________________________________________________________
Never miss a thing. Make Yahoo your home page.
http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs
*
****
*******
******************************************************
* To remove yourself from this list, send: *
* UNSUBSCRIBE INFRARED *
* to *
* MAJORDOMO@... *
*----------------------------------------------------*
* For the IR-FAQ, IR-Gallery and heaps of links: *
* http://www.a1.nl/phomepag/markerink/mainpage.htm *
******************************************************

Re: HIE Email Campaign Update

2007-12-19T05:20:01Z

--- Jimmy Williams <nighthawkjw@...> wrote:

>
> > Kodak never really made a profit from their infrared
> > film (this comes from both
> > people I know who used to be Kodak photographers -
> > one did most of his work in
> > the infrared section). Their primary monies came
> > from the government,
> > specifically the Treasury Department (this is why it
> > was so incredibly
> > difficult to get their 8X10" infrared film - the
> > 4X5" version was cut down from
> > the 8X10" stock). The consumer end of things was
> > mostly an afterthought that
> > in itself lost money, but was intended to get
> > customers to use their other
> > products.
>
> It sounds as if you know first hand about Kodak's
> profits from IR film. I am familiar with marketing
> strategies such as Ford selling the Escort for near
> cost simply to keep a large presence of the Ford brand
> on the road. It seems very unlikely that such a unique
> item as HIE would serve such a purpose - otherwise it
> would be in all Ritz/Wolf Camera shops, instead of
> being a special order item.

James -

Actually, I used to be able to get rolls at Ritz, although that was 10-15 years
ago. The one in Annapolis had a refrigerator where they kept, mostly, slide
film, and on several occasions when I had run out, I could get a quick roll or
two there (at a dear cost).

Your best shot at this is, as you say, to remind Kodak of their unique position
in this particular category - nobody else makes film like HIE/HSI. It seems to
me that there could be an outside shot at getting them to do a single run each
year, similar to Konica, to ensure that the unique results can be maintained.

Cheers -

george

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

Eclectic Mix: http://EclecticMix.com
One Minute How-To: http://OneMinuteHowTo.com
DRiP Investing: http://DRiPInvesting.org

Handmade Photographic Images: http://www.GLSmyth.com - Blog: GLSmyth.Wordpress.com

*
****
*******
******************************************************
* To remove yourself from this list, send: *
* UNSUBSCRIBE INFRARED *
* to *
* MAJORDOMO@... *
*----------------------------------------------------*
* For the IR-FAQ, IR-Gallery and heaps of links: *
* http://www.a1.nl/phomepag/markerink/mainpage.htm *
******************************************************

Re: HIE Email Campaign Update

2007-12-18T10:30:18Z

At 11:12 AM Tuesday12/18/2007, Jimmy Williams wrote:

> > Kodak never really made a profit from their infrared
> > film (this comes from both
> > people I know who used to be Kodak photographers -
> > one did most of his work in
> > the infrared section). Their primary monies came
> > from the government,
> > specifically the Treasury Department (this is why it
> > was so incredibly
> > difficult to get their 8X10" infrared film - the
> > 4X5" version was cut down from
> > the 8X10" stock). The consumer end of things was
> > mostly an afterthought that
> > in itself lost money, but was intended to get
> > customers to use their other
> > products.
>
>It sounds as if you know first hand about Kodak's
>profits from IR film. I am familiar with marketing
>strategies such as Ford selling the Escort for near
>cost simply to keep a large presence of the Ford brand
>on the road. It seems very unlikely that such a unique
>item as HIE would serve such a purpose - otherwise it
>would be in all Ritz/Wolf Camera shops, instead of
>being a special order item.
>
>I don't doubt the govt contracts. Lots of marijuana
>patches were discovered using this film!
>
>
> > Best of luck with the campaign, but I would be
> > absolutely shocked if it
> > succeeded - on the one hand I'm rather amazed that
> > the film has been available
> > this long, but on the other hand look how long they
> > supported disc film).
>
>Yeah, thanks... I think?!?
>
> >
> > The bottom line is that when you look at this -
> > http://tinyurl.com/ywrzo7 - you
> > see that they have little choice in the matter.
> > Because it is a public
> > business, the owners (shareholders) need to see a
> > return on their investment,
> > and management has been very slow to respond. That
> > is not how a successful
> > company is supposed to work.
>
>Yes, I agree... the almighty dollar is all that really
>matters. What I am hoping to impress upon Kodak is
>that they were responsible for making photography a
>popular art form for the masses. Now, that film has
>become less popular, Kodak needs to shoulder some
>responsibility for preserving the art form of fine-art
>film photography. The cultural impact of losing an art
>form is what is at stake, whether it be infrared film
>or any film. The important point is what happens when
>an art medium ceases to be available and the impact it
>has on the art community.
>
> >
> > So I hope that I'm wrong and they change their mind,
> > and if there is any chance
> > for that then you are working on the right path to
> > make it so.
>
>Thanks, George. Don't get me wrong - I'm not trying to
>butt heads with you. I only want people to keep a
>positive outlook on this issue. I am continuing to get
>media exposure for this cause and feel it is an
>important issue, far beyond wanting the film for my
>own work. I sincerely believe if Kodak wanted to
>continue to make the film, they would find a way to do
>it and at least break even with it. Maybe that isn't
>enough, so the alternative will be to find a new maker
>for HIE and hope Kodak will sell the formula.
>
>I have butted heads with some folks over at APUG that
>were nothing more than devil's advocates. My feelings
>about this list are that you members are the ones that
>are passionate about IR photography and many of you
>still use film or used it prior to going digital. You
>can understand why I want to try to do something about
>this, so I consider this a home base. I welcome all
>discussion on this issue and hope that I can count on
>you all for some support in the weeks or months to
>come until the future of this film has been assured.
>
>Any of you who have any press contacts that you can
>share with me, this is a vital source of exposure
>which I sincerely believe will cause Kodak to
>reconsider. Any of you who know others using film, be
>it IR or not, this should be important to them as
>well, so please pass the word along.
>
>I truly appreciate every bit of support. This effort
>is for us as well as for a future generation of
>photographers who may choose to create beautiful
>images using this film.
>
>
>Sincerely,
>James C. Williams
>

