another new person building a basic UV system

[jag]

Great forum here - thanks for all the information you've shared.

 

I'm a photographer that mostly shoots people, although sometimes places when I'm traveling alot.

 

Was looking to experiment with UV on portraits - thinking I might start with film as it looks like a much lower cost than modifying a camera, etc. I didn't see any threads particularly devoted to film UV photography - maybe I missed it? When I was researching it, some people seemed to think I needed IR Cuts in addition to UV, others said unnecessary with B&W film. Thinking to start small - basic filter, etc - and avoid the expense and hassle of unusual filter sizer, Baader cost, etc.

 

Anyways, thanks for including me. :)

[nfoto]

hi and welcome to the UVP site.

 

Officially it is simpler to use film for UV. I deliberately phrase the statement in this manner because there are lots of considerations to pay attention to even if you can indeed use a "unmodified" camera.

 

Firstly, most films even b/w have some anti-UV coating applied to them. Thus the UV response will *not* be phenomenal. Secondly, although few films extend their spectral sensitivity into the IR range, many are quite sensitive to red and this means you need to be careful with the filtration unless red leakage is replacing IR contamination as the main culprit in degrading a UV record. Thus even though a B+W 403 in theory should suffice to get clean UV captures, stacking with a 8612 filter will improve the outcome in most cases. Needless to say you need to filter out visible light to get anything UV-like recorded on your film frames.

 

Thus, unless you shoot in a dark room with a stationary subject and a UV illumination source with no side bands into visible or red/IR, you face the same filtration challenges so extensively described and discussed by digital UV shooters. And having a lens that transmits UV adequately is an issue common to all UV work.

[jag]

How is the sensitivity on something like Ilford or Kodak 3200 B&W? Is there another filter that's better suited to film photography?

 

Thanks.

[nfoto]

Check the film specification for spectral information.

 

Most of the "classic" UV [+- bandpass] filters such as the Hoya U-330/U-340/U-360, B+W 403, or Wratten 18A, really are only suitable for film use. They leak a lot of deep red/IR, or borderline violet, so watch out for out-of-band contamination. Stacking with the 8612 should be regarded as a safety measure.

 

The current UV bandpass filters discussed here on UVP (for digital UV) can of course equally well be used with film.

[JCDowdy]

Here is a (somewhat sluggish download) link to a free copy of Kodak Publication No. M-27 you might find interesting.

[Andrea B.]

Hello Jag and welcome to UVP. I hope you enjoy the site.

 

I didn't see any threads particularly devoted to film UV photography - maybe I missed it?

We do not have too much here. I think that there is less interest in UV film photography than in the past simply because digital has taken over all film photography. We do get occasional questions about UV film work. And now that I have mentioned that I think I should create a "tag" for that subject so that what few posts or references we have will be easily searchable. :D Stay tuned!

[jag]

Thanks.

 

Yeah, it seems a bit harder to get information on IR sensitivity of traditional B&W films, but feels like an area that film might have an advantage.

[nfoto]

I think only the end user can balance the actual equation of film vs digital for UV (or IR). Neither platform is perfect, but the tricky parts differ between them. The outcome can be quite similar and the answers gained can be pretty much identical.

 

I commenced my IR, then later UV, work with film and for me the thought of going back to film simply does not exist. Others may land on a different approach.