Jump to content
UltravioletPhotography

HIE in UV


OlDoinyo

Recommended Posts

In the days when infrared photography was purely a film endeavor, one of the mainstays of the undertaking was Kodak High Speed Infrared Film, colloquially known by its code name 'HIE'. This monochrome film had well-known signature characteristics: a very coarse grain structure, a contrasty tonality which was described by its proponents as "otherworldly" (and by its detractors as "nasty" or similar epithets,) and, in the infrared, a strong halation around highlights due to light-piping of infrared in the emulsion and film base. A typical example of an infrared photo with this film is one I took about a decade ago, using the Olympus 35RD and a #093 filter:

 

post-66-0-26728700-1541864752.jpg

 

I have had a couple of rolls of this film , which was discontinued in 2007, lying around, some very expired and likely with little infrared sensitivity still remaining; but it occurred to me that perhaps the film could still be used for UV imaging, which is not dependent on the perishable IR sensitizers in the film. I loaded one roll, with an expiration date around 2000(!) into my Olympus 35RD, mounted the Baader U2 filter, and decided if HIE's signature characteristics would carry over into the UV realm. The film was developed in D-76 with motorized agitation for 11 minutes at 20C. Due in part to the film's age and condition, there was considerable base fog and some blotching in the emulsion; however, several images were obtained:

 

post-66-0-46390500-1541866534.jpgpost-66-0-76054700-1541866579.jpgpost-66-0-72308100-1541866622.jpgpost-66-0-90824900-1541866701.jpg

 

The working ISO was very low, perhaps less than 10 in daylight, due in part to the mediocre UV bandpass of the 35RD's lens (see elsewhere for my test of it.) The limited bandpass also meant that the paint on the railroad cars was not rendered as dark as it would have been with a lens such as the Steinheil. The images are very grainy, although the reductions posted here do not show that very well. The tonality of HIE is well represented in these images. There is, however, no sign of the prominent halation that is a hallmark of infrared HIE images. This is not surprising, as ultraviolet light does not pipe well through emulsion or film stock, unlike infrared; and overall, there is considerably less "otherworldly" character to these images. (I could fake such an effect in Photoshop, but that was not the point of this exercise.) One also notes that the images, while reasonably sharp in the center, are quite soft at the corners; this may be due to chromatic aberration of the 35RD's lens. I have not noticed this before, but it is quite obvious in these photos.

 

This has been an interesting investigation, and I may continue it at some point; if so, I think I will use my main film SLR rather than the little Oly, and I will use the Steinheil next time.

Link to comment

Excellent photos! Less distance UV haze/scattering than I would expect in Lake of the Clouds shot. I like the subject matter, you can't go wrong with trains, IMO. :)

 

The thin shadows and bars of light are a nice highlight in "Old gray train".

 

Thanks.

Link to comment

Very interesting.

One day I should take my expired film out of the freezer and test it too. I don't have a good uv lens for my Pentacon six camera though. So may be more challenging.

All my film is 120.

Link to comment

What a fascinating study, Clark. Thank you for this interesting film post. We don't get very many of those at all.

 

The photos show lots of detail in spite of the fog/blotching you mention and the grainy stuff. What we miss, though, in posted film photos is that "depth" which is present in printed film photos. Not depth of field, but that feeling that we are looking into the paper print in some way. Do you plan to print any of these? Just curious.

 

I love trains. This is really nice work. "Old Grey Train" is cool. And I also like the last "Parked Hoppers".

 


 

Reed: Less distance UV haze/scattering than I would expect in Lake of the Clouds shot.

I noticed that too. But then I wondered if the grain perhaps is giving a bit of false detail? Hard to say when looking at a small web size version.

Link to comment

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...