AGFA Chronex medical film: What should I rate this?

[Drew Bedo]

Got two boxes of this film. . . .about 200 sheets of 8x10 in total.

This is a single side emulsion medical imaging film used in Nuclear Medicine and Ultrasound to record from a CRT. In the past, I have used Kodak Ektascan which was made for the same applications, and I rated it at 200. The Ektascan was compatible with chemistry and processing for Tri-X.

Anyone have experience with the AGFA film? What should I rate it at?

Sure I can test it, but some idea of a starting point would help.

Sorry: I still can't figure out how to post a picture right-side-up!

[Drew Bedo]

No experience with this?

[Dugan]

No experience with this?

It looks like it's up to you, Drew!
;)

[Jim Noel]

Since it was competitor of Ektascan, I would start my trial at EI 100, and develop by inspection.

[Drew Bedo]

I used to rate Ektascan at ISO 200 and developed it in the automatics roller transport gear in the darkroom of the hospital I worked doing Nuclear Medicine imaging in the 1990s. That gear was normally used for X-Ray, Ultrasound and Nuc-Med films. The negs came out dry in 90 seconds! Later on, this film was processed in a commercial lab using "normal" development in Tri-X chemistry . . .also turned out well.

I intend to test it from ISO 50 to ISO 400. We'll see.