I for one love HIE and support the campaign to retain it in some fashion.
[For me, reaching 900 nanometers without an anti-halation layer is
way better than digital and post-processing.]
(If George's e-Bay auction for the Konica 120 IR film is any
indication, some folks are willing to pay a lot per frame for really
nice IR film.)

In addition to appealing to Kodak's "art community conscience," or to
an alternative
lower-overhead manufacturer (i.e., maybe where labor costs are less
but high tech is available, like India or China),
why not also consider appealing to patrons of the arts. Under the
current US Administration that seems to be against federal support of
the arts and against "corporate welfare," it's unlikely, but maybe if
we can hold out to January 2009, The National Endowment for the Arts
or other programs (maybe even a private foundation) would actually
consider funding a rescue effort for such a unique artistic tool.

Just a thought.
Elton K.

*
****
*******
******************************************************
* To remove yourself from this list, send: *
* UNSUBSCRIBE INFRARED *
* to *
* MAJORDOMO@... *
*----------------------------------------------------*
* For the IR-FAQ, IR-Gallery and heaps of links: *
* http://www.a1.nl/phomepag/markerink/mainpage.htm *
******************************************************

Re: HIE Email Campaign Update

2007-12-18T09:12:42Z

> Kodak never really made a profit from their infrared
> film (this comes from both
> people I know who used to be Kodak photographers -
> one did most of his work in
> the infrared section). Their primary monies came
> from the government,
> specifically the Treasury Department (this is why it
> was so incredibly
> difficult to get their 8X10" infrared film - the
> 4X5" version was cut down from
> the 8X10" stock). The consumer end of things was
> mostly an afterthought that
> in itself lost money, but was intended to get
> customers to use their other
> products.

It sounds as if you know first hand about Kodak's
profits from IR film. I am familiar with marketing
strategies such as Ford selling the Escort for near
cost simply to keep a large presence of the Ford brand
on the road. It seems very unlikely that such a unique
item as HIE would serve such a purpose - otherwise it
would be in all Ritz/Wolf Camera shops, instead of
being a special order item.

I don't doubt the govt contracts. Lots of marijuana
patches were discovered using this film!

> Best of luck with the campaign, but I would be
> absolutely shocked if it
> succeeded - on the one hand I'm rather amazed that
> the film has been available
> this long, but on the other hand look how long they
> supported disc film).

Yeah, thanks... I think?!?

>
> The bottom line is that when you look at this -
> http://tinyurl.com/ywrzo7 - you
> see that they have little choice in the matter.
> Because it is a public
> business, the owners (shareholders) need to see a
> return on their investment,
> and management has been very slow to respond. That
> is not how a successful
> company is supposed to work.

Yes, I agree... the almighty dollar is all that really
matters. What I am hoping to impress upon Kodak is
that they were responsible for making photography a
popular art form for the masses. Now, that film has
become less popular, Kodak needs to shoulder some
responsibility for preserving the art form of fine-art
film photography. The cultural impact of losing an art
form is what is at stake, whether it be infrared film
or any film. The important point is what happens when
an art medium ceases to be available and the impact it
has on the art community.

>
> So I hope that I'm wrong and they change their mind,
> and if there is any chance
> for that then you are working on the right path to
> make it so.

Thanks, George. Don't get me wrong - I'm not trying to
butt heads with you. I only want people to keep a
positive outlook on this issue. I am continuing to get
media exposure for this cause and feel it is an
important issue, far beyond wanting the film for my
own work. I sincerely believe if Kodak wanted to
continue to make the film, they would find a way to do
it and at least break even with it. Maybe that isn't
enough, so the alternative will be to find a new maker
for HIE and hope Kodak will sell the formula.

I have butted heads with some folks over at APUG that
were nothing more than devil's advocates. My feelings
about this list are that you members are the ones that
are passionate about IR photography and many of you
still use film or used it prior to going digital. You
can understand why I want to try to do something about
this, so I consider this a home base. I welcome all
discussion on this issue and hope that I can count on
you all for some support in the weeks or months to
come until the future of this film has been assured.

Any of you who have any press contacts that you can
share with me, this is a vital source of exposure
which I sincerely believe will cause Kodak to
reconsider. Any of you who know others using film, be
it IR or not, this should be important to them as
well, so please pass the word along.

I truly appreciate every bit of support. This effort
is for us as well as for a future generation of
photographers who may choose to create beautiful
images using this film.

