X-Ray Film and Paterson Orbital Tanks

[Mkillmer]

I have been wanting to develop 8x10 X-Ray film but I have never had the correct equipment for development.
My makeshift darkroom does not have plumbing so try development was not appropriate and all other rooms in the house have large windows and glass doors. I perform most of my development with a Jobo Rotary system - this works great, but it is inappropriate for X-ray film - the back side gets scratched and the internal tank ridges leave marks on the film. I had tried many variations to the Jobo and eventually decided X-Ray film would not be practical.
Last week I bought a Paterson Orbital Processor and have been testing/modifying it - I thought my experience my be interesting to some...
My first image developed was a portrait shot on 8x10 Fuji HTR X-ray Film.


Based on reading, I put two small balls of BluTac on 2 diagonal corners of the film before loading the film in the Orbital Processor to help flow under the film. I developed with 200ml paRodinal 1:50 for 4 minutes using continuous manual rotations of the tank on the tanks domed base.
Certainly not elegant, but it worked!
101539

Next I tried some still life images, developed in the same way. The first image I developed with 200m of chemicals and I noticed strong bands of uneven development.

101540
Orbital Processor Test - Uneven Development #1


Some posters on the internet used more developer, so I developed a second picture with 300ml of chemicals.


101541
Orbital Processor - Uneven Development #2


Even stronger banding.
The bands were aligned on the outer edges of the pictures, Other posts on the internet suggested the internal fins (inside the tank) were the cause of the uneven development. This seemed vary plausible - the banding reminded me of flow marks you can get on 35mm film near the sprocket holes if you agitate the film too aggressively.

Why didn't the first portrait have banding then? I suspect it does, but it just so happens the dark background completely masks the banding.
I decided to make some modifications to the tank...

[Mkillmer]

So... I cut off the fins with a saw and sanded the edges down. I also made the decision to stop using the BluTac on the film and stick 4 small balls into each corner of the tank.

I have taken 2 shots with the new setup. Neither image appear to have banding, but the style of the photo is quite different that the earlier 2, so banding may not be as obvious, but it is definitely improved...

101547
Still life - by the Sea (Orbital Processor)


101543
Pommegranites (Orbital Processor)


I will try later today with a smooth background and look for other signs of banding or uneven development.

This is still an experiment underway, but I am fairly confident the Orbital processor will work well enough for me to start seriously using X-ray film in the future.

[Leigh]

I developed with 200ml paRodinal 1:50...
That works out to 4ml of Rodinal concentrate for an 8x10 film.

Rodinal instructions say a minimum of 10ml for one 8x10 film.

Also, Rodinal is designed for minimal agitation, definitely not continuous.

- Leigh

[Mkillmer]

That works out to 4ml of Rodinal concentrate for an 8x10 film.

Rodinal instructions say a minimum of 10ml for one 8x10 film.

Also, Rodinal is designed for minimal agitation, definitely not continuous.

- Leigh

Hi Leigh,
i've read the same, but in my experience, 200ml of paRodinal, at 1:50 (yes 4 ml total) will develop 3 sheets of 8x10 X-Ray film in a row with no problems. I chicken out after 3 and make a new batch. Does paRodinal have different properties to ordinary? It's not supposed to, but I'm not sure how to tell.

I have better results with paRodinal in continuous agitation than I had with DD-X in continuous agitation so I use paRodinal a lot! YMMV, but it's working we'll for me.
Mark

[Ed Bray]

When I use my Paterson Orbital I do Semi-Stand agitation. I also use 400ml of developer and sit the Paterson Orbital tank (without the base) in a 10x12 developing tray in a water bath and sat on a dish-warmer. At the required intervals I very gently rock the tank lengthways a couple of times. I still have my fins on and did not have any streaking.

[David Vickery]

Are you still processing for four minutes?? This is the most likely reason for the poor results. Film needs time to develop fully. Four minutes for a sheet of film is way too short. I would always try to mix/dilute the developer so that I will have at least eight minutes and I routinely process for twelve to sixteen minutes.

[Mkillmer]

When I use my Paterson Orbital I do Semi-Stand agitation. I also use 400ml of developer and sit the Paterson Orbital tank (without the base) in a 10x12 developing tray in a water bath and sat on a dish-warmer. At the required intervals I very gently rock the tank lengthways a couple of times. I still have my fins on and did not have any streaking.

Very interesting! What developer/concentration are you using?

[Mkillmer]

Are you still processing for four minutes?? This is the most likely reason for the poor results. Film needs time to develop fully. Four minutes for a sheet of film is way too short. I would always try to mix/dilute the developer so that I will have at least eight minutes and I routinely process for twelve to sixteen minutes.

I am still using 4 minutes development. If I make it any more dilute, I'm worried that there may not be enough developer to work - the orbital processor only holds 250ml.

