If you want to see if you're getting UV light or not, what you have to do is apply sunscreen on half a piece of something, and shoot it. The side with sunscreen will absorb UVs
Even before I watch: As someone who is a big fan of UV photography and is very disillusioned about the fact that nobody seems to be actively doing it or much less, making videos about it on youtube, I near damn started cheering when I saw the title of the video. Thank you.
Another possibility would be to use a pinhole camera since it has no glass to block the UV. Then use your UV/IR filter to block the visible light in combination with a blue filter to block out the red light. Your exposure times would be measured in lifetimes instead of seconds but it could work 🤷♂️
It would have been nice if you could have taken photographs of some flowers, or maybe a portrait with sunscreen applied to a subject (getting you in trouble for an unintentional blackface) so that we can see that the ultraviolet sensitivity is actually being utilized. Right now the results are "looks kinda funky, but can't really tell how the UV is changing anything"
2:52 If you want crazy color shifts, use the green frame for the red channel, the blue frame for the green channel and the UV frame for the blue channel. It will give you red foliage and such, but it will be less shiny.
The UV photography shows its power when you photograph skin, especially faces. Results are close but even more creepy then with wet plate collodion photography (which is basically UV photography because of its spectral sensitivity).
I've been playing with uv in digital and the issue is you need an IR blocking filter to go with the uv pass filter. IR easily overpowers the uv and you get basically nothing but IR with the standard filter. But yeah you need a LOT of exposure. On digital, on my full spectrum converted camera, it's like ISO 3200 1/30th wide open in direct sunlight at f1.8 with my best UV passing lens
You do cool stuff. I'll just share something fun with the class that I like to do with Rollei IR, I guess you could call a pentachrome. I take a series of IR, Red, Green, Blue, and 360nm peak UV shots, layer them, and then scrunch in the color channels from the full 350-780nm of the five shots to the 380-700nm the eyes can readily see. So the IR and UV are deep red and deep blue, then the red channel becomes yellow-green, green gets a little hint of blue, and blue gets a little hint of green. It makes for a fun way to see a scene.
Ok chemistry hat on here: All film emulsions are inherently sensitive to UV, it's why wet plate and the earliest forms of photography only showed up light into the blue spectrum. UV is a shorter wavelength and inherently more energetic photons than red light and it works to destabilise the silver halide crystals that form more effectively than less energetic light. This is why you can use a red safe light in a darkroom and not expose orthochromatic film / paper. Film now has sensitiser dyes that allow the emulsions to react to other colours of light, thus extending their sensitivity into green, red and sometimes infrared and by so doing also increase their sensitivity in general as they're capturing more photons that hit the emulsion. Earlier films had fewer or less effective dyes and so didn't reach as far up the spectrum. The reason colour film has that orange layer is to mask UV/Blue out of the red and green layers beneath as they're inherently somewhat sensitive to them. If I were to try this out, I would do something like a false colour image with UV/Blue/Green on orthochromatic film as that is probably likely to give you the best sensitivity ranges for a tri-chrome though I have no idea how good a blue filter would be as a UV cut, it might just past everything under say 450nm. The suggestions of sunscreen are pretty good here, it should either absorb or scatter UV differently depending on how it works.
Most Tungsten balance color films are sensitive to Ultra Violet light, give it a try with some Cinestill 800T sometime or any other motion picture tungsten balanced film you have laying around. I've not tried capturing Ultra Violet with Black and white film before though so was interested to see your results. You won't be getting crazy color shifts but more so unlocking DLC that your eyes don't see with Ultra Violet, IR is more about the color shifts from my experimentation.
Super wild results! I've been meaning to try out UV on film for a while. If you have any, I think ortho film is slightly more sensitive in the UV range, and might allow shorter wavelengths than the panchromatic films.
Yeah but if you do that I would recommend exposures of at least 10 minutes. UV light is already a lot more sparse than visible light and pinholes are extremely dark.
Shooting UV through a simple filter with color film and long exposures results in quite a bit of visible leakage, especially on the red end. Images so obtained are best regarded as hybrid UV/visible images. If all visible is blocked the images will be fairly monochromatic.
Love the channel, watched every video multiple times now. I was wondering if you had ever had the idea of creating DIY autographic film for 1920's kodak cameras? No one online appears to have really tried it. Seems like something right up your street! Cheers for all the excellent content.