Sincerely,
James C. Williams

____________________________________________________________________________________
Never miss a thing. Make Yahoo your home page.
http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs
*
****
*******
******************************************************
* To remove yourself from this list, send: *
* UNSUBSCRIBE INFRARED *
* to *
* MAJORDOMO@... *
*----------------------------------------------------*
* For the IR-FAQ, IR-Gallery and heaps of links: *
* http://www.a1.nl/phomepag/markerink/mainpage.htm *
******************************************************

Re: HIE Email Campaign Update

2007-12-17T10:29:27Z

--- Jimmy Williams <nighthawkjw@...> wrote:

[clip]

> I can only offer conjecture, since Kodak's responses
> to my questions - when answered - are specifically
> vague. I believe that there are financial problems at
> the root here. They site the manufacturing costs as a
> burden, it has to be handled in absolute darkness, so
> must also be manufactured and packaged in the dark. I
> also imagine they have a programmed production method
> that would be costly to alter, so rather than retool
> the production line for HIE, they chose to abandon it.
> This means workers have lost jobs, as well as
> distributors having fewer products to offer. It
> affects more than just us photographers.

Kodak never really made a profit from their infrared film (this comes from both
people I know who used to be Kodak photographers - one did most of his work in
the infrared section). Their primary monies came from the government,
specifically the Treasury Department (this is why it was so incredibly
difficult to get their 8X10" infrared film - the 4X5" version was cut down from
the 8X10" stock). The consumer end of things was mostly an afterthought that
in itself lost money, but was intended to get customers to use their other
products.

Best of luck with the campaign, but I would be absolutely shocked if it
succeeded - on the one hand I'm rather amazed that the film has been available
this long, but on the other hand look how long they supported disc film).

The bottom line is that when you look at this - http://tinyurl.com/ywrzo7 - you
see that they have little choice in the matter. Because it is a public
business, the owners (shareholders) need to see a return on their investment,
and management has been very slow to respond. That is not how a successful
company is supposed to work.

So I hope that I'm wrong and they change their mind, and if there is any chance
for that then you are working on the right path to make it so.

Cheers -

george

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

Eclectic Mix: http://EclecticMix.com
One Minute How-To: http://OneMinuteHowTo.com
DRiP Investing: http://DRiPInvesting.org

Handmade Photographic Images: http://www.GLSmyth.com - Blog: GLSmyth.Wordpress.com

*
****
*******
******************************************************
* To remove yourself from this list, send: *
* UNSUBSCRIBE INFRARED *
* to *
* MAJORDOMO@... *
*----------------------------------------------------*
* For the IR-FAQ, IR-Gallery and heaps of links: *
* http://www.a1.nl/phomepag/markerink/mainpage.htm *
******************************************************

Re: HIE Email Campaign Update

2007-12-15T06:09:12Z

> I think that it is a great idea. We shouldn't just
> sit idly and not
> let the providers of our tools know how we feel
> about the changes
> that they make in their product lines. With any
> luck, it might
> impact the timing of HIE's inevitable demise. That
> being said...

The reason I decided to try the campaign is that I
would regret not doing something and moving on. Too
many people simply accept decisions thrust upon them
with complacency and apathy. I am standing up and
saying "KEEP MAKING THIS FILM", not just for my
benefit, but for Simon Marsden, Arthur Drooker and the
hundreds of other talented artists using HIE.

> >I am sure that their intentions are to try to get
> me to stop this campaign,
>
> I doubt it. Do you think it embarrasses them? HIE
> is either
> economically viable (from Kodak or someone else) or
> it isn't. Either
> Kodak has misjudged demand, or it hasn't. I really
> doubt that they
> are annoyed by anyone telling them that they still
> want the product,
> either individually or as a public group effort.

I can only offer conjecture, since Kodak's responses
to my questions - when answered - are specifically
vague. I believe that there are financial problems at
the root here. They site the manufacturing costs as a
burden, it has to be handled in absolute darkness, so
must also be manufactured and packaged in the dark. I
also imagine they have a programmed production method
that would be costly to alter, so rather than retool
the production line for HIE, they chose to abandon it.
This means workers have lost jobs, as well as
distributors having fewer products to offer. It
affects more than just us photographers.

Furthermore, there was a changing of the guard in the
Film Products Group this past October. I suspect that
the new Execs had to do something to clean house and
improve revenues for their product lines, dropping
those products that were not showing enough profit.
It's all about money, statistics and impressions.

>
> >If Picasso had been told by the manufacturer of his
> favorite blue
> >paint (the BLUE PERIOD paint!) that they were not
> going to make it
> >anymore, what would he have done?
>
> He would have done the exact same thing as if they
> had never made it
> in the first place. He would have done something
> different. It
> might even have been better, but without omniscient
> knowledge of
> alternate timelines, there is no way to know.

I'm not gonna touch this one!

>
> I am not saying we should go down without a fight.
> Quite the
> contrary, actually. But we need to keep things in
> perspective.

Thanks for checking my perspective. I do welcome all
input, negative and postive. While I am trying to
maintain a positive attitude to persevere in the face
of the enormous task of influencing Kodak, I am not
without a realistic perspective and the idea that it
might fail. If people think it won't work and don't
email Kodak because of that, then they can't say they
tried. I am trying, and I believe something good WILL
COME OF IT!

~JCW

____________________________________________________________________________________
Never miss a thing. Make Yahoo your home page.
http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs
*
****
*******
******************************************************
* To remove yourself from this list, send: *
* UNSUBSCRIBE INFRARED *
* to *
* MAJORDOMO@... *
*----------------------------------------------------*
* For the IR-FAQ, IR-Gallery and heaps of links: *
* http://www.a1.nl/phomepag/markerink/mainpage.htm *
******************************************************

Re: HIE Email Campaign Update

2007-12-14T15:12:46Z

At 08:22 AM 12/14/2007 -0800, Jimmy Williams <nighthawkjw@...> wrote:
>The email campaign to save Kodak HIE-135 infrared film began here,
>and I am happy to say it is continuing.

