Photo shot with X-ray film [Archive] - Large Format Photography Forum

Gene McCluney

15-Jul-2007, 22:44

This image of the old Bridge (a favorite subject of mine) was shot with some X-ray film I got as a free sample to try. It is called Blue Sensitive High Speed. I cut it down to 5x7 size from the 8x10 samples I got. I developed it by inspection in HC-110b..worked out to be about three minutes. Exposure was about f45 at 1/4 sec.
This is reproduced from a scan of the negative, with some curve adjustment applied and a wee bit of sharpening.

Dave Brown

16-Jul-2007, 12:38

Cool. I've been experimenting with X-ray film in my 8 x 10 for some time now. The stuff is cheap ($30 for 100 sheets) and the supply isn't going to dry up any time soon. Having emulsion on both sides leads to slightly soft photos, but I like the look. The base is thicker than ortho films I've used, making it much easier to work with. In addition to various dilutions of HC-110, I've also developed X-ray film in dektol. Keep up the good work.

Paul Metcalf

16-Jul-2007, 13:12

Having emulsion on both sides leads to slightly soft photos, but I like the look. I'm curious as to why there's emulsion on both sides. The phosphorous panel in an x-ray machine would be between the x-ray object and the film, correct?:confused: Anyhow, this is still way cool. What are good sources for x-ray film (in 8x10). Thanks. Paul

Gene McCluney

16-Jul-2007, 14:14

Gene McCluney

16-Jul-2007, 14:39

Here is another shot I took with X-ray film. Old civil war graves.

EdWorkman

16-Jul-2007, 15:24

Is single emulsion sided film noticeably sharper ?
thanks
Ed

Gene McCluney

16-Jul-2007, 17:22

Is single emulsion sided film noticeably sharper ?
thanks
Ed

I don't know that there is any "single sided" X-ray film.

EdWorkman

16-Jul-2007, 17:26

It was my impression that the "half speed" film was single coated, and the "High Speed" coated on both sides. Not true?
regards
Ed

Donald Qualls

16-Jul-2007, 17:44

Actually, it's "high definition" (if industrial film) or "mammography" film (if medical type) that's single sided; it's used in applications where fine resolution and sharpness are more important than maximum density (in mammography, I believe an amplifying phosphor screen is used, technology similar to light amplification only with x-ray sensitive amplifier screens, in order to get maximum definition and enough density to read with a minimal x-ray dose). The "half speed" is just slower emulsion, AFAIK. BTW, there are also ortho X-ray films, intended for use with either blue or green phosphor screens; a full-speed ortho high-def film would be very much like an ISO 50 ortho photographic film, and ought to avoid the softening of the dual emulsion.

I've got a partial box of long-expired Kodak X-Omat film here; I should try to find out which sort it is (blue sensitive or ortho) and what speed, and work on getting it cut to sizes I can use -- should be easy enough under my red safelight. Either that, or trade it to someone with a BIG camera (it's listed as 35x43 cm, which I translate as about 14x17 inches)... ;)

EdWorkman

16-Jul-2007, 18:06

eddie

16-Jul-2007, 18:28

tylercooney

16-Jul-2007, 19:52

Thanks Don, now I know what to look for.
I have actually started building a 7x17 box camera.
The test of my skills is the filmholder. If I can make that work the GG back should be easier.
I've designed it to match my poor skills and am waiting for my son to cut a couple of pieces of metal with precision so I can do the fill in with wood and glue and putty and a big hammer.
I hate the thought of spoiling a sheet of HP-5 etc as I attempt to iron out the light leaks etc. so I appreciate very much all the posts about Xray film.

I'm thinking about building a large film holder also and was thinking I would just use photo paper to test for light leaks. Should work the same right? Put the paper in take the holder out into bright sunlight for several minutes and then develop the paper. If anything but white shows up you know you have a leak somewhere. Would that work?

tylercooney

16-Jul-2007, 20:01

I just checked out the CXS website. They sell developers for their films also. Would it improve/increase sharpness to use those developers over Dektol or other? Might be worth a try at 6 dollars a gallon. Also, when shooting this film is any filter needed?

