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

[premortho]

To me, I would strengthen the developer. It all seems to be there, just thin.
Great idea axs810.

Tom, maybe the narrower histogram for 11 min shows film pushing and I need for exposure and less devel?

[ScottPhotoCo]

Thanks, Tim. 100 as always.

Thank you sir. With the Ektascan I have found different sensitivities dependent on light. I now shoot it at ISO 80 in the shade and under artificial light and at ISO 125 in most sunlight applications. If split sun/shade with the main subject focus in the shade I'll split it at 100. Anyone else experiencing this?

Processing with Rodinal at 30ml/1l in a Jobo (continuous) for 6:30 at 20c.

Tim
www.ScottPhoto.co

[Ari]

8x10 Kodak G Xray, Gundlach Radar, 10m rotary in 1:100 Adonal

https://farm4.staticflickr.com/3857/14900604227_faff2a18bd_c.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/oGHuvr)Scan-140830-0007www (https://flic.kr/p/oGHuvr) by Sergei Rodionov (https://www.flickr.com/people/24930737@N05/), on Flickr

I love this shot; you're getting some great mileage out of that Gundlach Radar.

[StoneNYC]

Thank you sir. With the Ektascan I have found different sensitivities dependent on light. I now shoot it at ISO 80 in the shade and under artificial light and at ISO 125 in most sunlight applications. If split sun/shade with the main subject focus in the shade I'll split it at 100. Anyone else experiencing this?

Processing with Rodinal at 30ml/1l in a Jobo (continuous) for 6:30 at 20c.

Tim
www.ScottPhoto.co

To an extent I like the density of the shadows but highlights are still blowing out on me too much, I did side by side comparisons of Delta100 and Ektascan@100 both in Rodinal 1:50 using 300ml total in the 3005 different dev times of course, but I'm pretty sure it was over development not over exposure that caused highlight blowouts on the ektascan film. I tried using a yellow filter as others have mentioned that helps, but I haven't been able to test enough of both to see if the yellow does help tame the contrast or not...

I'm thinning maybe shooting it at 80 instead and reducing dev time significantly that might help. So that's my next attempt.

[Andrew O'Neill]

Abandoned lodge on Vancouver Island. Ektascan developed in very dilute Pyrocat-HD.

[angusparker]

To an extent I like the density of the shadows but highlights are still blowing out on me too much, I did side by side comparisons of Delta100 and Ektascan@100 both in Rodinal 1:50 using 300ml total in the 3005 different dev times of course, but I'm pretty sure it was over development not over exposure that caused highlight blowouts on the ektascan film. I tried using a yellow filter as others have mentioned that helps, but I haven't been able to test enough of both to see if the yellow does help tame the contrast or not...

I'm thinning maybe shooting it at 80 instead and reducing dev time significantly that might help. So that's my next attempt.

With Ektascan I've seen quite a few people shoot at ISO 80 and shorten DEV times by 15% to tame contrast. Seems to work for me. Adding the yellow filter might be the next step. I've only done 20 sheets of the stuff but I'm going to become good with it once the 14x17 camera is up and running. Don't want to waste my time when I have to develop a sheet at a time.

[StoneNYC]

With Ektascan I've seen quite a few people shoot at ISO 80 and shorten DEV times by 15% to tame contrast. Seems to work for me. Adding the yellow filter might be the next step. I've only done 20 sheets of the stuff but I'm going to become good with it once the 14x17 camera is up and running. Don't want to waste my time when I have to develop a sheet at a time.

So true!

[Fred L]

http://www.kolstad.us/ebay/4x5-EKTASCAN-TEST-EI100-03-4MinDev.jpg

Jonathan

wow, I would not have guessed this was X-ray film if you hadn't included that data. and the price is incredible. guess I'll have to order some to experiment with ;)

[jcoldslabs]

wow, I would not have guessed this was X-ray film if you hadn't included that data. and the price is incredible. guess I'll have to order some to experiment with ;)

I'd recommend it. With a little bit of testing--it only took me three 4x5 sheets to get in the ballpark for exposure and processing times--you'll be well on your way. And yes, you can't beat the price.

Jonathan

[Fred L]

only hitch is that the link says no shipping to Canada. will have to call and ask about specifically and if they can make exceptions.

so to be sure, this film is single side coated which is why it looks so damn nice compared to other X-ray films which are coated both sides right ?

[Ari]

Fred, I just added the film to my cart, and they list three places as shipping destinations: USA, Canada and Dominican Republic.
Shipping one box to Canada via UPS is only $22, but it's UPS :(

[Fred L]

thanks Ari, that UPS thing is a killer though. did you order or just ran the order to see what shipping cost ?

[Ari]

I just ran it through to see the cost.
I'm sending you a PM.

[Jim Noel]

Abandoned lodge on Vancouver Island. Ektascan developed in very dilute Pyrocat-HD.
What do you consider "very dilute" Pyrocat HD?

[Andrew O'Neill]

5ml of A and B solutions in 1200ml water.

[Jim Noel]

Thanks

[NiNo]

yesterday was not my day :) negs, prints.... but anyway

121003

121004

121005

TTX:
13x18 + Fujinon 250/6,3
Kodax Blue X-Ray 13x18 in Pyrocat HD 1:1:100, contact printed on Slavich paper in Ilford MG Dev

[Degroto]

Can't you just buy some x-ray at an Canadian seller for medical equipment? Might be it bit more expensive but from what I have read you have 22 dollar to play with if you can skip UPS. In the Netherlands I bought at a dutch medical supplier and they didn't ask if you where a professional. But that might be different in Canada of course. :) Oh and I payed €55,00 for 100 sheets of double sided film.

[towolf]

My day wasn’t much better either. Thought I’d tentatively standardize on ISO 25 and do some portraits, since I really liked photoevangelists work in this thread.

This extremely blue film make skin looks crazy with all those pores and blemishes. And then I think I’m overdeveloping after I thought I have to battle mottling with near continuous agitation and sheet flipping in my tray.

Metered ISO 25, f22, 1s. But messed up on the first frame and shot at f5.6, i.e., 4 stops "overexposed". So, ISO 1.6?

http://i.imgur.com/kbIegWTl.jpg (http://imgur.com/kbIegWT.jpg)

Metered ISO 25, f22, 1s. Metered EV 9 on the right cheek and EV 7 on the left. So I need to go easy on the agitation, or dilute more. But I already diluted Refinal to 1+3 and developed this for 15 min, instead of 5 min before.

http://i.imgur.com/nc5hPlLl.jpg (http://imgur.com/nc5hPlL.jpg)

side-by-side

http://i.imgur.com/IcbMzqx.jpg (http://imgur.com/IcbMzqx.jpg)

But now I think I will just stop doing trays and use this

http://i.imgur.com/TR6SnIp.jpg (http://imgur.com/TR6SnIp.jpg)

Then I can do less frequent agitation and hopefully avoid mottling and fucking up the sheet trying to flip it over.

[premortho]

You are developing by time instead of by inspection? What concentration of Rodinal are you using? I adjust my concentration of Rodinal, or Dektol until it takes about 8-9 minutes for developement. I had a problem with stronger mixes of the image going from too thin to too contrasty with higher concentrations too quick. Are you also washing (stopping) in a rotary processer? I would try just changing one thing at a time. I would first develop the way you have been, then rinse in a tray without agitation. I use distilled water. What happens is, the water pretty well stops the highlight development, but, by not agitating, the developer works a little longer on the shadows. If that doesn't do enough, then try diluting the developer more. You are already close to the short side time frame for developing.I don't know how much, if at all, this helps with this problem. But I can assure you of one thing. The problem is not with the film. Ektascan is the finest orthochromatic film available today.
To an extent I like the density of the shadows but highlights are still blowing out on me too much, I did side by side comparisons of Delta100 and Ektascan@100 both in Rodinal 1:50 using 300ml total in the 3005 different dev times of course, but I'm pretty sure it was over development not over exposure that caused highlight blowouts on the ektascan film. I tried using a yellow filter as others have mentioned that helps, but I haven't been able to test enough of both to see if the yellow does help tame the contrast or not...

I'm thinning maybe shooting it at 80 instead and reducing dev time significantly that might help. So that's my next attempt.

[premortho]

Well, the bottom one looks great to me. The top one would be a problem no matter what kind of film you used. Too much light coming in through the window vs. the amount of light on the shadow side. The lighting ratio is too extreme. Did you use a reflector? If you can find a copy of Mortenson's book on portrait lighting and exposure, I think it would help you a great deal. You certainly need no help on posing a model. These two are great. I don't know what the problem is with the middle one, unless it is under exposed.
yesterday was not my day :) negs, prints.... but anyway

121003

121004

121005

TTX:
13x18 + Fujinon 250/6,3
Kodax Blue X-Ray 13x18 in Pyrocat HD 1:1:100, contact printed on Slavich paper in Ilford MG Dev

[premortho]

only hitch is that the link says no shipping to Canada. will have to call and ask about specifically and if they can make exceptions.

so to be sure, this film is single side coated which is why it looks so damn nice compared to other X-ray films which are coated both sides right ?
No, that's not the only reason it looks nice. It is also backed (anti-halation backing), which stops the flaring one gets with double side x-ray film. Ektascan is the finest orthochromatic film available today, other that Ilford's Ortho-Plus, which is only available in 4X5, and a lot more expensive.

[NiNo]

premortho, thank you for your notes

[Fred L]

thanks Premortho, yup, anti-halation backing is definitely a plus for sharper images. Shooting ortho would be something new, but for the right subjects....

[StoneNYC]

yesterday was not my day :) negs, prints.... but anyway

121003

121004

121005

TTX:
13x18 + Fujinon 250/6,3
Kodax Blue X-Ray 13x18 in Pyrocat HD 1:1:100, contact printed on Slavich paper in Ilford MG Dev

Pretty sure any day with a beauty like her is a good day, and I like the blow out on the first one, it's pleasant, and I like the harshness on her face in the last one, again, personal preference but I like both of them.

[NiNo]

thank you!
my wife will be glad to know:)

[NiNo]

does anyone know why scratches on the negative?
i am pretty accurate by working with, but at the end i always see 2-3-more scratches :(
i use kodak blue

is kodak/retina green or another one better?

many thx!

[Vaughn]

Most x-ray film is double-sided (emulsion on both sides), so both sides needs to be handled with twice the care of single-sided film. If you are developing in trays, try putting a piece of glass on the bottom of the tray to prevent scratches. Work out a development method that minimizes how often a side of the film touches anything until it is dry.

Some folks have found that film hangers are a nice way to go, depending on size.

[NiNo]

Vaughn, thanks a lot!

a piece of glass - its so easy! :) i will try to develope with next time

[Vaughn]

Trouble is, you should have a piece of glass with each tray...and of course, not breaking them, too! Good Luck!

[premortho]

Yes, the right subject is right. As I've said before, I was taught (by my grandfather) to use ortho film for everything except portraits of women. Ortho film can be brutally sharp. I suppose that was the rational for soft focus lenses back in the day.
thanks Premortho, yup, anti-halation backing is definitely a plus for sharper images. Shooting ortho would be something new, but for the right subjects....

[Jim Noel]

Yes, the right subject is right. As I've said before, I was taught (by my grandfather) to use ortho film for everything except portraits of women. Ortho film can be brutally sharp. I suppose that was the rational for soft focus lenses back in the day.
When I was learning photography in the late 30's and 40's ortho films were at least as common as panchromatic ones. I used to carry Tri-X ortho as well as Super XX. Oh how I miss Super XX. I still have a little Tri-X Ortho and am glad I ran across this info about the Carestream product.An order is going in today.

Jim

[Jim Noel]

Yes, the right subject is right. As I've said before, I was taught (by my grandfather) to use ortho film for everything except portraits of women. Ortho film can be brutally sharp. I suppose that was the rational for soft focus lenses back in the day.

It was always interesting to photograph people with a few freckles as those beneath the skin also showed up as very dark spots.