I think that it is a great idea. We shouldn't just sit idly and not
let the providers of our tools know how we feel about the changes
that they make in their product lines. With any luck, it might
impact the timing of HIE's inevitable demise. That being said...

<snip>

>This statement does not in any way dissuade me from continuing the campaign.

Good.

>I am sure that their intentions are to try to get me to stop this campaign,

I doubt it. Do you think it embarrasses them? HIE is either
economically viable (from Kodak or someone else) or it isn't. Either
Kodak has misjudged demand, or it hasn't. I really doubt that they
are annoyed by anyone telling them that they still want the product,
either individually or as a public group effort.

>If Picasso had been told by the manufacturer of his favorite blue
>paint (the BLUE PERIOD paint!) that they were not going to make it
>anymore, what would he have done?

He would have done the exact same thing as if they had never made it
in the first place. He would have done something different. It
might even have been better, but without omniscient knowledge of
alternate timelines, there is no way to know.

I am not saying we should go down without a fight. Quite the
contrary, actually. But we need to keep things in perspective.

--
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.5.503 / Virus Database: 269.17.2/1184 - Release Date: 12/14/2007 11:29 AM

*
****
*******
******************************************************
* To remove yourself from this list, send: *
* UNSUBSCRIBE INFRARED *
* to *
* MAJORDOMO@... *
*----------------------------------------------------*
* For the IR-FAQ, IR-Gallery and heaps of links: *
* http://www.a1.nl/phomepag/markerink/mainpage.htm *
******************************************************

HIE Email Campaign Update

2007-12-14T08:22:04Z

The email campaign to save Kodak HIE-135 infrared film
began here, and I am happy to say it is continuing.

Thanks to Simon Marsden who shared a contact at
Amateur Photographer Magazine in UK, an article
appeared on their online version Wednesday, 12
December and they will publish an article covering the
campaign in their printed magazine as well.
http://www.amateurphotographer.co.uk/

Likewise, thanks to Jennifer Calais Smith in NYC, who
shared a contact at PDN magazine, who interviewed me
yesterday for an article that will appear soon in
their online magazine, and I will post the date for
that ASAP.
http://www.pdnonline.com/pdn/index.jsp

Now for the bad news, Kodak have issued a statement:
"While we very much appreciate the correspondence
we've received from some photographers who use our
infrared film and would like to be able to purchase it
in 2008 and beyond, the fact is the decline in use of
infrared film has been so substantial over the years
that it is no longer practical for Kodak to continue
to manufacture the film given the extremely low demand
and volume, the age of the product formulations and
the complexity of the processes involved. Infrared
film will be available through the end of 2007."

This statement does not in any way dissuade me from
continuing the campaign. I am sure that their
intentions are to try to get me to stop this campaign,
but I feel more determined than ever to cause a
positive outcome for the future of HIE infrared film.
Whether it is that Kodak reconsider and continue
making it, or if they choose to hand the emulsion
formula to one of the other manufacturers, either
would be good - my preference being that Kodak think
in terms of finding a way to manufacture the film and
market it in a profitable way.

So, my message to you photographers impacted by this
issue, is to keep positive. I expect further exposure,
bringing more impact to the campaign. Any and all of
you who have lists of fellow photographers to send the
message to, do so now and generate more emails.

Also, let us consider this a banner for all film
photographers for the fight to keep the films we have
and want in the future. Film photography never need be
in jeopardy if we who use film make it an important
part of the art form of photography. If Picasso had
been told by the manufacturer of his favorite blue
paint (the BLUE PERIOD paint!) that they were not
going to make it anymore, what would he have done?
Find your inner Picasso and stand up for the film you
use. Contact the manufacturers now and express your
gratitude for it. People make decisions regarding
these choices and people can be influenced, which is
the heart of my campaign.

Sincerely,
James C. Williams

____________________________________________________________________________________
Never miss a thing. Make Yahoo your home page.
http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs
*
****
*******
******************************************************
* To remove yourself from this list, send: *
* UNSUBSCRIBE INFRARED *
* to *
* MAJORDOMO@... *
*----------------------------------------------------*
* For the IR-FAQ, IR-Gallery and heaps of links: *
* http://www.a1.nl/phomepag/markerink/mainpage.htm *
******************************************************

Coverage of Email Campaign to Save HIE-135

2007-12-12T10:06:49Z

http://www.amateurphotographer.co.uk/

Amateur Photographer Magazine have covered the
campaign and it is the top item of their "Latest
News".

--
Sincerely,
James C. Williams

Photographer specializing in infrared photography.

Online Galleries:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/nighthawkjw/sets/

http://photo.net/photos/James%20C.%20Williams

____________________________________________________________________________________
Be a better friend, newshound, and
know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now. http://mobile.yahoo.com/;_ylt=Ahu06i62sR8HDtDypao8Wcj9tAcJ

*
****
*******
******************************************************
* To remove yourself from this list, send: *
* UNSUBSCRIBE INFRARED *
* to *
* MAJORDOMO@... *
*----------------------------------------------------*
* For the IR-FAQ, IR-Gallery and heaps of links: *
* http://www.a1.nl/phomepag/markerink/mainpage.htm *
******************************************************

Infrared Film Available

2007-12-12T05:35:49Z

In case there is any interest, I have placed some of my infrared film on sale
at eBay. All film has been in my freezer since purchase.

100+ feet of HIE - http://tinyurl.com/2mzy6s
10 Rolls of Konica Infrared Film - http://tinyurl.com/3c32l4
10 Rolls of Konica 120 Size Infrared Film - http://tinyurl.com/3a3e5a

If there is any interest then I will make my boxes of HSI available.