R09 is actually the only “Rodinal” that literary died on me. 1 year after opening, instantly with no signs of weakening. And I’m over cautious so it was filled with inert gas all the time.
From a bit of semi-related info. UV light isn’t the same through the year and to compensate most film companies to keep iso consistency blocks a portion of UV light. Learned this from LFP podcast talking about dry plate.
UV imagery tends to be hazy as UV scatters really easily, that's likely the blue cast you are seeing, the UV just being unable to travel as directly to the lens unlike the red and green light. If you want a strong effect with UV, photograph someone with sunscreen on.
If you want to cut the IR, shoot long exposures starting at absolute last light... Red fast, blue slow... The UV will be the last light from the sun to make it to your lens, then you'll just get a little more visible spectrum from moon/cloud...
Its possible the lens is absorbing quite a lot of UV. Even that Series-E has a bunch of glass elements in it. Perhaps give that filter a try with a pinhole body cap to rule out glass absorbtion.
there are some process and enlarger lenses that allow UV light and they come affordable. I have an EL-nikkor 40mm f/4 that I had succesfully used for alternative processess, so it indeed lets UV light thru. You can find that model an similar ones for around 50 bucks, but you have to make sure that they are compatible with alternative processess (aka: cyanotype, carbon, palladium, gumoil... well, you get it), as not all enlarging lens is ok with UV light. And please, buy the "low-end" lenses. We darkroom dwellers have to struggle to find proper lenses because every instagramer is using them for macro. xDDD About filtration: be imaginative. There must be another source of light filtration not associated with photography. Think about greenhouses, think about solar panels... There must be some material readily available that allows UV light. Film: you are pushing the limits of spectal sensitivity. Use appropiate emulsions for UV wavelenght. Search for blue sensitive emulsions, think out of the box. Perhaps dryplates? X-ray film? You can do it!
I haven't done a whole lot of research so I could be wrong, but most affordable IR cut filters also cut UV as well. There are IR cut filters but those are about as expensive as UV bandpass filter.
@@atticdarkroomHi! What if you start a croudfund to rent equipment? I know you do this for fun and whenever you have free time but I'm sure there are some folks like me willing to invest on these kind of experiments.
I swear one day you'll hit the sweet spot. For now keep making garbage so we don't have too. There is a magic to your process I should mention. Please don't stop. Your garbage is content gold.
![[LIVE] : ONE ลุมพินี 85 | คู่เอก "ยอดเหล็กเพชร vs ผึ้งหลวง"](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/Qq_19bnnxEo/mqdefault.jpg)
Nobody can stop this man trichromes
Even him can stop them when something wents sideways 😂
If you want to see if you're getting UV light or not, what you have to do is apply sunscreen on half a piece of something, and shoot it. The side with sunscreen will absorb UVs
That's a good idea.
Even before I watch:
As someone who is a big fan of UV photography and is very disillusioned about the fact that nobody seems to be actively doing it or much less, making videos about it on youtube, I near damn started cheering when I saw the title of the video. Thank you.
Another possibility would be to use a pinhole camera since it has no glass to block the UV. Then use your UV/IR filter to block the visible light in combination with a blue filter to block out the red light. Your exposure times would be measured in lifetimes instead of seconds but it could work 🤷♂️
Next up on Attic Darkroom- Doing Trichromes with 160M band radio.
🤔
It would have been nice if you could have taken photographs of some flowers, or maybe a portrait with sunscreen applied to a subject (getting you in trouble for an unintentional blackface) so that we can see that the ultraviolet sensitivity is actually being utilized. Right now the results are "looks kinda funky, but can't really tell how the UV is changing anything"
2:52
If you want crazy color shifts, use the green frame for the red channel, the blue frame for the green channel and the UV frame for the blue channel. It will give you red foliage and such, but it will be less shiny.
The UV photography shows its power when you photograph skin, especially faces. Results are close but even more creepy then with wet plate collodion photography (which is basically UV photography because of its spectral sensitivity).
Collodion has a lot of blue and some green sensitivity I think.