[Max Hao]

I'm only half way through this wonderful thread. Lots of beautiful images and a wealth of info. I've been shooting X-ray for a few months. I try to control scratches and managed to get scratch free negatives roughly 8 out of 10. Have you folks tried repairing a scratched negative? I was thinking of pencils. Any other stuff?
Cheers,
Max

[grzybu]

I have small bathroom which works as my darkroom when needed and I can use only one Paterson developing tray for developing, stop bath and fixing ;) I've used very fine sandpaper to smooth tray bottom and since then I didn't saw any scratches, but I don't touch the sheet until it's fixed and cleaned. Then I touch it only at the very edge and hang it to dry.
I've made safelight using three bright red LED's connected to 4xAA batteries and it works perfect. Light it bright and there is absolutely no fogging on the film.

[premortho]

When I was learning photography in the late 30's and 40's ortho films were at least as common as panchromatic ones. I used to carry Tri-X ortho as well as Super XX. Oh how I miss Super XX. I still have a little Tri-X Ortho and am glad I ran across this info about the Carestream product.An order is going in today.

Jim
Yes, but is more fussy than Tri-X Ortho. That product had three emulsion layers, fast, faster and pretty damn fast. Ektascan has one layer, fast. But, with careful metering, and not overdeveloping, it is sure good stuff! I use a Weston Master 111, and have had good results. When you cut this down to 4X5 (or 5X7) remember to notch the other corners so you will load the cut film holders correctly. And a good 2X yellow filter does good work with this film. When I started photography (in 1946), Ortho was the most common film used. Pan was only used for special occasions or special effects. Remember the red filter craze? I bought a couple rolls of pan to try the red filter sky effect, but gave it up. Looked too un-natural for me. Be careful, you've probably forgotten how much sharper ortho is then pan.

[Jim Noel]

Mine is due Monday. I am looking forward to a few tests for EI and development prior to walking over the the lake with the 8x10.
Jim

[Fred L]

look forward to seeing the photos Jim

[premortho]

Development? Don't you develop ortho film by inspection? I might add that I have been using a led safelight originally made for a bicycle. If you go this route, be sure to get one with a clear lens. That way you get the red led bulb. The color cut-off on led's is quite sharp.
Mine is due Monday. I am looking forward to a few tests for EI and development prior to walking over the the lake with the 8x10.
Jim

[SergeiR]

10m, rotary 1:150 Rodinal

https://farm4.staticflickr.com/3879/15169150431_55e521af70_c.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/p7rRWp)Scan-140907-0006www (https://flic.kr/p/p7rRWp) by Sergei Rodionov (https://www.flickr.com/people/24930737@N05/), on Flickr

[NiNo]

some pics from yesterday

121462 121463

TTX:
Fujinon 250/6,3
Kodak Blue 13x18 in Pyrocat HD 1:1:100 on Foma FB + Ilford MG Dev

[SergeiR]

8x10, Kodak CSG, rotary processing 12m, Rodinal 1:150 (or somewhere between 150 and 200)

https://farm4.staticflickr.com/3862/15171675592_32f8bd581d_c.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/p7ENzE)Scan-140907-0005www (https://flic.kr/p/p7ENzE) by Sergei Rodionov (https://www.flickr.com/people/24930737@N05/), on Flickr

[StoneNYC]

8x10, Kodak CSG, rotary processing 12m, Rodinal 1:150 (or somewhere between 150 and 200)

https://farm4.staticflickr.com/3862/15171675592_32f8bd581d_c.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/p7ENzE)Scan-140907-0005www (https://flic.kr/p/p7ENzE) by Sergei Rodionov (https://www.flickr.com/people/24930737@N05/), on Flickr

How did you get the nice vignette? Was it just the lens or purposefully done? Or in the print process?

[SergeiR]

How did you get the nice vignette? Was it just the lens or purposefully done? Or in the print process?

Its pretty much how light was there, and very light burning on the right edge. Combination of overcast, slightly burnt out grass and quite dense foliage around doing rest.

[trundrumbalind]

Hello! There seems to be 3 types of Ektascan film; Green, Full Speed Blue and Half Speed Blue. Do you know the difference between these?
I found a distributor here in Mexico but I don't know which one should I buy.


Jim,

I think this is the stuff, although the photo they show with the listing is incorrect. This is the "blue" variety with a blue-tinted base. I just ordered a couple of 100 sheet boxes:

http://www.zzmedical.com/8x10-in-carestream-kodak-ektascan-b-ra-single-emulsion-video-film.html

Jonathan

[jcoldslabs]

I don't know about the "color" varieties--blue/green/full speed--but here is a scan of the box and label from the 8x10 x-ray film that I just bought. All I can say for sure is this version is a single-sided emulsion on a blue-tinted base with an anti-halation layer and a shooting speed somewhere around EI50 - EI100.


http://www.kolstad.us/ebay/Ektascan%20Box.jpg



http://www.kolstad.us/ebay/Ektascan%20Box%20Label.jpg

Jonathan

[Jim Noel]

Yes, I will be developing it by inspection but I like to home in on EI and development prior to making images which I hope will be more important.
My darkroom is rather fully equipped with several types and colors of safelights so I have no concerns there. There are at least three red ones which have been totally satisfactory with Ilford Ortho as well as some very ancient Tri-X Ortho.
I sent you a PM to which I hope you respond positively.

Jim

[StoneNYC]

I don't know about the "color" varieties--blue/green/full speed--but here is a scan of the box and label from the 8x10 x-ray film that I just bought. All I can say for sure is this version is a single-sided emulsion on a blue-tinted base with an anti-halation layer and a shooting speed somewhere around EI50 - EI100.


http://www.kolstad.us/ebay/Ektascan%20Box.jpg



http://www.kolstad.us/ebay/Ektascan%20Box%20Label.jpg

Jonathan

Yea that's what I have, I've never heard of different versions...

[premortho]

Yea that's what I have, I've never heard of different versions...

And neither have I. Kodak has many different X-ray films, which vary in color rendition, but Ektascan is the most orthochromatic of all of Kodak's X-ray films. In fact it is the most orthochromatic film they have, period. :)

[trundrumbalind]

Yea that's what I have, I've never heard of different versions...

121562
Here you go. I'd like to buy some b/ra film, but I don't know which one I should get :/

[StoneNYC]

121562
Here you go. I'd like to buy some b/ra film, but I don't know which one I should get :/

Interesting, when you order it, does it still give you the options in the drop down?

Generally, Green is 400, Blue is 200, half speed is half of whatever type so half blue so 100.

I THOUGHT all ektascan was only 100 so not sure the website is correct ? Hmmmm ok who knows more?

[Tin Can]

Ektascan is not regular X-Ray film at all. It is designed for CRT video screen capture, it is never used for actual X-Ray like the double sided stuff.

I imagine Ektascan will not be around much longer as imaging CRT's is fast becoming even more obsolete than analog X-Ray.

Other companies do make CRT video capture film, but it is difficult to find any good info on it. Somebody needs to buy samples and test it.

I use Ektascan and am very happy with it.

[trundrumbalind]

wow, how did you developed this in a rotary tube? didn't you get scratches and uneven developmpent on the side facing the tube?? Or is there something I'm missing about Kodak G X-Ray?

8x10 Kodak G Xray, Gundlach Radar, 10m rotary in 1:100 Adonal

https://farm4.staticflickr.com/3857/14900604227_faff2a18bd_c.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/oGHuvr)Scan-140830-0007www (https://flic.kr/p/oGHuvr) by Sergei Rodionov (https://www.flickr.com/people/24930737@N05/), on Flickr

[Jim Noel]

First two sheets of Ektascan developed. Both exposed at EI 100, and companion images on FP4+ at same exposure for comparison.
1st sheet in tray with HC110 1+63 for 6 minutes almost constant agitation+ 2 minutes standing in water. Shadows are under-exposed, although FP4 is not. Contrast a little strong even for salt prints.
2nd sheet #12 filter to separate clouds EI 100 plus allowance for filter. in tray with HC110 , 1+100 for 12 minutes, limited agitation (5 seconds each 30 seconds), + 2 minutes standing in water. Contrast better, but of course shadows still under-exposed. sky and clouds look good.
Not unreasonable for 1st tests of this film. I'll get where I want to be soon.
I will probably move to D-23 + water bath, and Pyrocat HD for next tests in my search for the EI /developer combination which best suits my work.
An aside - the FP4+ negatives look very good with a nice long scale.

Some will ask to see images, but I stopped putting images anywhere on the web because of theft and use for profit. That is why I no longer have a web site or blog.

[Tin Can]

1982 state of the art CRT X-ray recording.

I'm not paying for this article? Will someone?

http://proceedings.spiedigitallibrary.org/proceeding.aspx?articleid=1232641

and this 4x4"!


http://www.cmxmedicalimaging.com/sample-page/kodak-ektascan-bra-film-not-interleaved-10-x-10cm/

[StoneNYC]

wow, how did you developed this in a rotary tube? didn't you get scratches and uneven developmpent on the side facing the tube?? Or is there something I'm missing about Kodak G X-Ray?

Depends on the tube, I've used a Cibichrome tube and that worked ok, also you can strip the "back side" and remove the scratches by doing that.

[SergeiR]

wow, how did you developed this in a rotary tube? didn't you get scratches and uneven developmpent on the side facing the tube?? Or is there something I'm missing about Kodak G X-Ray?

I been working with X ray in rotary tubes since day i started using Xray about year and half ago. Only two times i had actual issues - one time when i was stupid to develop it in Jobo tank for paper and then back emulsion was not developed. Other time when i was idiotic to drag film out of tube be the edge and scratched other sheet with it.

if you use film tubes (like unicolor) or other contraptions (like core inserts) you actually got liquid go between sheet and sides. I never strip my film other side , b/c i hate doing it :) It just takes some practice and being careful, and then things working just fine. Sure, you might get scratch here and there on edges, but who cares (few mm out of 8x10 real estate won't hurt you). Its hell of the lot easier to develop for hour in rotary, than doing so next to the tank in dark room, and doing it "by inspection". I don't have dipping tanks though, they might be not bad solution either.


8x10 Kodak, CSG, 12 m rotary in adonal 1:170

https://farm4.staticflickr.com/3847/15168815281_e6461d3e0b_c.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/p7q9iX)Scan-140907-0002www (https://flic.kr/p/p7q9iX) by Sergei Rodionov (https://www.flickr.com/people/24930737@N05/), on Flickr

[StoneNYC]

Cool roots!

I've just confirmed the X-Ray is completely orthochromatic! This is exciting to discover, that it's almost fully so, not just a tiny bit... I'm going to try the normal green stuff to see how it reacts to the amber darkroom light.

I just ordered more of the ektascan, and that's when I realized it IS the green I ordered as it's the cheapest, so it's considered 400 yet I've had to shoot it at EI80 to get a good neg... Hmmm.

[Randy]

Stone, my experience with CSR green latitude is that it is only slightly orthochromatic, or better described as a week panchromatic. My first attempt at processing with a red bulb resulted in slight fogging. I had to move my safelight farther away.

[mdarnton]

With Fuji Green, I tried using first my normal orange/brown (OC?) light and it was total fog. Then I tried a red bulb I'd gotten from a photo supplier as a safelight, and that wasn't much better. Finally I just caved, and bought a real x-ray safelight on Ebay. I haven't tried the LED thing. I intend to try LEDs, and think you should try them first. . .The real safelight is very very dark, so I don't even bother to use it.

[StoneNYC]

With Fuji Green, I tried using first my normal orange/brown (OC?) light and it was total fog. Then I tried a red bulb I'd gotten from a photo supplier as a safelight, and that wasn't much better. Finally I just caved, and bought a real x-ray safelight on Ebay. I haven't tried the LED thing. I intend to try LEDs, and think you should try them first. . .The real safelight is very very dark, so I don't even bother to use it.