Cheers -

george

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

Eclectic Mix: http://EclecticMix.com
One Minute How-To: http://OneMinuteHowTo.com
DRiP Investing: http://DRiPInvesting.org

Handmade Photographic Images: http://www.GLSmyth.com - Blog: GLSmyth.Wordpress.com

*
****
*******
******************************************************
* To remove yourself from this list, send: *
* UNSUBSCRIBE INFRARED *
* to *
* MAJORDOMO@... *
*----------------------------------------------------*
* For the IR-FAQ, IR-Gallery and heaps of links: *
* http://www.a1.nl/phomepag/markerink/mainpage.htm *
******************************************************

Arthur Drooker's book

2007-11-28T08:39:13Z

Saw a piece Sunday last on CBS TV in the US on Arthur Drooker's new
book, "American Ruins." All IR photography. Very nice.
For those who are not already aware, links below:

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/11/25/sunday/main3537931.shtml

http://www.drookerphotography.com/

Cheers,
Elton K.

*
****
*******
******************************************************
* To remove yourself from this list, send: *
* UNSUBSCRIBE INFRARED *
* to *
* MAJORDOMO@... *
*----------------------------------------------------*
* For the IR-FAQ, IR-Gallery and heaps of links: *
* http://www.a1.nl/phomepag/markerink/mainpage.htm *
******************************************************

infra red conversion

2007-11-28T02:52:07Z

If anybody wants their digital slr converted ,try advancedcameraservices.co.uk they also fit uv & quartz filters1

Instructions on how to convert a Kodak DC3400 for IR

2007-11-23T12:06:19Z

Hi folks,

It has taken me far too long to sit down and just do the writeup, but
anyway: here it is, my instructions on how to convert a Kodak DC3400 digicam for
IR use:

http://www.xs4all.nl/~wkb/IR-DC3400/

I invite comments and questions. Please send me suggestions on my "Further plans"
section.

enjoy,

Wilko
Arnhem, the Netherlands
*
****
*******
******************************************************
* To remove yourself from this list, send: *
* UNSUBSCRIBE INFRARED *
* to *
* MAJORDOMO@... *
*----------------------------------------------------*
* For the IR-FAQ, IR-Gallery and heaps of links: *
* http://www.a1.nl/phomepag/markerink/mainpage.htm *
******************************************************

RE: (1) Rollei IR (2) IS-1 Camera RAW & Photoshop

2007-11-22T02:29:59Z

Oh,

I forgot to add that the image on the web site is actually the MACO IR
prototype, I also shot a sheet of Rollei film, and under these
conditions (IE no trees and grass, same light) the Rollei film was
identical to the MACO, at 2 ass more speed..;-)..

Best,

Cor
*
****
*******
******************************************************
* To remove yourself from this list, send: *
* UNSUBSCRIBE INFRARED *
* to *
* MAJORDOMO@... *
*----------------------------------------------------*
* For the IR-FAQ, IR-Gallery and heaps of links: *
* http://www.a1.nl/phomepag/markerink/mainpage.htm *
******************************************************

RE: (1) Rollei IR (2) IS-1 Camera RAW & Photoshop

2007-11-22T02:26:03Z

Elton,

I have used the Rollei film in 4*5 format, it realy needs a 89b filter
to get a (modest) IR effect at a speed of 6 asa.

I would roughly rate in increasing IR effect:

Rollei<MACO IR prototype<MACO 820c (discontinued, is now EFKE 820 I
assume)<HIE.

An (somewhat different approach) sample of Rollei film can be found at:

http://home.casema.nl/cordieuwke/Cuprotype.html

Best,

Cor

> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-infrared@... [mailto:owner-infrared@...] On Behalf Of
> Elton N. Kaufmann
> Sent: woensdag 21 november 2007 22:03
> To: infrared@...
> Subject: (1) Rollei IR (2) IS-1 Camera RAW & Photoshop
>
> Back in February, I posted the message repeated below about my early
> experience with the Rollei IR film.
>
> I remain curious as to whether anyone on the list has had any

experience

> yet with the Rollei film, the one advertised as a 400 speed.
> ---
> February message:
> "Speaking of IR film and HIE, I too am still fully analog as far as
> shooting is concerned. I still use HIE in 35 mm and the Aerographic
> 2424 (HIE) in 120 format while my small supply lasts. I very much
> liked the now-long-gone Konica 750 IR film, and I found the MACO 820
> useable, but not nearly as good. The MACO is now also
> discontinued. I have recently tested the Rollei IR 400 film in both
> 35 mm and 120 formats and have concluded that to get good IR effects,
> the speed is excruciatingly slow (like EI ~ 0.75 with the 695 or 715
> filters they recommend). For example, the spectral response of the
> film is orders of magnitude down from its maximum at the wavelength
> of the foliage Wood effect. Can anyone confirm my impressions of the
> Rollei? ....."
> ---

*
****
*******
******************************************************
* To remove yourself from this list, send: *
* UNSUBSCRIBE INFRARED *
* to *
* MAJORDOMO@... *
*----------------------------------------------------*
* For the IR-FAQ, IR-Gallery and heaps of links: *
* http://www.a1.nl/phomepag/markerink/mainpage.htm *
******************************************************

Re: Email Kodak To Save HIE-135

2007-11-21T16:30:14Z

Hi James,

I think it would also be effective to register the letter as a
petition online http://www.petitiononline.com/
that way you will get many more people in support of your letter.

regards
Peter

On 22/11/2007, Jimmy Williams <nighthawkjw@...> wrote:

> Fellow Infrared List Members,
>
> Below I have copied an email I just sent to Patrick
> Hamilton, Public Relations Director, Kodak CDG EAMER:
> patrick.hamilton@...
>
> Mr. Hamilton has encouraged me to write Kodak and is
> aware that I am attempting to start an email campaign
> to save HIE-135. He has assured me that he will get
> the messages to the appropriate people.
>

(1) Rollei IR (2) IS-1 Camera RAW & Photoshop

2007-11-21T13:01:04Z

Back in February, I posted the message repeated below about my early experience with the Rollei IR film.

