PDA

View Full Version : Tiny Format X-Ray images



Randy Moe
15-Mar-2015, 12:40
Shot these yesterday. All Ektascan.

The square is Hasselblad sheet film system. Studio flash.

The 2X3 is Crown Graflex RF focus, very bright day, no clouds east, wispy clouds west. It is this grey here, almost no color except red stop sign. Light yellow filter. Notice flare in West shot.

Scanned on V700 as batch of 7 on 8x10 setting, emulsion down flat on glass.

All cut with cheap guillotine cutter under red LED.

130894130895130896

Fr. Mark
18-Mar-2015, 17:38
Your darkroom is neater than mine!

I figure I'm going to have some left over strips of film from cutting Xray 8x10 to 5x7. I was thinking of making/using some pinhole cameras to play with it. Or maybe it can be made to fit and wind on a 35mm camera...maybe further smaller-i-fy it to fit between the sprockets, I can't imagine punching the sprocket holes.

Randy Moe
18-Mar-2015, 21:57
Your darkroom is neater than mine!

I figure I'm going to have some left over strips of film from cutting Xray 8x10 to 5x7. I was thinking of making/using some pinhole cameras to play with it. Or maybe it can be made to fit and wind on a 35mm camera...maybe further smaller-i-fy it to fit between the sprockets, I can't imagine punching the sprocket holes.

That's just a display, my darkroom is somewhat bigger and posted in 'Show us your Darkroom' thread.

All those scraps are good for testing fixer and other things over time. I throw little away.

premortho
24-Mar-2015, 08:21
Ha - I got this one wrong. I was thinking Voightlander Bergheil's and other 3 1/4 X 4 1/4 cameras. Also the carloads of cameras that don't have film manufactured for them any more. 116, 118, and 122. Lots of fun available here.
That's just a display, my darkroom is somewhat bigger and posted in 'Show us your Darkroom' thread.

All those scraps are good for testing fixer and other things over time. I throw little away.

Fr. Mark
20-Apr-2015, 19:43
This evening I cut a bunch of Ektascan for 5x7's (and 4x5 for testing etc) and as a result I had a bunch of 1"x10" strips of film. Actually, they are a little more than 1", 1 and 1/16 and that's 27 mm, a 35mm film image is 24x36mm so I thought maybe I could stick this strip of film in the old Olympus OM-1 and take a few pictures with it and see what they look like. I can't show you the negatives 'cause the film strip is still drying and I don't have a film scanner yet anyway, but it worked! I think that if I put them in a proper cassette and could have a little tension on the film I'd've gotten 5, maybe 6, exposures not three with odd spacing. With 36 exp rolls I usually get 38 with this camera sometimes 39. I have daylight balanced fluorescents in the art studio/darkroom so there's a reasonable amount of blue and green light (not tungsten which is heavily shifted to red/orange). I propped the camera on darkroom timer, used the mirror lock up and the self timer to avoid the shakes and took 3 pictures at 1 sec f16 (waste of a f1.8 lens). I assumed that the film was a true ASA 64 with these lights and used some home brewed rodinal (fresh bottle---the old one was not behaving right) 1:100 for 10 minutes and have what look like 3 great little negatives. Its amazing the level of detail this film can record---I don't think Xray machines I've seen can render this finely. I look forward to putting these in the enlarger tomorrow and having a better look at them at 10x but probably won't print any bigger than 5x7, if I do more than make contact prints (or slides...I have a bunch of these film strips). It was super fun going from "I wonder..." to having the answer in my hands in 1/2 hour or less. The photos aren't art, but one need not have great art to enjoy one's self.

Randy Moe
20-Apr-2015, 20:43
No reason to waste scrap.

Who makes art, I just try to have a good time.

Randy Moe
21-Apr-2015, 14:35
This makes very interesting reading with charts. How this Fujifilm is sharper.

http://www.zzmedical.com/doc/RX.pdf

ridax
22-Apr-2015, 07:48
Tiny format? Hmm... I assume the X-ray stuff is cheap because it utilizes some primitive technologies, and thus it must be much coarser in its grain. Has anyone made any direct comparisons to the 'normal' films like TMX and FP4+ or the cheaper Fomapan 100? X-ray film prices are attractive but I'm not inclined to think FP4+ isn't worth all the money they charge for it.... How much the grain difference actually is?

Randy Moe
22-Apr-2015, 08:07
It would be interesting to compare the X-Ray films themselves, I have only used Kodak X-Ray, CSG double sided and Ektascan. I would love to see anyone's results with the Fujifilm I linked to.

However, when you look at my 6x6cm Hasselblad shot in the first post here, it looks pretty darn good to me. That was scanned flat on the glass of V700, and reduced to this site's requirements. The actual negative is very nice, no I have not enlarged it. It was simply a test shot.