It's confirmed when I looked at the dry neg this morning, absolutely no fog from standard amber safelight, so the ektascan can be opened in the darkroom no problem! Awesome now I can cut some 4x5 and actually see what the heck I am doing! So glad to finally have access to a darkroom!

[UlbabraB]

I use Kodak T-MAT G/RA Xray film and I load and develop them with a "normal" red bulb safelight at about 1 meter, it's a bit dim but no fog at all.

[Tin Can]

Red LED is the best, they have a sharp cutoff. On the side of my Ektascan box, it has a safe light symbol and the words 'Kodak LED, GBX-2' now I google that and find.

http://125px.com/docs/unsorted/kodak/KODAK%20LED%20Safelight%20Information%20Sheet.ashx.pdf

GBX-2 is no longer recommended, Kodak LED is.

Notice the wavelength specs. They are the same as the cheap LED's I have all over my darkroom from.

https://www.superbrightleds.com/moreinfo/led-globe/2-watt-g11-globe-bulb-360-degree/440/#/attributes/13

That site is the cheapest and that bulb is great. I put them in old Kodak bullet safe lights without a filter, makes them directional, at 48" no fog and I can see everything.

[grzybu]

I've tried to point my red LEDs directly at the film at about 5cm for several seconds while developing and nothing happened. No fog at all.

[Tin Can]

I have noticed no fogging of paper or X-Ray film using these LED bulbs. I keep the darkroom rather bright with one on each station. And since these use only 1.9 watts per bulb, I nearly never turn them off.

Today, while I was on the site, I ordered a big Red LED flood bulb for my shooting area, so I can bounce it off the white ceiling when using a lens without a shutter. Pull the darkslide and pop the strobes.



I've tried to point my red LEDs directly at the film at about 5cm for several seconds while developing and nothing happened. No fog at all.

[axs810]

Where do you guys buy your safelights? I have an 11 watt red bulb from freestyle but a 1.9 watt safelight bulb sounds better lol

[Tin Can]

Read post 2042.



Where do you guys buy your safelights? I have an 11 watt red bulb from freestyle but a 1.9 watt safelight bulb sounds better lol

[axs810]

doh!...thank you :)

[SergeiR]

I have noticed no fogging of paper or X-Ray film using these LED bulbs. I keep the darkroom rather bright with one on each station. And since these use only 1.9 watts per bulb, I nearly never turn them off.

Today, while I was on the site, I ordered a big Red LED flood bulb for my shooting area, so I can bounce it off the white ceiling when using a lens without a shutter. Pull the darkslide and pop the strobes.


I have never had issues with cheap 160 LED wee light and twice folded red gel sheet ;) But then i used it like few times for Xray film (use it all the time with collodion and for silver printing though) .. Still like to load film in darkness. Makes it more intimate ;)

[Tin Can]

My models like a red room...




I have never had issues with cheap 160 LED wee light and twice folded red gel sheet ;) But then i used it like few times for Xray film (use it all the time with collodion and for silver printing though) .. Still like to load film in darkness. Makes it more intimate ;)

[SergeiR]

8x10 Kodak CSG, 1:200 rodinal, rotary, 12m

https://farm4.staticflickr.com/3909/15239570835_fb2df60fe2_c.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/pdEMti)Scan-140914-0004www (https://flic.kr/p/pdEMti) by Sergei Rodionov (https://www.flickr.com/people/24930737@N05/), on Flickr

[mdarnton]

What lens Sergei? Something absurdly wide? I like the feeling of space.

[SergeiR]

What lens Sergei? Something absurdly wide? I like the feeling of space.

120/8 S-A ;) I got it kinda hacked on small copal shutter in T mode

[Shen45]

Is anyone enlarging 5x4 xray negatives? If so to what size and how would you describe the results?

[blueribbontea]

Is anyone enlarging 5x4 xray negatives? If so to what size and how would you describe the results?

I have done portraits on Ektascan in 4X5 and enlarged so far to 11X14 (approx.) with very good results. I developed in D-23 and got smooth tones and good highlight rendition. It seems to be a very fine grain film.


Bill

See post 1973, a scan of the print.

[StoneNYC]

I have done portraits on Ektascan in 4X5 and enlarged so far to 11X14 (approx.) with very good results. I developed in D-23 and got smooth tones and good highlight rendition. It seems to be a very fine grain film.


Bill

See post 1973, a scan of the print.

As far as I understand it, it's actually a "t-grain" emulsion so it should be very fine grained.

[blueribbontea]

As far as I understand it, it's actually a "t-grain" emulsion so it should be very fine grained.

Exactly; that and single sided with an anti-halation backing makes it a very nice film. The hard part for me was getting good cuts under the safelight with my paper cutter. Once I get that process finessed I will shoot more 4X5 with it.


Bill

[grzybu]

It's fun to look how x-ray film handles the red color.

https://farm6.staticflickr.com/5590/15058167068_f3fd5d3c4b_o.jpg

Carbon print from 18x24 cm green sensitive Kodak x-ray film developed with D-23.
Zeiss Tessar 300/4.5

[NiNo]

some pics

121846

121847

121848

121849

BR/A 8x10" + Pyrocat HD 1:1:100 on Slavich Bromportret developed in Ilford PQ-U 1:9

[SergeiR]

yup. Colours.

8x10 Kodak CSG, usual rotary, 12m in Adonal 1:200

(green leafs and rose is orange)

https://farm6.staticflickr.com/5565/15053988350_22ee2e38f0_c.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/oWgCgh)Scan-140914-0007www (https://flic.kr/p/oWgCgh) by Sergei Rodionov (https://www.flickr.com/people/24930737@N05/), on Flickr

[SergeiR]

8x10 Kodak CSG, usual rotary 12m , Adonal 1:200, overcast, 360mm Symmar-S

https://farm4.staticflickr.com/3868/15053008267_40c943ef48_c.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/oWbAVi)Scan-140914-0003www (https://flic.kr/p/oWbAVi) by Sergei Rodionov (https://www.flickr.com/people/24930737@N05/), on Flickr

[kanga]

Hi,
I'm new in here, and new in x-ray, please help me.

I have a box of 8x10 X-ray film, the type is: XOE green sensitive, x-ray RETINA
Can I develope this with rodinal r09? How long?
Can I develope this film in tank?
I usualy use tank for 8x10, but x-ray both side emulsion maybe problem...
Thank You!
kanga

[StoneNYC]

Hi,
I'm new in here, and new in x-ray, please help me.

I have a box of 8x10 X-ray film, the type is: XOE green sensitive, x-ray RETINA
Can I develope this with rodinal r09? How long?
Can I develope this film in tank?
I usualy use tank for 8x10, but x-ray both side emulsion maybe problem...
Thank You!
kanga

When it comes to x-ray you'll really have to do a lot of your own testing, but 6 minutes is a good starting point, but ANYTHING can be developed with Rodinal...

You can strip one side of the emulsion with bleach if you have scratches.

Good luck with your testing!

[kanga]

Thanks, at the weekend I'll try it.

[SergeiR]

Hi,
I'm new in here, and new in x-ray, please help me.

I have a box of 8x10 X-ray film, the type is: XOE green sensitive, x-ray RETINA
Can I develope this with rodinal r09? How long?
Can I develope this film in tank?
I usualy use tank for 8x10, but x-ray both side emulsion maybe problem...
Thank You!
kanga

207 pages on actual information and images in this thread. There is another on in Film discussion. Read it, try it, play with it.

[jcoldslabs]

4x5 B&J Orbit monorail, 210mm Hugo Meyer Doppel-Anastigmat, Ektascan B/RA at EI 80, HC-110 1:63 @ 68°F for 5 minutes (rotary).


http://www.kolstad.us/ebay/4x5-Ektascan-EI80-Peeling-Paint.jpg

Jonathan

[David Schaller]

4x5 B&J Orbit monorail, 210mm Hugo Meyer Doppel-Anastigmat, Ektascan B/RA at EI 80, HC-110 1:63 @ 68°F for 5 minutes (rotary).


http://www.kolstad.us/ebay/4x5-Ektascan-EI80-Peeling-Paint.jpg

Jonathan
Another beautiful image from the gift that keeps on giving Jonathan. Did you get into reciprocity issues? I'm thinking of trying some of this Ektascan and I'm wondering how to calculate long exposures.
Thanks,
Dave

[jcoldslabs]

Thanks, David. I'm being serious when I say that I feel like sloppily painting a few pieces of plywood and leaving them out in the elements all winter just so I'll have some new photo projects come next summer.

I have not yet tested the Ektascan for reciprocity but that's next on my list. The exposure time for the image above was around a half second (by hand) and there were no issues with the negative. I don't have a densitometer so my "testing" amounts to visual inspection and/or checking the pre-scan histogram. It's pretty easy to tell if I've lost my shadow detail just by looking at the negative on a light box. I'll be sure to report back any reciprocity data I manage to sort out.

Jonathan

[David Schaller]

Thanks Jonathan,
I should just get some myself and do some testing, since it is so inexpensive per sheet. I will try that.
Dave

[towolf]

Finally getting the hang of this old grunge film. The rounded corners are all bubbly.

http://i.imgur.com/UerZsF0.jpg (http://imgur.com/UerZsF0.jpg)

[imagedowser]

Kanga, If your lucky enough to have tanks, use them, it's the safest method to avoid scratches. Sergi is right all the information is in this thread.... good luck.

[dsphotog]

It's fun to look how x-ray film handles the red color.


https://farm6.staticflickr.com/5590/15058167068_f3fd5d3c4b_o.jpg

Carbon print from 18x24 cm green sensitive Kodak x-ray film developed with D-23.
Zeiss Tessar 300/4.5


Especially freckles!

[Andrew O'Neill]

Kanga, If your lucky enough to have tanks, use them, it's the safest method to avoid scratches.

Flat-bottomed trays are fine. I've used them for years to develop double-sided xray film. No scratches. I certainly would stay away from trays with raised ridges, though. With film tank holders you can run the risk of surge marks if you're not careful, and a tremendous amount of developer is required... Another alternative, is the ziplock bag method.

[NiNo]

https://c2.staticflickr.com/4/3847/15319382555_509bd189d8_c.jpg

8x10", Fujinon-W 250/6,3 wide open
Kodak BR/A developed in Pyrocat HD 1:1:100
Contact Print on Slavich Bromportret 80, developed in Ilford PQ-U 1:14
Scan of the print on Epson V500

[Tin Can]

Nice, very nice,

but that subject would would great with a cell phone pic...

[kanga]

nice!
I tried on 8x10" this lens: Fujinon-W 250/6,3 but not really enough...
Are you use a long time those both?

[NiNo]

nice!
I tried on 8x10" this lens: Fujinon-W 250/6,3 but not really enough...
Are you use a long time those both?

what do you mean @both?

fujinon-w 250/6,3 i have for 1 year and till this august it was my the only lens

[SergeiR]

8x10 Kodak CDG, Adonal 1:140 , 12m rotary (yes, playing with dillutions again)

https://farm4.staticflickr.com/3864/15151764030_a8e3191ed2_c.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/p5UKyS)Scan-140923-0003www (https://flic.kr/p/p5UKyS) by Sergei Rodionov (https://www.flickr.com/people/24930737@N05/), on Flickr

[SergeiR]

8x10 Kodak CSG , 14" Thomson projection petzval

https://farm4.staticflickr.com/3861/15346473662_9e40b678cc_c.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/po7FXu)Flower study #4 (https://flic.kr/p/po7FXu) by Sergei Rodionov (https://www.flickr.com/people/24930737@N05/), on Flickr

[SergeiR]

8x10 Kodak CSG, 1s exposure, 10m in 1:100 Adonal, rotary

https://farm3.staticflickr.com/2943/15169943538_22de5d67b5_c.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/p7vVGE)TV dinner (https://flic.kr/p/p7vVGE) by Sergei Rodionov (https://www.flickr.com/people/24930737@N05/), on Flickr

[Tin Can]

Great title!