I remain curious as to whether anyone on the list has had any experience yet with the Rollei film, the one advertised as a 400 speed.
---
February message:
"Speaking of IR film and HIE, I too am still fully analog as far as
shooting is concerned. I still use HIE in 35 mm and the Aerographic
2424 (HIE) in 120 format while my small supply lasts. I very much
liked the now-long-gone Konica 750 IR film, and I found the MACO 820
useable, but not nearly as good. The MACO is now also
discontinued. I have recently tested the Rollei IR 400 film in both
35 mm and 120 formats and have concluded that to get good IR effects,
the speed is excruciatingly slow (like EI ~ 0.75 with the 695 or 715
filters they recommend). For example, the spectral response of the
film is orders of magnitude down from its maximum at the wavelength
of the foliage Wood effect. Can anyone confirm my impressions of the
Rollei? ....."
---
I do still have a few roils of HIE and the cut-down 2424 in the frig. Soon I go fully digital unless a good HIE-clone appears.

Update on IS-1 Camera RAW and Photoshop:
I bought a Fujifilm IS-1 in August and posted a question about camera RAW files at that time. With the help of folks on the Flikr Fujifilm S9100 group,
I determined that RAW files from the IS-1 cannot be processed in Photoshop CS2 or earlier versions, because the RAW Photoshop plug-in does not recognize the IS-1 name in the file's EXIF data as being the same as the S9100. Thanks to Joshua Putnam for referring me to the Flikr S9100 group.

Elton Kaufmann

*
****
*******
******************************************************
* To remove yourself from this list, send: *
* UNSUBSCRIBE INFRARED *
* to *
* MAJORDOMO@... *
*----------------------------------------------------*
* For the IR-FAQ, IR-Gallery and heaps of links: *
* http://www.a1.nl/phomepag/markerink/mainpage.htm *
******************************************************

Email Kodak To Save HIE-135

2007-11-21T11:40:38Z

Fellow Infrared List Members,

Below I have copied an email I just sent to Patrick
Hamilton, Public Relations Director, Kodak CDG EAMER:
patrick.hamilton@...

Mr. Hamilton has encouraged me to write Kodak and is
aware that I am attempting to start an email campaign
to save HIE-135. He has assured me that he will get
the messages to the appropriate people.

I ask each and every one of you to please take a
moment and write an email to Kodak. Copy my letter if
you like. Even if you don't ever plan to use film
again, consider those of us who do and make this tiny
effort.

I plan to post a very similar message to APUG,
Photo.net and to flickr's IR group. If any of you know
of other forums I should post to please send me that
information. Please contact me offlist if you like:
nighthawkjw@...

Thank you all for your assistance. I know we can make
this happen if we try!

Sincerely,
James C. Williams

________________________________________________

Dear Kodak,

This message is to be distributed to those responsible
for the choice
to delete or discontinue Kodak's HIE-135 infrared
film. The purpose of
this message is to persuade those people to reverse
that choice.

Among the many applications of photography there is a
unique type of
film that produces very unusual photographs, infrared
film. It's
initial and major commercial purpose has been for
scientific and
security purposes. However, aside from these mundane
applications, a
much more visually appealing application is fine art
photography using
infrared film.

Many fine art photographers recognise the great
benefits of using film
and prefer film to digital. In the case of infrared
photography, there
are many people trying different approaches to using
digital cameras,
but that system has problems to be solved and the
results are not
nearly as good as those produced by HIE-135.

Among other infrared films, HIE-135 is also unique and
superior. The
extended range of 900nm produces a greater sensitivity
to the infrared
spectrum, and the absence of an anti-halide backing
makes it ideal for
producing images evoking surreal and ethereal
properties that no other
film produces. No other film manufacturer producing
infrared film
today makes a film like HIE-135.

Discontinuing the manufacture and distribution of
HIE-135 infrared
film will mean that photographers like myself will
have to compromise
future bodies of work. It will mean that perhaps the
best infrared
photographer, Sir Simon Marsden, who has dedicated 30
years to
producing thousands of images on HIE-135, will have to
either adapt or
end his career now.

The responsibility of a creative medium for many
people lies in this
decision. It not only represents the choice to stop
making a specific
type of film, but is indicative of the future of all
film. Kodak was
responsible for the popularity of photography, and
needs to be
responsible for safeguarding the future of it as well.

--
Sincerely,
James C. Williams

Photographer specializing in infrared photography.

Online Galleries:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/nighthawkjw/sets/

http://photo.net/photos/James%20C.%20Williams

____________________________________________________________________________________
Be a better sports nut! Let your teams follow you
with Yahoo Mobile. Try it now. http://mobile.yahoo.com/sports;_ylt=At9_qDKvtAbMuh1G1SQtBI7ntAcJ
*
****
*******
******************************************************
* To remove yourself from this list, send: *
* UNSUBSCRIBE INFRARED *
* to *
* MAJORDOMO@... *
*----------------------------------------------------*
* For the IR-FAQ, IR-Gallery and heaps of links: *
* http://www.a1.nl/phomepag/markerink/mainpage.htm *
******************************************************

A test of my posting ability

2007-11-21T09:20:18Z

TO: Infrared List:

I have been sending messages to the list that do not appear to actually get posted, so this is a test message
in what I believe is very plain text with no footers, HTML, MIME or other obvious problems that might cause MAJORDOMO to filter it out.