[Jody_S]

I have used as little as 1ml of Ilford developers (currently DD-X) per sheet of 8x10, quite deliberately to prevent the sheet from fully developing. I also go for 4ml for X-ray, I've not had a problem with uneven development. Also, X-ray film and imagesetting film are designed for very rapid development, they come out of the processor in 60-90 seconds, developed, fixed and washed. So in a drum with continuous agitation, the main problem is keeping development even given the time it takes to pour in and pour out the solutions. Too short will leave a portion of the sheet overdeveloped because it had significantly more time in the solution than the rest, from the pouring times. I've settled on 1:30 for X-ray, and I adjust my solution in consequence (single use).

I think the original problem could easily be solved by stripping the backside of the X-ray film, the front will be perfectly developed and the scratches are all on the backside anyway.

[Mkillmer]

... X-ray film and imagesetting film are designed for very rapid development, they come out of the processor in 60-90 seconds, developed, fixed and washed...

Hi Jody_S,
Isn't it incredible that X-ray film can be fixed and washed in this short period of time!
I noticed that fixing seems to be complete in less than a minute, how long do you wash for?

Mark

[Leigh]

Processing time is a function of emulsion thickness, among other things.

X-ray film has very thin emulsion, so processing can be done quite rapidly.

It also has emulsion on both sides, to double the contrast.

- Leigh

[Jody_S]

Hi Jody_S,
Isn't it incredible that X-ray film can be fixed and washed in this short period of time!
I noticed that fixing seems to be complete in less than a minute, how long do you wash for?

Mark

10-15 mins in running tap water, no issues with 200 or so sheets. I wash again after stripping the reverse side.

[C_Remington]

If orbital works normal film, why did u ever think it wouldn't work for X-ray?

[Geraldine Powell]

I use 120 ml of developer in my orbital processor, (Xytol for the most recent batch). I have never had any banding. I do continuous manual rotation.
I put little plastic game counters on the bottom of the tank with superglue to prevent sticking of the negatives.
Geraldine

[Mkillmer]

If orbital works normal film, why did u ever think it wouldn't work for X-ray?

X-ray film is double sided and has a very fragile coating when wet.
The problem isn't developing the film, its preventing scratches.

[jcoldslabs]

Processing time is a function of emulsion thickness, among other things.

X-ray film has very thin emulsion, so processing can be done quite rapidly.

I've been testing some very thin emulsion aerial duplicating film and have been getting good results with rotary processing for 2 1/2 minutes using HC-110 1:39. As Leigh says, not all films need 5+ minutes to fully develop.

Jonathan

[Ed Bray]

Very interesting! What developer/concentration are you using?

I use Caffenol C-L (http://caffenol.blogspot.co.uk/search/label/recipe) (1.4g of KBr) @21 degrees C with 4x 4x5 or 2x 5x7 films in a Paterson Orbital Tank with constant gentle agitation for the 1st 30 seconds and 3 gentle agitations of the tank after the following 2, 4, 8, 16 minutes with the Caffenol drained out after a further 39.5 minutes (total 70 minutes).

Caffenol is really easy to make up and the hardest part for most people is finding the Sodium Carbonate (anhydrous).


<a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/edbray/7263686130/" title="Gorse and Woods by Ed Bray, on Flickr"><img src="http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7085/7263686130_9cd213f301_b.jpg" width="812" height="1024" alt="Gorse and Woods"></a>

[Andrew O'Neill]

Sodium Carbonate

One should easily find it in a supermarket. I have a big box of Arm and Hammer Washing Soda.

[Corran]

It also has emulsion on both sides, to double the contrast.

I think this has been stated before but also refuted. I don't think the double-sided film has "double the contrast," just double the density. I've never noticed a difference in contrast characteristics from film that I bleached one side of, or those that I did not.

Also, I routinely develop 8x10 sheets in a BTZS tube with only 2.5mL of Rodinal (1:100 dilution) with no problems, constant agitation.

[Ed Bray]

One should easily find it in a supermarket. I have a big box of Arm and Hammer Washing Soda.

I'm pretty sure that the Arm & Hammer is not Anhydrous and you either need to bake it (to reduce the moisture content) or use a lot more to give the correct amount of Sodium Carbonate for the formula (with a slight decrease in the amount of water used).

[SergeiR]

That works out to 4ml of Rodinal concentrate for an 8x10 film.

Rodinal instructions say a minimum of 10ml for one 8x10 film.

Also, Rodinal is designed for minimal agitation, definitely not continuous.

- Leigh

I do continious agitation development of R09 1+100 of 200ml for 2 sheets and its certainly works for me. And i do much longer times than 2 minutes.
YMMV

[Mkillmer]

I applied silicon surface protectors from the hardware shop inside the Jobo tank - Fantastic!! No Scratches!!!

101819

101820