[Corran]

I spent most of today, with the assistance of a friend and better woodworker than I, planing, sanding, and filing down a film holder to properly fit a camera. Sadly the beam that locks the holder into the back isn't in the correct place for the camera, so, I've got a serious light-leak problem, even with a darkcloth over the camera as much as possible (I don't have a humongous DC though).

I did this experiment with two sheets of 8x10 Fuji green-sensitive x-ray film taped together, developed in Acufine. Thank God for cheap test film.... Shot with a 450mm f/9 Nikkor-M.

http://www.oceanstarproductions.com/photosharing/8x20-0030ss.jpg

[Donald Qualls]

Wow. Just coming into this (skipped a good chunk of this thread, so pardon if I've missed a previously posted answer to my question), and this looks like a way to make larger format affordable (I'm contemplating building an 8x10 field camera) -- thirty-five or forty cents a sheet looks a lot more attractive than five bucks or more per exposure for 8x10, and I can live with an orthochromatic sensitivity curve, almost all the time. Some of the stuff a long way back up the thread appears to be gone or the vendors out of business (like industrial NDT film) -- but medical films are still available in multiple brands, suggesting they've still got some legs.

Am I correct in understanding that these materials can be handled in red (for "green" films) or yellow (for "blue") safelight? That would greatly simplify cutting down to size (a paper cutter with felt on the table and a stop for exact dimension should do the job), not to mention being able to develop by inspection in light levels that don't require averted vision to see the image. Are there any known sources for film factory-cut to 5x7 or 4x5 (and if so, is it compatible with standard film holders)?

[Tin Can]

8x10, 11x14 and 14x17 fits ANSI holders.

I use red LED safelight, for all situations.

Cutting down to any size is easy under LED.

There are various films being used.

7x17 cuts to 5x7 nicely.

[mdarnton]

I admit to being hung up on not shooting because 4x5 film is so expensive AND too small. Then I got some xray film, and everything is different. I even bought an 8x10 camera....something that I'd previously dismissed as being too expensive. I may not ever shoot any regular LF film again.

[SergeiR]

and here is same little guy amongst greenery that is autumn in Dallas (grrrr)

8x10, Kodak CSG, 10m rotary in 1:100 Adonal

https://farm4.staticflickr.com/3924/15370619651_e9ffedd0fc_c.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/pqfrHD)Scan-140927-0010www (https://flic.kr/p/pqfrHD) by Sergei Rodionov (https://www.flickr.com/people/24930737@N05/), on Flickr

[Tin Can]

It really is a good idea to read both X-Ray threads in their entirety.

I did and it helped me immensely.

[Jim Noel]

If the info concerning X-Ray film is not in the two threads, you don't need it.

[jcoldslabs]

Donald,

One caution if you haven't already taken note: many x-ray films have emulsion on both sides, front and back. This can be an issue depending on the processing regimen you use. Drums with smooth (or ribbed) interior surfaces can lead to uneven development and/or scratching of the rear facing emulsion, while tray development is less problematic in this respect. Since I use Cibachrome drums for my film development I shoot Kodak (Carestream) Ektascan B/RA film which is a traditional single-sided orthochromatic emulsion with anti-halation dyes on the back side. And yes, it fits right into an 8x10 holder without any trimming.

Jonathan

[kanga]

what do you mean @both?

fujinon-w 250/6,3 i have for 1 year and till this august it was my the only lens

Sorry my English is not too good..

So:
I tried on 8x10" this lens: Fujinon-W 250/6,3 but not really enough...
Are you use a long time ago this lens for 8x10?
Do you have any Vignetta, darkness in the corners, when you use correction (horizontal/vertical)?
My serial number is: 494117 and yours?
Thank you!

[kanga]

Someone has used this film?
How can the sensitivity?
Tolerate the red light?

122451

[lecarp]

Jonathan, What developer are you using with this Kodak (Carestream) Ektascan B/RA?
Have you any sample images convenient to share?


Donald,

One caution if you haven't already taken note: many x-ray films have emulsion on both sides, front and back. This can be an issue depending on the processing regimen you use. Drums with smooth (or ribbed) interior surfaces can lead to uneven development and/or scratching of the rear facing emulsion, while tray development is less problematic in this respect. Since I use Cibachrome drums for my film development I shoot Kodak (Carestream) Ektascan B/RA film which is a traditional single-sided orthochromatic emulsion with anti-halation dyes on the back side. And yes, it fits right into an 8x10 holder without any trimming.

Jonathan

[Donald Qualls]

Since I use Cibachrome drums for my film development I shoot Kodak (Carestream) Ektascan B/RA film which is a traditional single-sided orthochromatic emulsion with anti-halation dyes on the back side. And yes, it fits right into an 8x10 holder without any trimming.

Yep, I'm working my way through the two X-ray film threads; already got the Ektascan B/RA noted and ZZ Medical bookmarked (along with CXS, haven't checked yet if they have the Ektascan). Doesn't look like there's any actual 5x7 available (though I do see 13x18 cm in spots), but I'll probably just make the jump directly to 8x10, given the cost (seeing old Calumets on eBay for $500 or so BIN, too; that militates against building one). I can scan a full 8x10 negative, have experience with various printing-out processes for contact prints (and of course there's contact printing on enlarging paper) and if I ever have a need to enlarge from that size I can make up a projection back for the camera or build a box enlarger (no movements needed for conventional enlarging). Too bad I can't use a split dark slide to shoot 5x8 on 8x10 film (maybe I can make up a pair, one short, one with a window, but I can see the window one hanging on the velvet when trying to remove it, causing light leaks at the very best outcome). I could do 4x10 with a split dark slide, but that's a little wider than my comfort zone on format...

[mdarnton]

You need a split/sliding back. They show up on Ebay regularly.
For instance: http://www.ebay.com/itm/Burke-James-8x10-Sliding-Reducing-Back-/271492161496

If you get an older wood camera, many of them come with spring-loaded slots for sliding strips of wood to block off half the film, optionally in either direction. Often the slats themselves are missing, but they're easy to make. Agfa-Ansco 8x10 views are good, folding tailboard cameras, often not too expensive.

[StoneNYC]

You need a split/sliding back. They show up on Ebay regularly.
For instance: http://www.ebay.com/itm/Burke-James-8x10-Sliding-Reducing-Back-/271492161496

If you get an older wood camera, many of them come with spring-loaded slots for sliding strips of wood to block off half the film, optionally in either direction. Often the slats themselves are missing, but they're easy to make. Agfa-Ansco 8x10 views are good, folding tailboard cameras, often not too expensive.

Just make one...

You just need some clamps and a ruler and cloth cutter.
122452

[Donald Qualls]

You need a split/sliding back. They show up on Ebay regularly.
For instance: http://www.ebay.com/itm/Burke-James-8x10-Sliding-Reducing-Back-/271492161496

That's exactly what I need. Do you know, are they likely to fit another brand of camera (for instance, would a Burke & James fit a Calumet)? Alternately, that wouldn't be a hard item to fabricate; I just need a spring back without latch pins for reversing (easily removed from a spare back) and make up a mask and pair of slide rails for the back to move in. A couple spring-loaded detents to give repeatable positions, and it's good to go with standard film holders.


If you get an older wood camera, many of them come with spring-loaded slots for sliding strips of wood to block off half the film, optionally in either direction. Often the slats themselves are missing, but they're easy to make. Agfa-Ansco 8x10 views are good, folding tailboard cameras, often not too expensive.

I'm looking for something with at least basic movements -- rise, shift, tilt and swing -- at one end, like common flatbed types. Then, if I buy instead of building, it'll be a matter of what's on eBay when I have money. If I build a camera, it'd be simple to incorporate slots to accept a cut down dark slide for that job, though a sliding back would be better to avoid having to use movements to get the same framing (an issue if the frame is horizontal, putting the film holder vertical so just moving the entire camera could cause unwanted perspective changes).


Just make one...

You just need some clamps and a ruler and cloth cutter.

For 4x10, it's that simple (at least for the film holder side of things). For 5x8 on 8x10, not so much.

[StoneNYC]

That's exactly what I need. Do you know, are they likely to fit another brand of camera (for instance, would a Burke & James fit a Calumet)? Alternately, that wouldn't be a hard item to fabricate; I just need a spring back without latch pins for reversing (easily removed from a spare back) and make up a mask and pair of slide rails for the back to move in. A couple spring-loaded detents to give repeatable positions, and it's good to go with standard film holders.



I'm looking for something with at least basic movements -- rise, shift, tilt and swing -- at one end, like common flatbed types. Then, if I buy instead of building, it'll be a matter of what's on eBay when I have money. If I build a camera, it'd be simple to incorporate slots to accept a cut down dark slide for that job, though a sliding back would be better to avoid having to use movements to get the same framing (an issue if the frame is horizontal, putting the film holder vertical so just moving the entire camera could cause unwanted perspective changes).



For 4x10, it's that simple (at least for the film holder side of things). For 5x8 on 8x10, not so much.

It's not as simple but it's doable you just have to carry 2 dark slides and be very careful inserting the framed one...

[Light Guru]

You need a split/sliding back. They show up on Ebay regularly.
For instance: http://www.ebay.com/itm/Burke-James-8x10-Sliding-Reducing-Back-/271492161496

If you get an older wood camera, many of them come with spring-loaded slots for sliding strips of wood to block off half the film, optionally in either direction. Often the slats themselves are missing, but they're easy to make. Agfa-Ansco 8x10 views are good, folding tailboard cameras, often not too expensive.

Keeping in mind that this is a xray film thread and considering how inexpensive xray film is why not just expose the entire sheet and crop later.

You could buy over 300 sheets of xray film for what it would cost to buy the split sliding back

[Donald Qualls]

Keeping in mind that this is a xray film thread and considering how inexpensive xray film is why not just expose the entire sheet and crop later.

You could buy over 300 sheets of xray film for what it would cost to buy the split sliding back

That's a very good point. The sliding back would be mainly a hedge against xray film dropping out of production while 8x10 conventional film is still available (but expensive -- Ilford from Freestyle is already about six times the price of the relatively expensive Ektascan B/RA, though rebranded Foma is only about half again the price). For immediate purposes, though, it'd be cheaper to shoot 8x10 double-emulsion than even similar material in 5x7 (even if you get some of the 5x7 autoradiographic film I eventually found on my fourth search), and if the economy bug grows bigger jaws, about half the semi-affordable (i.e. under $600) 8x10 cameras I saw on eBay today had rotating 4x5 reducing backs.

Looks like $500 or so for the camera, $250 to $500 for a common type lens in shutter (I can make lens boards myself; I've done several for my Speed Graphic and Graphic View), and $40 to $70 each for 8x10 film holders (and, of course, I'd have to buy film holders and at least one lens if I build a camera, too). If my bonuses from work get into the range my boss is dangling, even for three or four months, I can do that, and by the time I'm too old and frail to tote an 8x10 around, I'll have saved money vs. shooting even 4x5 .EDU Ultra for that time...

OTOH, I could almost certainly build the slider so I don't have to modify the reversing back off the camera to use it, meaning it would only cost the materials and work to make the sliding back -- and a sliding back could also be built to shoot four 4x5 frames on an 8x10, which frames could be separated and fit in my existing enlarger...

[Donald Qualls]

Okay, here's another potentially silly question relative to x-ray films (specifically the green-sensitive versions): after spending days wading through the image sharing thread for x-ray, I saw dozens of comments on how the film speed changes with changes in lighting (especially the color of the light), and had to almost physically restrain myself from posting replies to posts two or three years old, because this seems so simple. Presuming, of course, that your meter cell has a reasonably flat response curve across visible light (seems to me they're made to have this, and silicon meters often include an IR block filter to avoid over-metering on IR-heavy subjects), all you should need to do is meter through a strong minus-red filter to have little or no "speed change" with changes in the light color -- open shade, with heavy blue from sky scatter, dimmed tungsten light (which gets redder as you turn down the brightness), sunrise, noon, sunset, or night, a minus-red would make the meter's response very nearly match that of the film (for blue-only film, it'd be even easier: meter through a blue tri-color filter, or combine minus-red and minus-green). Looking at Wikipedia, it appears a 44 or 44A filter would be what's wanted.