Gene McCluney

16-Jul-2007, 22:14

I got a free sample of the CXS High Speed Blue Sensitive, and all my sample images are with that film. Here is another.

Nick_3536

18-Jul-2007, 08:48

I'm guessing the various X-ray film holders are useless for cameras? At least with normal backs.

David Vickery

18-Jul-2007, 09:52

All of the the X-ray cassettes are useless because they are mostly only transparent to X-rays. But there was a double-sided, medical/industrial film holder made in the 14x17 size, and probably 11x14 too, and is why these sizes have been standardized throughout the film industry (as apposed to the other ULF camera sizes). So if you can find a medical/industrial film holder in the 11x14 or 14x17 sizes then they should fit in any properly manufactured 11x14 or 14x17 camera.

David Vickery

18-Jul-2007, 10:04

You can also find a variety of X-ray film on ebay. I have a some that I plan on trying out as soon as I get my darkroom back. I did play with some before I had to give up my darkroom over a year ago and I made one image that I loved and I feel that at least some of the x-ray films hold a lot of promise.

If you want only single sided film then look for the notch code. It can be hard to decipher what some of these films are, or what they will do, but at least if it has a notch code then you know that it is coated on only one side. Whether that is good or bad depends on the user of course.

David Vickery

18-Jul-2007, 10:12

Gene, What is your EI???

DeBone75

18-Jul-2007, 16:33

At one time they made a film holder for x-ray film that was used for film dulpication machines. They were the same as regular 8X10 holders except they had a small rib on each side. They could be cut off fairly easily. I have not seen any in use for several years. I work in a Hospital.

Richard Martel

18-Jul-2007, 18:00

Interesting.

http://www.e-radiography.net/radtech/f/film.htm

richard

Gene McCluney

18-Jul-2007, 18:38

Gene, What is your EI???

I haven't quite got that down yet. For the "Big Wheel" shot it was about EI 50. I developed by inspection under red safelight in HC-110b. Developing time was about 3 minutes on a film hanger with frequent agitation, but not continuous agitation. I would hold the film up and look thru it at the red safelight to judge shadow density.

Gene McCluney

18-Jul-2007, 18:44

Another image from a couple days ago, shot on CXS High Speed Blue Sensitive X-Ray film. (which is Agfa film) The original is sharper than it appears in this very small jpg. however the passenger car in the background is intentionally a little soft.

EdWorkman

19-Jul-2007, 11:43

Very cool
Thanks for sharing
Ed

Donald Qualls

22-Jul-2007, 12:14

so the link that gene gave which do i want to buy? which did you buy gene? CXS High (Full) Speed Blue Film or CXS Ortho Green Film or CXS Green Latitude Film

which is more like regular film. will all work for me? thanks

eddie

I'd be inclined to try a sample of the Green Latitude or Ortho Green film -- those'll be ortho sensitive and one is faster (Ortho Green) while the other has wider latitude, which implies a longer range. It doesn't look like CXS, at least, tells you which films are single- vs. double-sided, but the ones that talk about "sharpness" are likely to be single sided.

Gene McCluney

27-Jul-2007, 10:29

All the photos I posted in previous posts were from a sample pack of blue sensitive X-ray film. I ordered a 100 sheet box, and my first use of the film from this box shows fogging under red safelight processing. I know it is the safelight because of the pattern of the fogging shows the shadow of the film hangar the film was processed in. It is odd that the film which should be only sensitive to the blue end of the visible light spectrum is actually effected by the deep red safelight...a safelight that works perfectly well for my processing of ortho/litho film, a safelight that I have used for years for that purpose. What do you suppose the issue is?

Ernest Purdum

27-Jul-2007, 10:54

This reminds me of being in the office of an industrial radiographer. He had some beautiful images made with his X-ray machine.

Maybe blue sensitive film would be useful to someone interested in ancient processes and ancient soft-focus lenses.

wclavey

27-Jul-2007, 12:18

I looked for a spec sheet for the various x-ray films available from CXSonline and couldn't find any, and I checked the other vendors of the AGFA product, with no luck there either, but I cannot say it was exhaustive.

