Results 1 to 4 of 4

Thread: Difference of x-ray v normal film

  1. #1
    indecent exposure cosmicexplosion's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    sydney
    Posts
    664

    Difference of x-ray v normal film

    X-ray seems to work. Not seen one in real life.
    Why is it so cheap?
    Is it made of the same stuff as normal film?
    I know it's coated on both sides.
    Cheers.
    A
    through a glass darkly...

  2. #2

    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    NJ
    Posts
    8,484

    Re: Difference of x-ray v normal film

    Not all x-ray film is coated on both sides. Double coated x-ray film is problematic because of low resolution. I use radiographs of small fishes to examine some skeletal features -- clearing and staining gives better views, takes longer and is more work -- and ones shot with high speed (double coated) film are very hard to read.

  3. #3

    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    1,384

    Re: Difference of x-ray v normal film

    X-ray film is (or was) a field quite as wide as photographic film - that is, about the only common property they have is that the bulk are unsensitized, while a few exceptions (screen and intensifier films) are green sensitized.

    Things to be aware of apart from double sided ones (which fare better on a pinhole camera, by the way): There are (or were) films with a wash-off opaque coating so that they can be handled in light, which are absolutely useless for photography. Other films you'll want to avoid are those sealed in light-tight sterilized envelopes or with integral intensifier sheets - while they could theoretically be stripped of their pack prior to exposure, these (photographically detrimental) features add quite considerably to their price.

  4. #4

    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    469

    Re: Difference of x-ray v normal film

    What's normal film? This is an orthochromatic film which means it is not sensitive to red at all...which means you can load the film holders and develope under a ruby red light. It has at least one less dye in the emulsion,as compared to panchromatic film, which seems to reduce grain size. It can also be brutally sharp. I use a light yellow filter to hold back the sky enough to print clouds. I like the way it renders color. But if there is a lot of red in the scene, I use something like tri-x (panchromatic). Unfortunatly, it's 10 times more expensive per sheet, so I don't use pan film very often.
    Quote Originally Posted by cosmicexplosion View Post
    X-ray seems to work. Not seen one in real life.
    Why is it so cheap?
    Is it made of the same stuff as normal film?
    I know it's coated on both sides.
    Cheers.
    A

Similar Threads

  1. The difference between normal large format lenses and macro lenses.
    By gorsescent in forum Lenses & Lens Accessories
    Replies: 20
    Last Post: 13-Jul-2012, 14:37
  2. Replies: 28
    Last Post: 8-May-2011, 17:36
  3. Clamp marks on E6 pro-processed film normal?
    By Daniel Geiger in forum Darkroom: Film, Processing & Printing
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: 6-Sep-2005, 10:21
  4. Replies: 1
    Last Post: 25-Apr-2001, 05:21
  5. Slide film latitude: Is there any difference?
    By Alex Horvath in forum Darkroom: Film, Processing & Printing
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 6-Nov-1998, 20:09

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •