Use of X-ray film: technical discussion with example images

[blueribbontea]

So the second bath is basically the carbonate solution, but with whatevr d23 on the negative still being active - is that what you mean?

I havent used any of the D-xx developers, barring Dektol(IIRC, an old D-xx formula?), so I am not familiar with their properties.

Would the negative be printed on a lower grade paper otherwise? (to counter the high-contrast?)

Yes: The agitation in the second bath is necessary as it does not function as a water bath, but as a developer without its own developing agent (the Metol). I think that is the best way to explain it. The metol is carried over in the film from the D-23 and will of course be depleted in the process, mor quickly in the heavily exposed areas as they demand more metol. I do this to reduce the contrast of the negative and thus I can use a higher contrast paper. The main advantage is that I am protecting the highlights from blocking up. The addition to the water in the second bath could also be sodium metaborate, instead of sodium carbonate; Anschell's "The Darkroom Cookbook" explains the options pretty well. Good luck.

Bill

[analoguey]

Where is here, analoguey? It is not "re-badged", it is re-named. In the United States, the name for this kind of marketing is "It's the same old whore, but in a new dress". Crude, but very descriptive. If you read my post #727 and 728, it will give all the info on the film, through the courtesy of Z&Z Medical, where I get the stuff. What I wrote in 727 was a direct quote from Kodak, Rochester's description. Ektascan is an orthochromatic film, which means it does not "see" red light. This affects exposure. It is quite slow in the early morning, and late afternoon. It is fastest between 10:00 AM and 3:00 PM at my latitude (44 degrees). You should keep an eye out for a medium yellow filter. I can't reccomend a specific filter, because I'm sure you could never find what I use, which is a Burke&James Ingento 2X yellow filter. 2X means two times the exposure. The fact that this film has an anti-halation backing is a big plus, and, combined with the fact it is a single sided emulsion is why I use it. I would not start using this film with a home brewed developer. You will have to learn it's ideocincracies, so using a common developer simplifies the learning curve. I don't shoot enough film these days to use a short life developer, which is why I use Rodinal. I used to use D-72, 24-1, but it doesn't keep that long. Rodinal keeps for years in the bottle it comes in.

Here would be Bangalore, India -thought I had the location on profile but maybe thats on APUG, not here.
Anyhow, I can buy from the seller on an offline/face-to-face transaction, so it's good

I plan to use Dektol 1:7 or Xtol 1:3/1:4. I have so far had good results with conventional 4x5 film/paper with those combos.

From what I see, the post nos you refer to seem to be someone else's?

[premortho]

Here would be Bangalore, India -thought I had the location on profile but maybe thats on APUG, not here.
Anyhow, I can buy from the seller on an offline/face-to-face transaction, so it's good

I plan to use Dektol 1:7 or Xtol 1:3/1:4. I have so far had good results with conventional 4x5 film/paper with those combos.

From what I see, the post nos you refer to seem to be someone else's?

I think I referred to the other x-ray folder on here. D-72 (Dectol) is what I used to use when I did more film processing. I had good luck using it at 1-24, usually for 10 minutes or so. I like 8-10 minute development as it builds contrast more slowly, giving more control. I used that 1-24 soup as a one-shot developer. I also use Rodinal (under whatever name) 1-64 or 1-100 because the stuff keeps forever in the original bottles. I've used Rodinal for over 70 years, except when I shot a lot of film every day (newspaper work) then I used D-72.

[photoevangelist]

Two new additions:

Mollie by Lee Smathers, on Flickr


Jorge by Lee Smathers, on Flickr

Taken With:
8x10 Korona, 12" Goerz Dagor
Fuji HR-A (Green Sensitive X-Ray)

Processed with:
Rodinal 1:100 for 5 min. in tanks and hangers

8x10 Contact Print on:
Fomabrom 111, D-72 1:2 2 min., toned in Moersch MT1 Selenium 1:10 2 min.

[photoevangelist]

This is something I've got up my sleeves for couples:

Tony & Kayt by Lee Smathers, on Flickr

Taken With:
8x10 Korona, 12" Goerz Dagor
Fuji HR-A (Green Sensitive X-Ray)

Processed with:
Rodinal 1:100 for 4 min. in tanks and hangers

Double 8x10 Contact Print on:
12"x16" Ilford MGFB Classic Matt, Moersch SE6 Blue 1:10 3 min., toned with Moersch MT1 Selenium 1:10 30 sec.

[towolf]

My professor gave me a stack of old Kodak X-ray film envelopes. The do look old and making my first two test shots, I wonder how to determine sensitivity, and what to do about the fog I get.


The base here is really foggy, isn't it? On the left I just fixed a strip straight from the envelope, the strip on the right was cut in the dark and souped for 5 min and then fixed to get base fog. The photo on the right was also developed for 5 min. The photo on the left was exposed at 3 stops over 100ISO and developed for 2.5min (all in Refinal).

[towolf]

I made two more test shots today and would really appreciate an expert opinion.

Since everybody is talking about ISO 100 in this thread I metered as EI 100 and got 1/10 at f22. I made two shots.

• EV 12.6, f22, 1/10, developed for 6 min in Refinal
• EV 12.4, f22, 1s, developed for 2 min in Refinal

The lower one was basically shot at EI 10, 3.3 stops "pull". Yet it looks so much better than the top metered at 100. And I held the incident meter in the midst of those flowers, they were not in the shadows. And somehow the table top is blown out in the top version. It got a much too strong contrast. So it can’t be "ISO 100", can it?

The margin has "K O D A°K XDM" imprinted on it.



How would I proceed here? I need to know what to meter, and how long to develop.

[desertrat]

I haven't done a lot of x-ray film, but I need to shoot at EIs lower than 100 to get any shadow detail. There's an old saying, "Expose for the shadows, develop for the highlights." The only advice I can give, is increase exposure until you get some detail in the shadows, but not necessarily in the deepest shadows. Then adjust development time until the contrast is where you want it. The exposure and development time you end up might be a good deal different than what others are using or recommending, but if following their times does not give you the results you want, then go your own way.

If your films are old and expired, exposure and development times for fresh films probably won't work anyway.

What looks like base fog might be safelight fog. The X-ray films I use are very sensitive to even a deep red safelight. Try handling and developing a few sheets in total darkness and see if there is less fog.

[towolf]

What looks like base fog might be safelight fog. The X-ray films I use are very sensitive to even a deep red safelight. Try handling and developing a few sheets in total darkness and see if there is less fog.

Thanks for your clues, I have meanwhile made one more exposure series with two ColorCheckers (for the gray wedges and to judge color sensitivity) as EI 10, 12, 25, 50. Will also test souping times, and Rodinal.

The safelight can't be the cause of fog because in the image above, the narrow strip was taken out in the dark, developed in the dark, and fixed in the dark. The level of gray matches with the adjacent picture's holder margins.

Perhaps I should lay out some of the trimmings in the safelight for long periods to see how much fogging appears when.

[premortho]

I made two more test shots today and would really appreciate an expert opinion.

Since everybody is talking about ISO 100 in this thread I metered as EI 100 and got 1/10 at f22. I made two shots.

• EV 12.6, f22, 1/10, developed for 6 min in Refinal
• EV 12.4, f22, 1s, developed for 2 min in Refinal

The lower one was basically shot at EI 10, 3.3 stops "pull". Yet it looks so much better than the top metered at 100. And I held the incident meter in the midst of those flowers, they were not in the shadows. And somehow the table top is blown out in the top version. It got a much too strong contrast. So it can’t be "ISO 100", can it?

The margin has "K O D A°K XDM" imprinted on it.



How would I proceed here? I need to know what to meter, and how long to develop.

How long to develop is relatively easy. As long as you use a ruby red safelight. Or led's of the correct spectrum. Remember that X-ray film is orthochromatic. The amber safelight that many use for papers will cause fogging. I use the same safelight for both. Ruby red. A quick check of your safelight is with a cd. When you hold it up in front of a safelight, and you see anything but red off the cd, either the light is not good enough, or you have light leaks in your darkroom. Now, to develop. The way I've done this (about 70 years with ortho film), is to develop until the image looks over developed in the tray, pull it out and look at the red safelight through the back (non emulsion) side of the negative. When you see some shadow detail through the back side, put in the water tray, and don't agitate for at least 2 minutes, then the hypo, and wash. The reason for using a plain water bath without agitation is this allows more shadow detail to come through, as the developer, which is already exhausted in the high lights, will continue working on the shadows. How long to keep it in the water bath comes with experience. Fortunately or un-fortunately, successful photography is much more an art than it is a science. That is the joy of it, isn't it? New comers to this style of work tend to pull the film out of the developer too soon. That's why you look through the back side.