Is there some completely obvious reason everyone is guessing about how much to compensate their exposure depending on what light condition they have? Based on the budgets of LF photographers, I doubt the cost of a single filter is it...

Essentially unrelated, I discovered I've had a box of x-ray film behind me all the time I've been reading about this stuff. It's Kodak X-omat XLS, which seems to be a pretty slow duplicating film, but with emulsion on both sides and green sensitive (it's probably similar speed to the ortho lith Freestyle sells). What I have is 35x43 cm, which is apparently just a little too narrow to fit 14x17 film holders, but ought to cut nicely to fit 4x5 or 9x12 cm (I've got cameras and film holders in both sizes), once I can get back into my darkroom (and test my safelight; it's a red color incandescent bulb that's many years old).

[mdarnton]

One good reason to have a sliding back if you only want to use half the film is that 8x10 Grafmatic holders seem uncommonly rare, and regular holders are ungodly bulky and heavy. If I were shooting half-frame I certainly wouldn't mind carrying 50% as many film holders!

[grzybu]

X-ray shooters may be interested in my simple Android app which helps you to visualize how the scene will look using orthochromatic film.
http://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/showthread.php?116838-Free-Adroid-app-for-ortho-like-camera-preview&p=1175348#post1175348

[Jim Noel]

Having grown up with ortho films in the 40's effective film speed is more intuitive than scientific. It is simple enough to take a reading with a good meter and do some interpolation based on the height of the sun above the horizon whether AM or PM. of course a lot of this comes from over 70 years of exposing film of all types and sizes. Also I find selenium cell meters of more use to me when using this film than the more "modern" ones I use with current pan films.

[SergeiR]

Is there some completely obvious reason everyone is guessing about how much to compensate their exposure depending on what light condition they have? Based on the budgets of LF photographers, I doubt the cost of a single filter is it...


i am in minority of people who just shoot it. I found that iso 100 is about right, i might wiggle it a bit if there is too much UV out (outdoors) to pretend its like 125-150. But then i also don't do whole premature stopping of development, don't truly care if i leave film in tube for few extra minutes if i have to answer the phone and such. Its much much less stressful this way and leaves me more concentrating doing what i like - making pictures ;) Even dilution for development - i would vary around 1:100 and 1:200 all the time, just depending on how i feel about it. Great thing about X-ray - it seems to not care all that much (unlike Arista 100 that is seriously fussy), kinda like Fuji's Acros.

But then of course i am sticking with Kodak CSG, and not looking around much for other types.

Here is CSG in somewhat green forest, btw. No filters

https://farm4.staticflickr.com/3924/15370619651_e9ffedd0fc_c.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/pqfrHD)Scan-140927-0010www (https://flic.kr/p/pqfrHD) by Sergei Rodionov (https://www.flickr.com/people/24930737@N05/), on Flickr

[Jim Noel]

Sergei,
This is one of your best!
Your comments are right on. Some of us get to uptight about the details and end up making technically correct images with no feeling or emotion. The object is to make images, not spend all day planning them.

Jim

[SergeiR]

Sergei,
This is one of your best!
Your comments are right on. Some of us get to uptight about the details and end up making technically correct images with no feeling or emotion. The object is to make images, not spend all day planning them.

Jim

Thanks, Jim. I am trying ;)

[Donald Qualls]

Having grown up with ortho films in the 40's effective film speed is more intuitive than scientific. It is simple enough to take a reading with a good meter and do some interpolation based on the height of the sun above the horizon whether AM or PM. of course a lot of this comes from over 70 years of exposing film of all types and sizes. Also I find selenium cell meters of more use to me when using this film than the more "modern" ones I use with current pan films.

For those of us who didn't grow up with ortho film (I was in my twenties before I knew there was a difference between Verichrome and Verichrome Pan, never mind knew that ortho film had still been widely available after I was born), it's a lot more comfortable to meter to an actual tested value and have a pretty high confidence level relative to what results you're going to get. Even at 35 cents a sheet, I don't see anything to be gained by wasting film with exposure errors that could turn a top-notch image into "could have been", on subjects I may never be able to photograph again. As noted above, those 8x10 film holders are big and heavy, too, so shooting multiple frames ("bracketing", as we called it when I was learning on 35 mm) just to validate a guess on exposure is an even bigger sin when I can only carry perhaps a dozen exposures of film in addition to camera, tripod, and lenses, compared to hundreds in miniature format. Shooting two for insurance is a lot different from shooting ten because you aren't sure what your meter is really telling you.

The two meters I use are a spot meter (I've forgotten the brand, but it's got a battery boost for low light) and a silicon cell averaging/incident unit; the spot meter, especially, seems likely to be adaptable to use a filter over its lens. I plan to set it up that way when using x-ray film, and when testing that film for speed.

[Jim Noel]

For those of us who didn't grow up with ortho film (I was in my twenties before I knew there was a difference between Verichrome and Verichrome Pan, never mind knew that ortho film had still been widely available after I was born), it's a lot more comfortable to meter to an actual tested value and have a pretty high confidence level relative to what results you're going to get. Even at 35 cents a sheet, I don't see anything to be gained by wasting film with exposure errors that could turn a top-notch image into "could have been", on subjects I may never be able to photograph again. As noted above, those 8x10 film holders are big and heavy, too, so shooting multiple frames ("bracketing", as we called it when I was learning on 35 mm) just to validate a guess on exposure is an even bigger sin when I can only carry perhaps a dozen exposures of film in addition to camera, tripod, and lenses, compared to hundreds in miniature format. Shooting two for insurance is a lot different from shooting ten because you aren't sure what your meter is really telling you.

The two meters I use are a spot meter (I've forgotten the brand, but it's got a battery boost for low light) and a silicon cell averaging/incident unit; the spot meter, especially, seems likely to be adaptable to use a filter over its lens. I plan to set it up that way when using x-ray film, and when testing that film for speed.
I do not and never have bracketed. My belief has always been that the Great Yellow Father invented the idea in order to sell more film. Knowledge of materials and equipment is far more valuable.

[Andrew O'Neill]

I don't bracket either. When I started in LF 20 years ago, I only had 2 holders. The same with 8x10. That forced me to be very careful with my exposures. I do however, shoot a backup if on a trip miles from home and I may not ever get back there again...
Shooting xray film is not rocket science. I shoot blue and green at 80. I use light yellow or green filters and apply the same factor as if I'm shooting conventional film. If exposures are longer than 1 second, I'll apply reciprocity compensation. I am perhaps more careful developing it than conventional film, especially with the double-sided stuff.
That's a beautiful image, Sergei.

[gavjenks]

I just use compensating development (since xray was so contrasty), so exact timing of development doesn't matter anyway, by the fundamental nature of compensating development.

Weirdly, d-76 diluted 1:4 for ~1 hour works better than other developers actually designed for compensating for my Fuji xray film. I tried obsidian aqua and HC-110, and they performed worse than the dilute D-76. No idea why.

[AF10]

Hi!
I'm very interested in this topic but but completely inexperienced in developing large format negatives. I´ve an old large format camera (18x24 cm) and this kind of negatives are a big challenge for a new project! Is there any "how to", step by step, paper that could help someone to start?
TIA,

[Tin Can]

Basicly you have found it, but you need to read this entire thread, or skim it.

However X-Ray film is just film and can be developed the same as any film.

Use normal film chemistry in trays. You have a lot to read. Maybe buy a used book or go to library.

Good luck.


Hi!
I'm very interested in this topic but but completely inexperienced in developing large format negatives. I´ve an old large format camera (18x24 cm) and this kind of negatives are a big challenge for a new project! Is there any "how to", step by step, paper that could help someone to start?
TIA,

[Andrew O'Neill]

This is the original thread, started in '09:
http://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/showthread.php?48099-X-ray-Film-example-and-comparison&highlight=xray+film+comparison

[Andrew O'Neill]

Someone has used this film?
How can the sensitivity?
Tolerate the red light?

It's either blue or ortho film so you can safely use it under a red or amber safelight.

[Andrew O'Neill]

Sorry my English is not too good..

So:
I tried on 8x10" this lens: Fujinon-W 250/6,3 but not really enough...
Are you use a long time ago this lens for 8x10?
Do you have any Vignetta, darkness in the corners, when you use correction (horizontal/vertical)?
My serial number is: 494117 and yours?
Thank you!

The W 250 has an image circle of 320. It should just cover 8x10. Make sure you stop down to f/22.

[Andrew O'Neill]

D-76 1+4 for one hour? Are you doing stand/semi-stand?

[SergeiR]

That's a beautiful image, Sergei.

Thank you, Andrew.

[StoneNYC]

Never mind, read 35m as 35mm and got confused lol

[SergeiR]

Never mind, read 35m as 35mm and got confused lol


And not meters either ;) Minutes.

[StoneNYC]

And not meters either ;) Minutes.

;)

[SergeiR]

And here is one with 30m(inutes :P) m same dilution and process. I think i am sticking with 30m for now, moving up from 12. General feeling is better.

https://farm4.staticflickr.com/3932/15401685046_8f719366c3_c.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/psZEnU)Scan-141002-0003www (https://flic.kr/p/psZEnU) by Sergei Rodionov (https://www.flickr.com/people/24930737@N05/), on Flickr

[Tin Can]

Very nice. Scene gives me ideas. Process also interesting.

Thanks



Decided to dork around with development time again. For my normal quantities it looks like around 7 minutes rotary will give you somewhat clear pour out developer. After 7 it starts to break down and it becomes blueish gray .. So i figured - what the hell. Lets go back a bit to even longer periods (i used to do up to 1hr with Arista film in similar dillutions).

Here is 35m rotary with 1:225 dilution pf Adonal (i had to run to the shop, to pick up bread for kid ;))



Very very delicate tones in highlights. I thought i blew them up , judging negative alone, but proven to be wrong. (oh come on.. 15s exposure that i counted in missisipies ;)) So i think i am going to be back to longer times for scenes with higher range.

[SergeiR]

Very nice. Scene gives me ideas. Process also interesting.

Thanks

Yeah, i got this doll for some collodion series, but ended up never starting it (was too hot here for 2 last months) :) Now that it cooling down i can start after all

[SergeiR]

Oh and after 30-35 minutes developer looks like REALLY dirty water ;) and, what is interesting, fixer doesn't become as yellowish as with 12 minutes or less.

[kanga]

The very first test picture, it's not bad, but in the future some little problem i will hope be solved.
Film: XOE Retina (iso400), Rodinal 1+50, dev.: 7sec, in tank, rotated with my hand.
122760

[mdarnton]

I wonder if anyone has any idea why xray films clear so quickly in the fix? Given their extra density, that's the last thing I would expect.

They also seem to dry quickly.

[Donald Qualls]

As a semi-educated guess, the double emulsion films use a grain technology appropriate for a single emulsion at half the speed (because the double layer gives roughly twice the density for a given exposure), or about ISO 50 for "full speed" material -- and in general, the slower the emulsion, the smaller the halide grains and the faster they'll clear in the fixer. Further, they're cubic grain rather than tabular; tabular grain takes 2-3 times as long to clear for a given speed. A half speed double coated x-ray film probably has grain size comparable to one of the faster printing papers, which will fully fix in two minutes in rapid fixer; even the full speed version ought to fix almost as quickly as Ilford Pan F or an ortho litho copy film (which typically fix about like enlarging paper).

[mdarnton]

Thanks.

[jp]

Regular film can clear pretty quickly too, but we don't see it as that's not done under safelight conditions.

[Corran]

I turn on the lights as soon as the film (regular film) is in the fixer. TMX takes like 4-6 minutes to clear. Most others are a little less. But not nearly as fast as x-ray (instantaneously, pretty much).