Peter De Smidt
22-Apr-2015, 09:16
In reading the spec sheets, it doesn't look like primitive technology. The price might have more to do with the volume and regularity of sales, as well as the expectations of the specific market. Since the big players already have high-tech operations to produce film, I doubt that changing production drastically, such as going with an "old tech" emulsion, would be a cost savings. It would probably require a completely different coating line.... but that's all just guesswork, of course. When I get time, I'll make some comparisons.

Fr. Mark
1-May-2015, 09:07
This picture is from the negatives described above where I put a 1"x10" piece of ektascan b/ra in an Olympus OM-1 and developed in Rodinal 1:100 10 minutes at 68F. 1 sec, f16, 50mm lens, mirror locked up, self timer. Enlarged to 5x7with focamat Ic with leitz 50mm elmar onto what I think is ilford MG VC RC glossy (the paper came as a gift wrapped in Aluminum foil from an old darkroom via a widow friend of my mom's) no contrast filter. "Scan" by iPhone 6. 133243

Randy Moe
1-May-2015, 09:33
This picture is from the negatives described above where I put a 1"x10" piece of ektascan b/ra in an Olympus OM-1 and developed in Rodinal 1:100 10 minutes at 68F. 1 sec, f16, 50mm lens, mirror locked up, self timer. Enlarged to 5x7with focamat Ic with leitz 50mm elmar onto what I think is ilford MG VC RC glossy (the paper came as a gift wrapped in Aluminum foil from an old darkroom via a widow friend of my mom's) no contrast filter. "Scan" by iPhone 6. 133243

That's looking pretty darn good.

Notice that 14x17 Ektascan is now easily available.

We may have created a whole new market for Kodak.

Maybe they want to sell what they can, maybe somebody woke up over there at Rochester.

All good as the kids say! :)

Fr. Mark
1-May-2015, 19:06
Where can you get 14x17 Ektascan? Zz medical?

Lalalalala can't hear you...don't have trays, don't have space, don't have camera (and said I'd stop building them once I finished the 8x10), don't have film holders(but even if I can't make them and I did buy a bunch of aluminum cookie trays specifically to make 14x17 dark slides...a changing tent and boxes or a nearby darkroom and the right camera design could get around that), don't have a lens with coverage (but meniscus lenses stopped down might be good enough), I did make the UV exposure unit big enough for 14x17...lalala can't hear you...

Fr. Mark
1-May-2015, 19:08
Thanks for the compliment. I'm happier with that picture than many I've taken lately. And it was just a crazy experiment. I guess it shows you have to keep trying and 100% of the shots you don't take don't score.

Randy Moe
1-May-2015, 20:00
Thanks for the compliment. I'm happier with that picture than many I've taken lately. And it was just a crazy experiment. I guess it shows you have to keep trying and 100% of the shots you don't take don't score.

When I shot 35mm, I expected maybe 1 keeper from every 3 rolls, so 1/100.

I still think that way, with digital, film, LF or ULF.

Actually my goal post is way higher.

I want one good one before I go out of time.

Fr. Mark
1-May-2015, 20:51
http://www.zzmedical.com/14x17-in-carestream-kodak-ektascan-b-ra-single-emulsion-video-film.html

Answered my own question about 14x17 Ektascan. Only in cases. Quite costly.

Randy Moe
1-May-2015, 21:34
http://www.zzmedical.com/14x17-in-carestream-kodak-ektascan-b-ra-single-emulsion-video-film.html

Answered my own question about 14x17 Ektascan. Only in cases. Quite costly.

Not really if you calculate cost per sq in or look a little deeper at ZZ, as they sell 8x10 100 sheets Ektascan for $80. http://www.zzmedical.com/analog-x-ray-supplies/x-ray-film/kodak-x-ray-film/8x10-in-carestream-kodak-ektascan-b-ra-single-emulsion-video-film.html

I buy both sizes.

Fr. Mark
2-May-2015, 20:46
Randy, I was imprecise. The $927 for 500 sheets of 14x17 ortho film with antihalation layer is not costly by square inch of film, but it is a lot of money relative to my self imposed toys allowance. Once I get 4x5, 5x7 and 8x10 under control with this film and that will have to also include deciding what developer to use (Rodinal, d-76, d-23 are candidates) then maybe I can consider a 14x17 pinhole camera on the way to a "real" 14x17 and arranging a buying club situation for the 14x17. Ie I sell three or four 100 packs and retain the remainder so I don't blow all my photo money in one go. 'Cause I'd need printing paper (water color for cyanotypes) etc etc and it's nice to have a little reserve for unexpected opportunities.
I am impressed with what can be done with Ektascan when everything turns out A+. Kind of exciting to imagine what that would be like 14x17.