If you do in fact receive this note, sorry for the inconvenience.

Elton Kaufmann

*
****
*******
******************************************************
* To remove yourself from this list, send: *
* UNSUBSCRIBE INFRARED *
* to *
* MAJORDOMO@... *
*----------------------------------------------------*
* For the IR-FAQ, IR-Gallery and heaps of links: *
* http://www.a1.nl/phomepag/markerink/mainpage.htm *
******************************************************

Re: coolpix 5000 IR testing (step 1)

2007-11-21T08:18:50Z

Quoting Keith Davison, who wrote on Wed, Nov 21, 2007 at 10:35:43AM -0000 ..

> > I still would love to know from any of the remaining film shooters out
> > there if this is strictly a consequence of using digital cameras in the IR
> > band.
>
> I shot HIE mainly with Canon FD lenses 7.5mm fisheye to 500mm mirror,
> cut-down 2424 with Pentax 67 lenses from the 35mm fisheye to the 200mm
> with x2 teleconverter. I shot HSI with Schneiders, 47XL to 150mm and an
> ancient Ektar 210mm. The lenses were usually stopped down to - HIE, f8,
> 2424 f11, HSI f22, filter was usually 87C.
>
> Never saw the "hotspot" once. The lenses were all primes with fewer
> elements than modern zooms, which will have an influence on internal
> reflections, as will the semi-symmetrical designs of the LF glass.

All these older lenses are metal construction I assume. Anybody ever
checked if there is a correlation with newer lenses with more plastic
contents and the hotspot phenomenon?

Wilko
*
****
*******
******************************************************
* To remove yourself from this list, send: *
* UNSUBSCRIBE INFRARED *
* to *
* MAJORDOMO@... *
*----------------------------------------------------*
* For the IR-FAQ, IR-Gallery and heaps of links: *
* http://www.a1.nl/phomepag/markerink/mainpage.htm *
******************************************************

Re: coolpix 5000 IR testing (step 1)

2007-11-21T02:35:43Z

> I still would love to know from any of the remaining film shooters out
> there if this is strictly a consequence of using digital cameras in the IR
> band.

I shot HIE mainly with Canon FD lenses 7.5mm fisheye to 500mm mirror,
cut-down 2424 with Pentax 67 lenses from the 35mm fisheye to the 200mm
with x2 teleconverter. I shot HSI with Schneiders, 47XL to 150mm and an
ancient Ektar 210mm. The lenses were usually stopped down to - HIE, f8,
2424 f11, HSI f22, filter was usually 87C.

Never saw the "hotspot" once. The lenses were all primes with fewer
elements than modern zooms, which will have an influence on internal
reflections, as will the semi-symmetrical designs of the LF glass.

I have converted two Sony F717's to full time IR, both exhibited the hotspot
with filters from 88a1/2 to the LDP 1000nm.

I have mentioned before that when I was doing the conversions I had to
remove the CCD, and its surface was extremely reflective to the naked eye,
much more so than the matte white appearance of Kodak film.

My guess is: - strong back reflection from the glassy CCD + AR coatings not
optimised for IR + modern zooms with many elements and exotic glasses =
hotspot.

Keith

*
****
*******
******************************************************
* To remove yourself from this list, send: *
* UNSUBSCRIBE INFRARED *
* to *
* MAJORDOMO@... *
*----------------------------------------------------*
* For the IR-FAQ, IR-Gallery and heaps of links: *
* http://www.a1.nl/phomepag/markerink/mainpage.htm *
******************************************************

IR hotspot - was coolpix 5000 IR testing (step 1)

2007-11-20T10:59:48Z

> I still shoot Kodak HIE, never had hot spots.
> so Stan, you've given me an idea, that may answer your question.
> I have a Nikon fit Sigma F1.4 30mm lens, that does sometimes make IR
> hotspot
> on the Nikon D50
> when used for IR, although not designed for full 35mm film area, its for
> smaller digital sensor.
> It would fit the film camera body. I should make a digital exposure with
> hotspot, then swap the lens to the film camera,
> to see if spot reproduced on film....

To Cameron and the group,

The simple test I did showed the IR hotspot immediately; I photographed some
white no-seam. On a fixed focal length lens like the Sigma 30mm, you could
get by with one exposure at f16 to see if it makes a spot. Just make sure
you underexpose the film a bit to get gray paper so the spot will be
apparent.

If you wanted to map the formation of the spot, do a series at all the
f-stops and watch the blemish come into "focus". As a bonus, you may find
this "digital" lens makes a nice soft vignette on the full format. My guess
is that it is such a short focal length it will cut off, making dark
corners - like too many filters on the lens. But wide open, it might be a
nice effect.