[jcoldslabs]

I can't address the "how" aspect, but isn't x-ray film designed to have a much shorter processing time than regular film? I seem to remember my dental x-rays being dry and ready for viewing in three to four minutes.

Jonathan

[premortho]

OK, it's normal orthochromatic film. I did not see if it is coated with emulsion on both sides. It is considerably easier to develop single sided films. Try a shot between 11:00 AM and 3:00 PM at 100 ASA sensitivity. Develop in a tray under a red safelight. The best safelights today are 3 or 12 Volt red LEDs. You can develop in 1 to 100 Rodinal, until the negative is done under the safelight.
Someone has used this film?
How can the sensitivity?
Tolerate the red light?

122451

[premortho]

I'm in roughly the same ortho experience level as Jim Noel, and I never bracket either. I have, and use a Weston Master light meter, but I'm not a slave to it. When I shot every day, I rarely used it at all. You develop a feel for what the light is. When I go shooting for myself, I often don't expose more than one or two sheets of film per day. I develop them the same night (it is so EASY under that red safelight), so I know what is going on. There was a reason that cameras came with only one or two sheetfilm holders. I don't like roll film cameras for that reason - - I can usually find only two at the most pictures that I really want to take. Why tale pictures you don't want to take?
I do not and never have bracketed. My belief has always been that the Great Yellow Father invented the idea in order to sell more film. Knowledge of materials and equipment is far more valuable.

[SergeiR]

Your xray images are fantastic!!
thank you. I just hope they will not stop making it for a while , as i shoot a lot (relatively speaking of course) ;)

[HoodedOne]

thank you. I just hope they will not stop making it for a while , as i shoot a lot (relatively speaking of course) ;)

Ferrania wiil probably also make x-ray film in the near future.

[SergeiR]

Dunno. Dries in about same amount as regular film for me, but then i do use drying cabinet with heat pumping fan ;) And of course drop of dishwashing liquid.

[Tin Can]

You are putting Kodak out biziness, PhotoFlo needs you...

:)


Dunno. Dries in about same amount as regular film for me, but then i do use drying cabinet with heat pumping fan ;) And of course drop of dishwashing liquid.

[StoneNYC]

You are putting Kodak out biziness, PhotoFlo needs you...

:)

Dishwashing liquid is the same as a photo flo?

[Tin Can]

I never tried it, but I have been meaning to, and Sergei always has solution.



Dishwashing liquid is the same as a photo flo?

[Jim Noel]

Detergents, Photo flo and LFN are all surfactants so they all have the quality of causing water to sheet off surfaces.

[SergeiR]

Dishwashing liquid is the same as a photo flo?

yup. Picked it up from the book, tried - happy ever since.
Just watch out to use normal ones (Dawn is ok, its clear enough, recommended to wash stuff for babies), and not things heavily polluted with additives (Ajax & etc).

I just drop a bit into tank, for about 15 s of last rotary wash cycle, it doesn't make much of foam (about 500ml of water there at the time), and film is dry and scan/print ready in about 15-25 minutes. Makes huge difference for me, as i tend to leave film in cabinet for forever otherwise and it gathers dust.

[SergeiR]

You are putting Kodak out biziness, PhotoFlo needs you...

:)

I kept running out of it and there is no longer any stores in Dallas or nearby that carry stuff. And i don't have huge storage space its bad enough i can't park car in garage with all the … stuff.. i have - costumes, light stands , camera bits and pieces ;) My wife is patient about it, but i don't want to push it ;) Or she will stop posing for me ;)

[SergeiR]

Detergents, Photo flo and LFN are all surfactants so they all have the quality of causing water to sheet off surfaces.

yup. Basically anything that can change surface tension of water seems to work nicely. PhotoFlo , i guess, is more clear solution than our average soapy things at households, but i have not yet seen much of difference to switch back. Plus i can always use same stuff to wash off basin and dishes afterwards ;) Win win..

[Tin Can]

I don't have wife, no room. :)

Kodak sunk their own ship.


I kept running out of it and there is no longer any stores in Dallas or nearby that carry stuff. And i don't have huge storage space its bad enough i can't park car in garage with all the … stuff.. i have - costumes, light stands , camera bits and pieces ;) My wife is patient about it, but i don't want to push it ;) Or she will stop posing for me ;)

[towolf]

So, with my mediocre results shooting on some mystery Kodak x-ray film (seems like blotchy patches of low contrast), I tried stripping the emulsion on the other side. And trying to be systematic I took three frames and stripped the back and the front on one each.

http://i.imgur.com/u4UY7qHm.png (http://imgur.com/u4UY7qH.jpg)http://i.imgur.com/aNfjAHYm.png (http://imgur.com/aNfjAHY.jpg)http://i.imgur.com/2TmIBuTm.png (http://imgur.com/2TmIBuT)

This is with fixed scanner exposure. The backside is really blurry. Viewing the front+back sheet this creates areas of reduced contrast. So not local micro-contrast, but impaired medium radius contrast. Like a halo.

Here’s a GIF that switches between kind of equalized versions

http://i.imgur.com/wsAc9EC.gif (http://imgur.com/wsAc9EC.gif)

I think I will strip always from now on. I found a method that is really quick. Take a tray, put two sheets of toilet paper on the bottom. Soak the TP with 3-4ml of bleach. Drop the sheet on top of that and move sheet around with gloved fingers. The emulsion is stripped in 10-20 seconds, no mess, no tape, no glass plate. Just rinse of the back first.

[StoneNYC]

yup. Basically anything that can change surface tension of water seems to work nicely. PhotoFlo , i guess, is more clear solution than our average soapy things at households, but i have not yet seen much of difference to switch back. Plus i can always use same stuff to wash off basin and dishes afterwards ;) Win win..

What about the effects on archival, isn't dish soap a corrosive of some kind?

[StoneNYC]

I kept running out of it and there is no longer any stores in Dallas or nearby that carry stuff. And i don't have huge storage space its bad enough i can't park car in garage with all the … stuff.. i have - costumes, light stands , camera bits and pieces ;) My wife is patient about it, but i don't want to push it ;) Or she will stop posing for me ;)

Running out? I have an edwal brand dropper and over 3 years and never run out, only getting close now, I have a whole bottle of kodak stuff, I expect it to last me my entire life....

[SergeiR]

Running out? I have an edwal brand dropper and over 3 years and never run out, only getting close now, I have a whole bottle of kodak stuff, I expect it to last me my entire life....

When i am "on the roll" - i shoot 100-200 sheets in a month of 8x10 alone. Add there some occasional roll film and stuff. And i don't reuse final rinse solutions (only fixer is reused). So yep. I did ran out of it on times when it was not convenient.

As of archival - i am not sure i care for negatives to be here in 50 years, b/c i know i would not be. But i know that i don't see any problems with film and X-ray film that been done 2 years ago (just re-scanned some stuff from 1.5 years ago recently). So - who knows. I prefer to keep huge tiffs of my scans, knowing full well that i can print out 8x10 negative from them and storage is far less consuming (that said - i do keep good negatives, and it eats up space like crazy :(()

[towolf]

Here’s two more examples of stripped versus unstripped. Is it my film (pretty much unidentified: it says Definix Medical on the envelope and KODAK XDM on the edge) that exhibits this large blurry cross-talk from the rear emulsion? Some people here said that stripping gives insignificant benefit. Are they using more modern film?

http://i.imgur.com/VHLMSe8.gif (http://imgur.com/VHLMSe8.gif)
http://i.imgur.com/JX6eYu5.gif (http://imgur.com/JX6eYu5.gif)

[Vaughn]

Unstripped, x-ray film has never given me sharp carbon prints.

[Andrew O'Neill]

Excellent examples, towolf.

[Tav Walraven]

towolf....

I knew there had to be another great use for toilet paper! Shooting 11x14, I'll probably use some large 3M paper towels I have in the darkroom and soak 'em with bleach and try your method. Thanks for the images dancing back and forth as it is obvious the backing takes away such a large degree of apparent sharpness. It appears that a slight bump in exposure might make up for the removed backing, eh? Thanks for the post.

[ghostcount]

Thanks towolf!

[towolf]

towolf....

I knew there had to be another great use for toilet paper! Shooting 11x14, I'll probably use some large 3M paper towels I have in the darkroom and soak 'em with bleach and try your method.

Just make sure you plop the sheet flat onto the bleach "pad" and carefully press it down. Doing that shouldn’t lead to bleach getting squeezed out, like out of a sponge. In that case you have too much bleach and it might get onto the front side, as has happened in the millwheel example above. Maybe I’ll shoot a quick video.


Thanks for the images dancing back and forth as it is obvious the backing takes away such a large degree of apparent sharpness. It appears that a slight bump in exposure might make up for the removed backing, eh? Thanks for the post.

For my film it’s definitely not a full stop. The triple example above shows the relative densities. It makes it lose 1/3 stop (for my old film at least).

[Andrew O'Neill]

Just make sure you plop the sheet flat onto the bleach "pad" and carefully press it down.

Yes, I imagine one must be very careful as there is no protection of the negative's front side.

[SergeiR]

Ferrania wiil probably also make x-ray film in the near future.

they seem to be more geared towards 35mm/120mm shooters

[towolf]

Here’s the quick video. I can imagine with formats larger than 4x5 it might need adjustments in the method.



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gnws-vaAD0U


n.b. I initially came up with this method to remove the backing on Fujiroids. I hated the taping and it would always leave black margins.

[angusparker]

Ferrania wiil probably also make x-ray film in the near future.

That would seem strange to me. It's low margin, a likely faster shrinking market than regular film, and seems to be dominated by Kodak and Fuji and a few distributors. More likely they move into E6 sheet or C41 120/35 is my guess but first we need to support them on Kickstarter to get going at all!

[StoneNYC]

Funny I Ike the black margins after taping :)

[HoodedOne]

That would seem strange to me. It's low margin, a likely faster shrinking market than regular film, and seems to be dominated by Kodak and Fuji and a few distributors. More likely they move into E6 sheet or C41 120/35 is my guess but first we need to support them on Kickstarter to get going at all!


I believe it was the FPP Ferrania interview ( the links are on the Ferrania site). But, they mentioned, that they had received a request from CERN for x-ray film.

[SergeiR]

Meanwhile

15m, Adonal 1:150, rotary.

8x10 Kodak CSG, Imagon 360mm

https://farm6.staticflickr.com/5611/15288074889_24cc19ddcc_c.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/phXo36)Flower study #14 (https://flic.kr/p/phXo36) by Sergei Rodionov (https://www.flickr.com/people/24930737@N05/), on Flickr

[SergeiR]

same as above process, but with a twist

Heliar 360mm here, with yellow-green filter

https://farm6.staticflickr.com/5616/15474970465_b8b8443470_c.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/pztgzB)Flower study #13 (https://flic.kr/p/pztgzB) by Sergei Rodionov (https://www.flickr.com/people/24930737@N05/), on Flickr

Note how tones of sunflower work

[andrewch59]

Hi to all, I am after a little information on Fuji Medical dry imaging film DI-ML 8x10. Like most I guess I am finding it difficult and expensive to source sheet film, reading this forum a few weeks ago gave me the idea of sourcing local xray departments for film to experiment with. Unfortunately most xray departments now use digital imaging, but it was suggested I try public and private mammography imaging centres. I have happened upon a local department which has some Fuji DI-ML dry imaging film secreted away in a storage room, which I can have for a small donation to the hospital. Is it any good for photography? and how hard is it to develop?
Regards

[Tin Can]

Hi to all, I am after a little information on Fuji Medical dry imaging film DI-ML 8x10. Like most I guess I am finding it difficult and expensive to source sheet film, reading this forum a few weeks ago gave me the idea of sourcing local xray departments for film to experiment with. Unfortunately most xray departments now use digital imaging, but it was suggested I try public and private mammography imaging centres. I have happened upon a local department which has some Fuji DI-ML dry imaging film secreted away in a storage room, which I can have for a small donation to the hospital. Is it any good for photography? and how hard is it to develop?
Regards

Dry film is not what you want.