So I tried the opposite approach and searched the Kodak website for safelights and x-ray and found a support column that talked about x-ray film fogging. That discussion pointed to this safelight publication, which covers all their film products. I doubt that it is something new to most of you, but it seems to confirm that you would be safe with a Kodak GBX-2 safelight.

http://www.kodak.com/global/en/consumer/products/pdf/k4.pdf

I further found that total cumulative safe exposure to this lamp is limited to 2-2.5 minutes.

Donald Qualls

27-Jul-2007, 15:36

It is odd that the film which should be only sensitive to the blue end of the visible light spectrum is actually effected by the deep red safelight...a safelight that works perfectly well for my processing of ortho/litho film, a safelight that I have used for years for that purpose. What do you suppose the issue is?

Most likely the dyes used to sensitize the film for visible-blue light actually also have a sensitivity spike in the red or infrared region. These wavelengths wouldn't affect things with automatic processing and X-ray exposure, but could cause trouble in processing under safelight.

If you have the option, you might try either a red or yellow LED safelight; the very narrow emission of the LED makes it much more likely to avoid trouble with "stray" sensitivity bands in the film. Yellow/amber would probably be the better choice -- and it's probably worth doing an actual formal safelight test; you might find the emulsion is similar to old green-blind IR films (this is what Weegee used to use; it was decades ahead of HIE which was broadly panchromatic as well as IR sensitive), which had fairly broad but low sensitivity in the red-to-infrared and even reached into yellow a bit, as well as blue/UV, but had a wide "dead" band in the green.

DanJones

27-Jul-2007, 16:00

Somebody has to ask...do you think it would work in pyrocat hd? Thinking along the lines of contact prints for VDB or POP.

Gene McCluney

28-Jul-2007, 11:11

Somebody has to ask...do you think it would work in pyrocat hd? Thinking along the lines of contact prints for VDB or POP.

Since it is a silver/gelatine emulsion, I would think it would "work" in any Pyro based developer. I see no issues with pyro.

Donald Qualls

28-Jul-2007, 15:45

Since it is a silver/gelatine emulsion, I would think it would "work" in any Pyro based developer. I see no issues with pyro.

Correct thinking here -- X-ray film is a silver halide emulsion and should work in any developer that will develop "conventional" camera films, glass dry plates, photographic paper, etc. Whether you'll like the results, you can only test.

I would suggest (from experience with Foma films in 120, which have a blue base similar to many X-ray films) that developers that produce an overall stain may give an uncomfortably high Dmin, especially if the stain is yellowish or brownish in color; I've gotten negatives with so much base density they were hard to scan when processing Foma in Caffenol (which produces a distinct overall brown stain). I don't know if this would be a problem with the greenish stain from true pyro developers like WD2D+ or ABC, but I suspect it would still be an issue, since the green pyro stain and blue base absorb on different wavelengths, so their densities would add.

If you have a staining developer that produces little or no general stain (like, say, Caffenol C), you may well find the results to your liking...

Gene McCluney

29-Jul-2007, 08:36

In regards my earlier post commenting on fogging with red safelight. As an experiment, I cut, loaded, shot and processed a couple of sheets of the Blue Sensitive film without any safelight (darkness), and as I expected, no fogging. I am kinda sad about this, as I was hoping I could develop by inspection.

wclavey

29-Jul-2007, 09:44

I just finished processing the 4 4x5s I made from the first sheet of the sample pack I ordered and I, too, can confirm the fogging with a red safelight. I have a large orange filter I am going to add in front of the red filter to see if that narrows down the light from the safelight and I moved it another 3 feet further away and will test again.

I also see that my paper cutter scratches the negatives about an inch in from the cut edge - - this corresponds exactly to the pressure bar that comes down onto the sheet being cut (it is a rolling wheel cutter). I think I need to put a sheet of blank paper on top of the film after I position it to cut it.

One of the 4 images has enough there that I am going to scan it after it dries to see of I can discern anything else before I test again.

Andrew O'Neill

29-Jul-2007, 09:46

Hmmmmm, I wonder how this film would perform as a masking film?