Stan Patz NYC

www.PatzImaging.com

*
****
*******
******************************************************
* To remove yourself from this list, send: *
* UNSUBSCRIBE INFRARED *
* to *
* MAJORDOMO@... *
*----------------------------------------------------*
* For the IR-FAQ, IR-Gallery and heaps of links: *
* http://www.a1.nl/phomepag/markerink/mainpage.htm *
******************************************************

RE: coolpix 5000 IR testing (step 1)

2007-11-20T08:42:42Z

Cc: Cameron Shaw
Subject: Re: coolpix 5000 IR testing (step 1)

> You are right it does help to reduce the IR 'hot spot', opening the lens,
> however then image not quite as sharp, (digital camera focus calibrated in
> visible spectrum)
> and problems in bright light or when you need more DOF, I have really had
> difficulty with this
> using the 750nm filter with a Fuji IS-1, what a disappointment !,
> Only real solution is to change lens or if not possible change camera!
> It has been suggested that a band pass filter could help,
> blocking the longer IR wavelengths that increase the effect.
> My question to the group please, has anyone actually tried this?

To Cameron and the group,

Back in September (Sept 12 posts) we discussed the IR hotspot. At the time I

tested my camera and found the IR hotspot was dependent on two things -
focal length and aperture. On my Sony/Zeiss zoom lens, the spot was
strongest about mid-zoom and the spot was most pronounced at minimum
aperture. It was too diffuse to see at wide apertures.

The IR hotspot was apparent with all IR filters, from a standard red 25A to
deep purple(?) 87C. This includes my special XDP band-pass filter which I
got from LDP, the company that converted my Sony. So there does not seem to
be a way of eliminating this effect; you have to work around it.

I still would love to know from any of the remaining film shooters out there

if this is strictly a consequence of using digital cameras in the IR band.

Stan Patz NYC

www.PatzImaging.com

I still shoot Kodak HIE, never had hot spots.
so Stan, you've given me an idea, that may answer your question.
I have a Nikon fit Sigma F1.4 30mm lens, that does sometimes make IR hotspot
on the Nikon D50
when used for IR, although not designed for full 35mm film area, its for
smaller digital sensor.
It would fit the film camera body. I should make a digital exposure with
hotspot, then swap the lens to the film camera,
to see if spot reproduced on film....
Cameron UK

This message has been checked for viruses but the contents of an attachment
may still contain software viruses, which could damage your computer system:
you are advised to perform your own checks. Email communications with the
University of Nottingham may be monitored as permitted by UK legislation.

*
****
*******
******************************************************
* To remove yourself from this list, send: *
* UNSUBSCRIBE INFRARED *
* to *
* MAJORDOMO@... *
*----------------------------------------------------*
* For the IR-FAQ, IR-Gallery and heaps of links: *
* http://www.a1.nl/phomepag/markerink/mainpage.htm *
******************************************************

RE: coolpix 5000 IR testing (step 1)

2007-11-20T08:18:48Z

It's not just limited to Digital cameras.

I was sent some false Colour IR film that had been taken by the
photographers at the Tate Gallery in London some years back for research
work they were doing and it has the exact same hotspot marking on the
roll of film (just pink/red rather than white).

This was proof to me that it was due to internal IR reflections. The
cure I gave them was to change lenses which worked. Again this was a
Nikon lens but I know I have read it happening with a few canon lenses
as well.

Jason Revell
*
****
*******
******************************************************
* To remove yourself from this list, send: *
* UNSUBSCRIBE INFRARED *
* to *
* MAJORDOMO@... *
*----------------------------------------------------*
* For the IR-FAQ, IR-Gallery and heaps of links: *
* http://www.a1.nl/phomepag/markerink/mainpage.htm *
******************************************************

Re: coolpix 5000 IR testing (step 1)

2007-11-20T07:44:23Z

RE: coolpix 5000 IR testing (step 1)

2007-11-20T07:10:04Z

Hi Jason,
You are right it does help to reduce the IR 'hot spot', opening the lens,
however then image not quite as sharp, (digital camera focus calibrated in
visible spectrum)
and problems in bright light or when you need more DOF, I have really had
difficulty with this
using the 750nm filter with a Fuji IS-1, what a disappointment !,
Only real solution is to change lens or if not possible change camera!
It has been suggested that a band pass filter could help,
blocking the longer IR wavelengths that increase the effect.
My question to the group please, has anyone actually tried this?
Thanks, Cameron

-----Original Message-----

Sent: 20 November 2007 10:39
To: infrared
Subject: RE: coolpix 5000 IR testing (step 1)

The 'hot Spots' are due to internal reflections inside the lens. I
presume the black coating used on the inside of some lenses reflects
some IR back into the lens that produces the 'hotspot'.

Sometimes the best way to avoid this is to use the lens fully open as
this makes it less obvious as it's more diffused and spread over a
larger area of the image. As you stop down the hotspots become smaller
and more 'focused' into the centre of the image.

Jason Revell
-----
Chris Eastwood
Sent: 20 November 2007 10:02
To: INFRARED@...
Subject: coolpix 5000 IR testing (step 1)

Hi

I've just got my Hoya R72 filter and taken a quick test with my coolpix
5000. Results are good, but the camera can clearly benefit from a
conversion because exposure times are LONG. Also there is a noticable
hotspot being created. I'ts subtle in present lighting conditions, but I

wonder if it will get worse in different conditions.

On the topic of hotspots, is this created by the reflection from the
front element onto the IR filter or is it something else.

Thanks

This message has been checked for viruses but the contents of an attachment
may still contain software viruses, which could damage your computer system:
you are advised to perform your own checks. Email communications with the
University of Nottingham may be monitored as permitted by UK legislation.

*
****
*******
******************************************************
* To remove yourself from this list, send: *
* UNSUBSCRIBE INFRARED *
* to *
* MAJORDOMO@... *
*----------------------------------------------------*
* For the IR-FAQ, IR-Gallery and heaps of links: *
* http://www.a1.nl/phomepag/markerink/mainpage.htm *
******************************************************