Get this and treat it just like regular film. Read the threads for all instructions you need.
http://www.zzmedical.com/analog-x-ray-supplies/x-ray-film/kodak-x-ray-film/8x10-in-carestream-kodak-x-ray-film.html

[SergeiR]

more dorking with filters on CSG Kodak

straight

https://farm3.staticflickr.com/2948/15500076612_83533bee33_c.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/pBFWLd)none (https://flic.kr/p/pBFWLd) by Sergei Rodionov (https://www.flickr.com/people/24930737@N05/), on Flickr


orange

https://farm4.staticflickr.com/3953/15313784808_da02fc438f_c.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/pke9Gy)orange (https://flic.kr/p/pke9Gy) by Sergei Rodionov (https://www.flickr.com/people/24930737@N05/), on Flickr

red

https://farm3.staticflickr.com/2948/15313711900_ab963722cf_c.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/pkdM2w)red (https://flic.kr/p/pkdM2w) by Sergei Rodionov (https://www.flickr.com/people/24930737@N05/), on Flickr

[SergeiR]

so basically having red helps to offset blue sky but not as much as one would hope.

[Tin Can]

so basically having red helps to offset blue sky but not as much as one would hope.

Didn't old ortho images have mostly white or clear skies?

[SergeiR]

Didn't old ortho images have mostly white or clear skies?

well CSG doesn't behave like true ortho film, plus you would think that sticking red filter would calm whole thing down as it sppse to be less sensitive.. but noooooo :)
I am aiming for fall trip in couple of days - trying to think what to bring to shoot mountain landscapes ;)

[Bazz8]

couple of Test images
all 8x10 Fuji HRT
all g-Claron 270mm
and last but not least all without a light leak,shot intentionally into the sun :)
https://farm4.staticflickr.com/3943/15321489639_59426346dc_b.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/pkUD5t)Scan-141011-0005 (https://flic.kr/p/pkUD5t) by barsus2001 (https://www.flickr.com/people/14389776@N06/), on Flickr
second shot away from the sun
https://farm4.staticflickr.com/3928/15321728508_e02e8e783d_b.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/pkVS5U)Scan-141011-0003 (https://flic.kr/p/pkVS5U) by barsus2001 (https://www.flickr.com/people/14389776@N06/), on Flickr

The issues I have had with my 2D and it boiled down to putting in 3 or 4 additional screws to strengthen the bellows frame,
just under the leather handle so when carrying the camera it was loosening all the time.

[Craig Tuffin]

Whole Plate Agfa HT-G f45 @ 1/8sec. Developed in Rodinal 1:120 for 10 mins in tanks and hangers

https://farm4.staticflickr.com/3946/15491421596_5fedd55c9a_b.jpg

[Craig Tuffin]

Whole Plate Agfa HT-G f45 @ 1/8sec. Developed in Rodinal 1:120 for 10 mins in tanks and hangers

https://farm4.staticflickr.com/3946/15491421596_5fedd55c9a_b.jpg

[axs810]

Nice image Craig!

[kanga]

123133
XOE green sensitive X-ray ISO400
Argentum Excursor IIh
Fujionon 210mm f5,6
F64 1/30
Rodinal 1:50 Dev:7sec in 20celsius

[kanga]

123133
XOE green sensitive X-ray ISO400
Argentum Excursor IIh
Fujionon 210mm f5,6
F64 4sec
Rodinal 1:50 Dev:7sec in 20celsius

[pasiasty]

http://fc04.deviantart.net/fs71/f/2014/171/b/2/zofie_140616_233520_by_pasiasty-d7na8cn.jpg
http://fav.me/d7na8cn
Mentor Panorama
Carl Zeiss Jena Tessar 300/4.5
Foma Medix XBU

[axs810]

https://dl-web.dropbox.com/get/Tara/Tara_xray1000.jpg?_subject_uid=73574541&w=AAAAXxigFw0wpCqz6ZiiXbiifMwzDfxWNg3cQMn4MB56vg



Got some funky lines on this negative

8x10 Cambo
Dagor 210mm f/6.8 wide open
Kodak Ektascan B/RA

[StoneNYC]

http://fc04.deviantart.net/fs71/f/2014/171/b/2/zofie_140616_233520_by_pasiasty-d7na8cn.jpg
http://fav.me/d7na8cn
Mentor Panorama
Carl Zeiss Jena Tessar 300/4.5
Foma Medix XBU

Beautiful photo, gorgeous model, perfect framing, excellent exposure.

[HoodedOne]

Beautiful photo, gorgeous model, perfect framing, excellent exposure.

+1

[ImSoNegative]

http://fc04.deviantart.net/fs71/f/2014/171/b/2/zofie_140616_233520_by_pasiasty-d7na8cn.jpg
http://fav.me/d7na8cn
Mentor Panorama
Carl Zeiss Jena Tessar 300/4.5
Foma Medix XBU

Excellent!!

[ImSoNegative]

Nice image Craig!

+1

[Craig Tuffin]

Thanks for the comments axs810 and ImSoNegative!

Still just beginning with this stuff so doing quite a bit of testing. Seeing how orthochromatic the Agfa actually is by photographing some skies...

https://farm6.staticflickr.com/5597/15348879328_e7996d8e51_b.jpg

Whole plate Agfa HT-G. Schneider 150mm SSXL f22 @ 1/4 sec
Developed in Rodinal 1:120 for 10min @ 21 degrees C

[Jody_S]

Thanks for the comments axs810 and ImSoNegative!

Still just beginning with this stuff so doing quite a bit of testing. Seeing how orthochromatic the Agfa actually is by photographing some skies...


Whole plate Agfa HT-G. Schneider 150mm SSXL f22 @ 1/4 sec
Developed in Rodinal 1:120 for 10min @ 21 degrees C

That's an amazing result for X-ray film.

[axs810]

http://i61.tinypic.com/i3aqug.jpg

Got some funky lines on this negative

8x10 Cambo
Dagor 210mm f/6.8 wide open
Kodak Ektascan B/RA




(reposting because I was told that my images weren't downloading in my last post)

[Tin Can]

http://i61.tinypic.com/i3aqug.jpg

Got some funky lines on this negative

8x10 Cambo
Dagor 210mm f/6.8 wide open
Kodak Ektascan B/RA




(reposting because I was told that my images weren't downloading in my last post)

Such a great image that I never saw the lines until I read your confession.

Shoot that again!

[axs810]

I really wish I could but the model moved back to NY :\ lol

Maybe I can find another willing model though :)

[axs810]

I tried skimming a few pages but it's easier for me just to ask...

How do you all store your Kodak Ektascan B/RA film? I usually store my Tri-x in a black bag in my vegetable drawer in the fridge, but am wondering if the xray will be able to handle temperature changes? Would it be best to just store this stuff at room temperature? Thanks! (and sorry if not reading previous posts annoys a few of you)

[SergeiR]

http://fav.me/d7na8cn
Mentor Panorama
Carl Zeiss Jena Tessar 300/4.5
Foma Medix XBU
Great result

[axs810]

Also how many of these red LED's can I have in my bathroom before fogging starts to become an issue?

https://www.superbrightleds.com/moreinfo/led-decorative/led-night-light-bulb/448/1499/


PS: Still curious about how you all store your Ektascan film (see post #840)

[Andrew O'Neill]

I store all my film, including X-ray, in the freezer. I treat it just like any of the other films that I use.

[jcoldslabs]

I store all my film, including X-ray, in the freezer. I treat it just like any of the other films that I use.

+1

[Tin Can]

Also how many of these red LED's can I have in my bathroom before fogging starts to become an issue?

https://www.superbrightleds.com/moreinfo/led-decorative/led-night-light-bulb/448/1499/


PS: Still curious about how you all store your Ektascan film (see post #840)

Eek, those are not the bulbs I now recommend. I did buy those first but they are bright pinpoints of light that act like flashlights. I only use 2 of the them in a ceiling fixture that aims them high against the walls of my bathroom or as I call it my X-ray film loading station. They are really too strong. 2 of those bulbs light up my whole large bathroom from wall bounce.
They are also candelabra base and you will need socket adapters. PITA

I use these. https://www.superbrightleds.com/moreinfo/g-series-minature/2-watt-g11-globe-bulb-360-degree/440/ These fit standard screw sockets, and since they glow in all directions the light is 'safer'.

I have them about every 5 feet horizontally and at least 4 feet vertically from X-Ray film or enlarging paper. They are the only safelight I use. 1 or 2 above each sink and one by each enlarger.

Everybody is supposed to test their own setup with the well known safelight test procedures published all over. Google that. :)

[Craig Tuffin]

A couple more...
Chamonix whole plate loaded with Agfa Ht-G.
Shot with 150mm Schneider SSXL @ f64 for 3sec and f45 for 1sec respectively.
Developed in Rodinal 1:120 for 10 mins. Tanks and hangers.

https://farm6.staticflickr.com/5605/15568401391_9baebedd4f_b.jpg

https://farm6.staticflickr.com/5610/15571063155_c363a0eab1_b.jpg

[axs810]

Randy Moe - Thanks for the update! I know I'm going to have to do some safelight tests before hand, but I just wanted to double check with everyone to see what works best for them. I've already bought two safelight bulbs (one from freestyle, and one that works for wet plate but not xray) but those ended up not working out for me. I'm in a tight spot for money so I had to ask again about how others store their xray film and what safelight they prefer to use so I don't "waste" as much money on bulbs and stuff. My last sheet of Ektascan was given to me by a friend and was stored in a locker at school. After shooting and developing it had faint lines going thru the whole negative horizontally so that's why I was curious how others store their film. I'm going to be ordering a box of Ektascan 8x10 soon, and that'll probably be the last box I can buy for about 4-6 months lol...


Thank you all for your responses it's much appreciated!

[jp]

I just store the box of film I am using on a shelf in the darkroom. Excess boxes get ziplock bagged and frozen.

[Tin Can]

X-Ray film is just film. A quick Google and we have this as first response.

http://motion.kodak.com/motion/uploadedFiles/US_plugins_acrobat_en_motion_newsletters_filmEss_12_Storage_and_Handling.pdf

Remember all film is only a few human lives in existence.

Many here choose to freeze film as Kodak recommends for periods greater than 6 months. Double ziplocks are a great idea.

But we should be using film as the consumable it is. It will go bad and will not last forever, no matter what we do.

Freezing and refreezing film is a bad idea, imho, too much handling. Freeze unopened boxes once and for as long as your refrigeration system lasts, which is not really that long.

I store my fresh film inside my climate controlled studio. Never hot, never cold. If I have excess film I store MINE in a dedicated refrigerator at just above freezing. I don't remove a box of LF film and take a few sheets and then return it to cool or frozen storage facilities. Common sense, I think. Once out of cool or frozen storage is stays out and is consumed.

I have lots of old film that people give me, none of it was ever stored in ideal conditions. Some of it is still usable, some is pretty useless, for me.

My prize 'old stuff' is 800 sheets of 8x10 AZO contact paper. I rescued it from an abandoned building in Detroit. It was in heavy dust, on the floor, for who knows how long, many years certainly, in an old studio without heat, AC and broken windows. The boxes have a bit of moisture damage on the outside, but as far as I can tell, this AZO is just fine. The boxes are undated. I'm aging it a bit more in my studio...

Film as we know it may or not exist another 2 lifetimes. I am starting to learn DIY emulsion methods. X-Ray is simply a temporary tool, we now have.

Love the one you're with.

[Corran]

Fantastic shots, great perspective. I like the light/dark motif, especially in the 2nd.

[Peter Lewin]

Craig, I really like the control you are getting from your x-Ray film. A lot of other examples seem to be either rather dark or rather contrasty, but you are getting a really nice tonal range. Very nice series of images!