I've been playing with uv in digital and the issue is you need an IR blocking filter to go with the uv pass filter. IR easily overpowers the uv and you get basically nothing but IR with the standard filter. But yeah you need a LOT of exposure. On digital, on my full spectrum converted camera, it's like ISO 3200 1/30th wide open in direct sunlight at f1.8 with my best UV passing lens
Good to know--that explains why my UV shots all come out looking like IR
Those bichromes are wild!
Babe wake up new attic darkroom just dropped
You do cool stuff. I'll just share something fun with the class that I like to do with Rollei IR, I guess you could call a pentachrome. I take a series of IR, Red, Green, Blue, and 360nm peak UV shots, layer them, and then scrunch in the color channels from the full 350-780nm of the five shots to the 380-700nm the eyes can readily see. So the IR and UV are deep red and deep blue, then the red channel becomes yellow-green, green gets a little hint of blue, and blue gets a little hint of green. It makes for a fun way to see a scene.
Hi there... Where can I see one of those? Really curious how it looks
@@labo I have some on Instagram, grey.nagle. They're the purple ones
I would try UV with pinhole photos… can’t block UV if there is no lens to block it…
4:24 wow, they look like Meteor M satellite HRPT imagery, I guess using 2 channels for RGB gives the same color scheme
Ok chemistry hat on here: All film emulsions are inherently sensitive to UV, it's why wet plate and the earliest forms of photography only showed up light into the blue spectrum. UV is a shorter wavelength and inherently more energetic photons than red light and it works to destabilise the silver halide crystals that form more effectively than less energetic light. This is why you can use a red safe light in a darkroom and not expose orthochromatic film / paper.
Film now has sensitiser dyes that allow the emulsions to react to other colours of light, thus extending their sensitivity into green, red and sometimes infrared and by so doing also increase their sensitivity in general as they're capturing more photons that hit the emulsion. Earlier films had fewer or less effective dyes and so didn't reach as far up the spectrum. The reason colour film has that orange layer is to mask UV/Blue out of the red and green layers beneath as they're inherently somewhat sensitive to them.
If I were to try this out, I would do something like a false colour image with UV/Blue/Green on orthochromatic film as that is probably likely to give you the best sensitivity ranges for a tri-chrome though I have no idea how good a blue filter would be as a UV cut, it might just past everything under say 450nm.
The suggestions of sunscreen are pretty good here, it should either absorb or scatter UV differently depending on how it works.
Most Tungsten balance color films are sensitive to Ultra Violet light, give it a try with some Cinestill 800T sometime or any other motion picture tungsten balanced film you have laying around. I've not tried capturing Ultra Violet with Black and white film before though so was interested to see your results.
You won't be getting crazy color shifts but more so unlocking DLC that your eyes don't see with Ultra Violet, IR is more about the color shifts from my experimentation.
He has blessed us with another upload
Super wild results! I've been meaning to try out UV on film for a while. If you have any, I think ortho film is slightly more sensitive in the UV range, and might allow shorter wavelengths than the panchromatic films.
You can just shoot pinhole. No lens, no UV blocking.
Yeah but if you do that I would recommend exposures of at least 10 minutes. UV light is already a lot more sparse than visible light and pinholes are extremely dark.
Yeah! Or plastic disposable camera lenses
@@unknown-otter Those will most likely block UV a lot better than glass. Especially if the lens was made out of polycarbonate or such.
Shooting UV through a simple filter with color film and long exposures results in quite a bit of visible leakage, especially on the red end. Images so obtained are best regarded as hybrid UV/visible images. If all visible is blocked the images will be fairly monochromatic.
Love the channel, watched every video multiple times now. I was wondering if you had ever had the idea of creating DIY autographic film for 1920's kodak cameras? No one online appears to have really tried it. Seems like something right up your street! Cheers for all the excellent content.
I think that bi-color is kinda what dog vision is like
R09 is actually the only “Rodinal” that literary died on me. 1 year after opening, instantly with no signs of weakening. And I’m over cautious so it was filled with inert gas all the time.
You should try this with fluorescent lights/mercury vapor bulbs.
From a bit of semi-related info. UV light isn’t the same through the year and to compensate most film companies to keep iso consistency blocks a portion of UV light. Learned this from LFP podcast talking about dry plate.
UV imagery tends to be hazy as UV scatters really easily, that's likely the blue cast you are seeing, the UV just being unable to travel as directly to the lens unlike the red and green light. If you want a strong effect with UV, photograph someone with sunscreen on.