Gene McCluney

29-Jul-2007, 09:49

After over 40 years of working in the darkroom, I can successfully cut and process the sheets in total darkness, I was just optimistic that I wouldn't have to. Still, regardless of the "total darkness" issue, I am very enthusiastic about using the X-ray film for two reasons. 1. It is very cheap, and 2., It gives a unique "vintage" look to the images.

Gene McCluney

29-Jul-2007, 09:51

Hmmmmm, I wonder how this film would perform as a masking film?

You should realize that X-ray films have a strikingly blue base. This color, while not affecting scans from the film or prints on graded paper, would affect contrast on variable-contrast papers.

Andrew O'Neill

29-Jul-2007, 09:56

Thanks for that info, Gene. That's out then....damn.

DeBone75

29-Jul-2007, 19:07

The Kodak film I use has a very blue base. If there is much of a change in contrast I sure can't see any. I also just got some of the free sample packs from two different companies. Looking forward to trying them. Also found a company that sells Konica 8X10 100 sheet box for $23 and change. Talk about cheap.

Gene McCluney

30-Jul-2007, 08:35

Also found a company that sells Konica 8X10 100 sheet box for $23 and change. Talk about cheap.

Would you care to share with us the name of this company so we could order some of this also?

John Curran

30-Jul-2007, 14:55

Great thread! Got to try this...

John

Brian Bullen

30-Jul-2007, 19:37

Gene, I found this site in searching for x-ray film:
http://xray-film-discounts.com/catalog/index.php?cPath=3&osCsid=8669f2fb49f5731e9ff8d6f8920c73bf
I haven't ordered from them so I can't speak to their reputation.

DeBone75

30-Jul-2007, 22:40

OK so it's $25 and change.
http://www.xraysupercenter.com/search.asp?SearchCol=6&SearchString=X-Ray%20Film&SortField=Spec&SortOrder=DESC

paul stimac

31-Jul-2007, 23:48

) and the supply isn't going to dry up any time soon.

Our local hospital and vet clinic just got a digital x-ray machines...

Gene McCluney

1-Aug-2007, 04:22

Our local hospital and vet clinic just got a digital x-ray machines...

Maybe you can talk them into giving you their stock of X-ray film for your pictorial use.

EdWorkman

1-Aug-2007, 10:09

In googling for xray supplies I have found many interesting things
Such as
Film processing hangers for some "ULF" sizes [like 7x17]
Plastic reeld for 70, 90 100 mm film x13 ft
If anybody cares I can post some urls [I think]

DanJones

4-Aug-2007, 15:55

just another thought...has anyone tried Diafine?

Gene McCluney

4-Aug-2007, 16:12

I have attached a comparison shot, Blue sensitive X-ray film rated at between ISO 50 and ISO 100, and Fomapan 200 rated at ISO 100. The X-ray film was developed in HC-110-b for about 2 minutes, the Fomapan in HC_110b for about 3.5 minutes.
The small file size permitted here does not allow a big enough image to show that the Fomapan image is sharper.

ronlamarsh

17-Jun-2010, 12:26

I'm curious as to why there's emulsion on both sides. The phosphorous panel in an x-ray machine would be between the x-ray object and the film, correct?:confused: Anyhow, this is still way cool. What are good sources for x-ray film (in 8x10). Thanks. Paul

There is emulsion on both sides because the cassettes(film holders) used have cesium iodied intensifying screens on both sides that glow during the x-ray exposure and yes double emulsion builds density faster being exposed on both sides. The industry went this direction to reduce exposure for the patient. Before intensifying screens the film was single emulsion and used in a paper cassette(oragami nightmare) but the exposure was extremely long and suffered from motion artifacts and of course the patient suffered also from increased dose: the use of intensifying screens cut the dose by by 90%. If you can find film intended for mamography it is single emulsion, what I have is blu/green sensitive, high contrast with very fine grain and high sharpness as it was used to detect calcifications down to 100 microns, but.....you had to have the processing correct. The tests i have done with the stuff I have show it needs an asa rating of about 50 to get good shadow detail. I rate it this low as most of these film have a long toe but once you hit the straight portion of the curve its STRAIGHT all the way out to a density of 4 b+f