My Favorite Color Is Infra-Red

I shoot 99% black-and-white. I prefer it for several practical and aesthetic reasons: great variety of interesting bw films exists; it’s generally cheaper than color; I can process it easily and cheaply while experimenting with developers; I see in forms rather than colors; I appreciate the subtlety of shades and tones; and I’m a minimalist type of guy. For me, colors can get in the way and distract from the object (unless the object is the color itself) and can be garish. That said, there are a lot of color photos I like; even some that I took. But, one look at my film fridge and it’s clear where my priorities lie.

That’s why my favorite color is infrared. Lately I’ve been doing a bit of infrared film photography and have liked the results. The classic IR shots are landscapes in bright sun where green foliage comes out looking snow-flocked and waters and skies are dark, like this recent panoramic IR shot I did with my old converted-for-120-film Ansco Junior 3A:

That IR effect is achieved by using film that is sensitive to wavelengths above 700 nanometers and combining it with a very deep red filter that cuts out all but the high-red infrared light. It has nothing to do with heat, which is a common misconception.

I use Efke IR820, which has sensitivity up to 820nm, but the price for it in medium format has spiked to $12 a roll. That’s $1 a shot, which is in the same league as 4×5 sheet film. In fact, I can get 4×5 Efke IR820 on eBay for $1 per sheet. Because of this rise in 120 prices, I’ve taken to using Rollei Retro 80S, which is not advertised as IR film, but has extended red sensitivity to 775nm, so with a R72 filter it acts just like IR film, although perhaps not as dramatically. The above shot was with RR 80S, which comes in at $7/roll. Still expensive, but nearly half price compared to the Efke. So, guess what I’ve adopted as my standard medium format IR film. The really nice thing about RR 80S is that it’s very nice non-IR black-and-white film so you can have a bunch around for normal bw, but then shoot it as IR when the mood hits.

Besides looking rather cool, infrared photos raise the issue of photography recording something humans do not naturally see. When you go to the Japanese Gardens at Cheekwood, you don’t see this:

I wonder if those anti-pictorialist, anti-artistic photography types would consider this an unnatural misuse of photography? I could (and did) shoot this scene completely straight with a long depth of field, but straight-shooting Group f/64 types would have to reject IR photography at least because of the use of a deep red filter to alter the capturing of light (Ansel Adams used a red filter for his famous “Monolith, Half Dome” in order to darken the sky, thus violating the rules of his Group f/64).  This is just one example of the ways that photography can literally extend our view of the world beyond what we normally see and I  have no problem with that. I consider it a good thing, filter or no filter.

So then, for me it’s black and white and infrared all over — perhaps I should try some shortwave-length x-ray film next….