If you want to cut the IR, shoot long exposures starting at absolute last light... Red fast, blue slow... The UV will be the last light from the sun to make it to your lens, then you'll just get a little more visible spectrum from moon/cloud...
Somehow missed this upload.. but it was a wild experiment
id love to see some more of that blue foliage
pinhole camera, no glass to block uv. for chip lithography they use mirrors for those short wavelengths to reduce glass obsorbtion.
Its possible the lens is absorbing quite a lot of UV. Even that Series-E has a bunch of glass elements in it. Perhaps give that filter a try with a pinhole body cap to rule out glass absorbtion.
A pinhole camera/lens is a good option for UV, makes filters more difficult but...
I have used r09 and adox rodinal interchangeably without any issues
I've been wanting to try shooting UV on B&W film for a while but I just have no idea where to start when it comes to how to meter an exposure lol
Just experiment. Bracket it. Expose each scene 7 times, starting from -3 stops to +3 and study the results
there are some process and enlarger lenses that allow UV light and they come affordable. I have an EL-nikkor 40mm f/4 that I had succesfully used for alternative processess, so it indeed lets UV light thru. You can find that model an similar ones for around 50 bucks, but you have to make sure that they are compatible with alternative processess (aka: cyanotype, carbon, palladium, gumoil... well, you get it), as not all enlarging lens is ok with UV light. And please, buy the "low-end" lenses. We darkroom dwellers have to struggle to find proper lenses because every instagramer is using them for macro. xDDD
About filtration: be imaginative. There must be another source of light filtration not associated with photography. Think about greenhouses, think about solar panels... There must be some material readily available that allows UV light.
Film: you are pushing the limits of spectal sensitivity. Use appropiate emulsions for UV wavelenght. Search for blue sensitive emulsions, think out of the box. Perhaps dryplates? X-ray film?
You can do it!
ultraviolet is also interesting like infrared, i last time try [with succes finally] infrared, it's time for trichrome it
Do some flowers! Some have interesting invisible UV reflectivity to attract pollinators
a quick word about R09 -> it died on me yesterday after 7 months since I opened it, roll turned out completly blank
Do it again but properly this time (with colour film, exposed correctly!)
The speck of dust on the bottom right had me cleaning my screen in confusion
Would it be possible to add an IR cut filter to just get the ultraviolet out of that filter?
I haven't done a whole lot of research so I could be wrong, but most affordable IR cut filters also cut UV as well. There are IR cut filters but those are about as expensive as UV bandpass filter.
@@atticdarkroomHi! What if you start a croudfund to rent equipment? I know you do this for fun and whenever you have free time but I'm sure there are some folks like me willing to invest on these kind of experiments.
Gotta use those UV lights that put all those Crypto Bros in the Hospital.
I think, duotone is what you were trying to say.
Attic Darkroom at 3:57 be like:
Colors are wierd
But they can be wierder
Ultraviolet makes me ultra violent.
I think if you corrected the bicolour to be paler it would look nice
Please more! If you have a patreon (or something else, doesn't have to be patreon), I'd be happy to kick in a few bucks a month.
I swear one day you'll hit the sweet spot. For now keep making garbage so we don't have too. There is a magic to your process I should mention. Please don't stop. Your garbage is content gold.
Great. Now i'm craving smoked salmon. ;D
did you block IR when taking the UV pictures?
always look forward to your nonsense
Thank you so much. I really appreciate it!
So fkn cool!
try ektar 100
Bro fucking what
Next time, get sunscreen involved!
Misread as "ultraviolent"
Hm, my comment was deleted. Is it because I mentioned uranium rocks and X-ray?
Yep, for some reason my comment gets deleted automatically. No idea what am I saying wrong, it’s just scientific stuff and research experience
Maybe I was saying about objects to photograph, but instead of }photographing} there was a different word. Super stupid, lol
Nope, something else. Now it’s just pure curiosity, what in my comment about UV filters makes TH-cam to delete the comment hmmmm
@@Qpwrtm My comments also got deleted. I wrote several paragraphs of useful info. I hope the man himself isn't doing this because then wtf.
@@fandyus4125don’t think so, it gets deleted very fast, probably some TH-cam filter. The question is what words are forbidden:)
My R09 matched my Adox Rodinal basically the same so how yours is underdeveloped is a myth