[Craig Tuffin]

Craig, I really like the control you are getting from your x-Ray film. A lot of other examples seem to be either rather dark or rather contrasty, but you are getting a really nice tonal range. Very nice series of images!

Thanks Peter! It's certainly been a lot of failures to get to this point :)

"Fantastic shots, great perspective. I like the light/dark motif, especially in the 2nd."

Cheers Corran...glad you like them.

[Donald Qualls]

The most important handling rule for freezing and refreezing film is to avoid condensation conditions. Water on the sensitive surface of film (that's both sides, for most x-ray stocks) can remove or relocate sensitizing dyes, leading to localized areas of reduced film speed (or increased, where the dye lands when the water dries) or changed color senstivity, as well as adhesion between sheets or of film to packaging (gelatin is a marvelous glue; it's been used for centuries to bond furniture together).

Don't open the airtight package until the entire box of film is up to ambient temperature (allow 12 hours out of the freezer for 8x10; I give 4x5 eight hours; even from the refrigerator, its best to allow several hours for the temperature to equilibrate). If you do choose to refreeze the film, close it up airtight and remove as much air as possible at room temperature (ideally the lowest humidity you can manage), before putting it in the freezer. I'd agree with the recommendation to minimize the number of transitions; consuming the film after thawing is probably best (but not all of us can use an x-ray size box of 8x10 or larger in a reasonable time after thawing).

Randy, a blue-sensitive, very slow emulsion is pretty easy. Broadening the spectral sensitivity requires chemicals that are going to be permanently out of production when film production ceases (which looks pretty good to be after I no longer care due to my own expiration); they were developed specifically for this one purpose and are used for nothing else. Making faster emulsions (= larger grain) is mainly a process of "ripening", letting the halide crystals grow, but it requires aging at controlled temperatures in the dark, before applying the emulsion to the base. Dry plates, as used ca. 1880, are well within range. Panchromatic film may be permanently beyond amateur production.

[Tin Can]

Donald,

The best emulsion advice for DIY I have found, is published by Denise Ross, http://www.thelightfarm.com/

I am going to try her methods this winter. I got a bunch of 5x7 glass plates for a start with dry plate.

Gathering supplies as I can. Big bottle of Everclear was called for, so I have that to scare people with.

[andrewch59]

Donald,

The best emulsion advice for DIY I have found, is published by Denise Ross, http://www.thelightfarm.com/

I am going to try her methods this winter. I got a bunch of 5x7 glass plates for a start with dry plate.

Gathering supplies as I can. Big bottle of Everclear was called for, so I have that to scare people with.

First thanks to all those that have supplied input to this thread, your information has been priceless. I have purchased 100 sheets of 10x12 blue half speed film and have achieved great results with it (just ordered 100 11x14 sheets). I purchased over a thousand of various sized sheets of printing paper off ebay for $36, and am having a ball.

In regards to the dry plate emulsions, there is a great set of instructions by Mark Osterman, refined from the 1800s, this may be the same one found on thelightfarm site. I have all the ingredients for dry plate and collodion as per John Coffers no7 recipe for wet plate and hopefully will experiment at xmas time. At present having too much fun refining pics with xray negs.
Thanks again for all the advice

[Tin Can]

First thanks to all those that have supplied input to this thread, your information has been priceless. I have purchased 100 sheets of 10x12 blue half speed film and have achieved great results with it (just ordered 100 11x14 sheets). I purchased over a thousand of various sized sheets of printing paper off ebay for $36, and am having a ball.

In regards to the dry plate emulsions, there is a great set of instructions by Mark Osterman, refined from the 1800s, this may be the same one found on thelightfarm site. I have all the ingredients for dry plate and collodion as per John Coffers no7 recipe for wet plate and hopefully will experiment at xmas time. At present having too much fun refining pics with xray negs.
Thanks again for all the advice

I cannot find Mark Osterman books on dry plate. You mention John Coffer, do you know if his DVD includes dry plate? I'm a book learner and avoid workshops.

[Jim Noel]

I tried skimming a few pages but it's easier for me just to ask...

How do you all store your Kodak Ektascan B/RA film? I usually store my Tri-x in a black bag in my vegetable drawer in the fridge, but am wondering if the xray will be able to handle temperature changes? Would it be best to just store this stuff at room temperature? Thanks! (and sorry if not reading previous posts annoys a few of you)
Why do some people always want to take the easy route? Most of us have spent many hours reading and testing. You can do the same thing rather than riding someone else's horse.

[axs810]

Ok sorry.

[andrewch59]

I cannot find Mark Osterman books on dry plate. You mention John Coffer, do you know if his DVD includes dry plate? I'm a book learner and avoid workshops.

Here is the address for Mark Ostermans recipe, it has a link in it which gives a more in depth explanation of the process, it is very interesting and explains how the emulsion can be manipulated to give you a faster emulsion and a more sensitive one. Good reading. No I don't do workshops very well, its just someone telling you what you can find on the net for free.
Another good source, though I'm probably trying to teach you to suck eggs, is Youtube. A guy called Borut Peterlin on you tube is very entertaining and has some great tips. Though it is wet plate collodion.


http://thelightfarm.com/Map/DryPlate/Osterman/DryPlatePart4.htm

I don't know about John Coffer and dry plate? Just interested in his wet plate collodion. You would have to check out his site.

[NiNo]

Sorry my English is not too good..

So:
I tried on 8x10" this lens: Fujinon-W 250/6,3 but not really enough...
Are you use a long time ago this lens for 8x10?
Do you have any Vignetta, darkness in the corners, when you use correction (horizontal/vertical)?
My serial number is: 494117 and yours?
Thank you!

kanga, sorry for late answer.
my is 493... it is the same lens.
the lens is good enough for 8x10 wide open in portrait distance (2-3m and more to model) with some movements
yes, i have vignetting and darkness in the corners if i have to much movements, but when, then i try to do my shots anotherway (read without movements or a bit less movements) if i would like to have 8x10 full of image. on the otherside i make my contact prints on 18x24 paper. it meens i have to crop :(

[Donald Qualls]

Donald,

The best emulsion advice for DIY I have found, is published by Denise Ross, http://www.thelightfarm.com/

Wow, that resource didn't exist last time I looked at making my own film. I'll have to look through her site in more detail; it certainly seems as if, as long as we can get acetate and glass, we'll be able to keep doing what we do (I have a couple 9x12 cm plate cameras, I can shoot glass without any more effort than pulling the film sheaths out of the plate holders -- and in that size, it isn't all that heavy). I'll have to look in more detail to see if she's at least come up with (or found and pointed to) a path to ortho sensitivity without exotic sensitizing dyes. If I can make an ISO 25 equivalent emulsion for film and plates, and control contrast in an emulsion to coat on paper for prints, I'll be able to do this as long as I can lift my tripod, regardless of what the film industry does.

[Tin Can]

Here is the address for Mark Ostermans recipe, it has a link in it which gives a more in depth explanation of the process, it is very interesting and explains how the emulsion can be manipulated to give you a faster emulsion and a more sensitive one. Good reading. No I don't do workshops very well, its just someone telling you what you can find on the net for free.
Another good source, though I'm probably trying to teach you to suck eggs, is Youtube. A guy called Borut Peterlin on you tube is very entertaining and has some great tips. Though it is wet plate collodion.


http://thelightfarm.com/Map/DryPlate/Osterman/DryPlatePart4.htm

I don't know about John Coffer and dry plate? Just interested in his wet plate collodion. You would have to check out his site.

Wow, just reread the link above and it is a much improved and understandable recipe, with pictures. This is doable.

I have 100 thin plates of 5x7 glass, much of the lab gear, and now the winter to gather supplies and try it.

I was unaware of John Coffer and his workshops sound terrific.

Great links!

[Andrew O'Neill]

I thought I'd try out my recently acquired 335mm Wollaston Meniscus lens. Kodak Ektascan B/RA X-ray film. Shot wide open. EI 80. Developed in pyrocat-hd.

[mdarnton]

That's on 8x10, probably?

[Andrew O'Neill]

Yessiree! Got some 14x17 but my camera needs some repairs first...bellows is stiffer than the drink I poured last night.

[gogo120]

http://fc04.deviantart.net/fs71/f/2014/171/b/2/zofie_140616_233520_by_pasiasty-d7na8cn.jpg
http://fav.me/d7na8cn
Mentor Panorama
Carl Zeiss Jena Tessar 300/4.5
Foma Medix XBU

Świetny portret.

Ja dziś testowałem nowy film RTG, Fuji UM-MA, jego zaleta, emulsja tylko po jednej stronie. Wstępnie świeciłem 64asa bo tak mi wychodziło na poprzednim filmie Fuji SuperRX więc od tego zacząłem.
Rodinal 1:100, 12 minut w kuwecie przy czerownym świetle. Negatyw wygląda dobrze, zobaczymy...
Pozdrawiam.

[andrewch59]

Wow, just reread the link above and it is a much improved and understandable recipe, with pictures. This is doable.

I have 100 thin plates of 5x7 glass, much of the lab gear, and now the winter to gather supplies and try it.

I was unaware of John Coffer and his workshops sound terrific.

Great links!

[andrewch59]

Yes it is a great reference. The other activity you might find valuable is albumen prints or salt printing. This will allow you to print your negatives onto one of the first materials used, it gives awesome results, once again Borut Peterlin gives a very practical demonstration on youtube.
As for the dry plate emulsion, it suggests your plates will be about iso 20-ish, this is within my parameters for using the cap off cap on exposure method. Might be the start of a great thread. I had trouble finding cheese crocks over here and had to import from the US. We do not have everclear here (Australia) either but there is another alcohol product (denatured alcohol) which is a great substitute, and cheap.
The emulsion is a gel, you just get a tablespoon out of your crock, heat it up and pour it onto your plate, will last indefinitely if stored correctly.
I will be doing it around xmas time, will let you know how it goes.

[Tin Can]

Great and do start a new thread.

[Woodturner-fran]

Foamcore camera, 0.4mm pinhole, 80deg AOV. Fuji HRT green 18*24cm, processed in Rodinal 100:1 6.5mins. Contact print.

https://farm4.staticflickr.com/3932/15599795226_f9eb890f52_z.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/pLv2CE)Workshop (https://flic.kr/p/pLv2CE) by francis morrin (https://www.flickr.com/people/38618759@N05/), on Flickr

[NiNo]

https://c2.staticflickr.com/6/5608/15437478528_3782040e1c_c.jpg

CP Goerz RP II
Kodak blue 13x18 developed in Rodinal
Slavich Bromportret 80 in Ilford PQ-U

PS. the print is not so sharp as it shown, this is texture of the paper :)

[SergeiR]

Back to xray, once holders cleared from Arista. I have found that i grew to get results with Xray way better and easier with "regular" Arista.


8x10, Kodak CSG, 1:100 Adonal, 10m rotary

https://farm6.staticflickr.com/5610/15613025556_e7e35fb553_b.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/pMEQxN)Scan-141026-0003www (https://flic.kr/p/pMEQxN) by Sergei Rodionov (https://www.flickr.com/people/24930737@N05/), on Flickr

[grzybu]

Yesterday I've took my camera out for first time and here is the result.

https://farm4.staticflickr.com/3941/15616382156_32e70d4d4e_o.jpg

https://farm4.staticflickr.com/3940/15640094395_f2132a7a9b_o.jpg

[ImSoNegative]

xray film shot with a Titan 8x10 pinhole, never used a pinhole camera before let alone with xray film, one thing I like about using xray film is so far there is no reciprocity failure that I have seen even at 22 minutes, I actually taped a 0 filter on the inside trying to control the contrast, it helped a bit, just shooting around the yard.

https://farm4.staticflickr.com/3939/15477388788_26680f6e06.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/pzFEsQ)titan and xray 2 (https://flic.kr/p/pzFEsQ) by goldenimageworks65 (https://www.flickr.com/people/126756312@N03/), on Flickr

[ImSoNegative]

another, my ghost, I was timing the exposure, this one was 16 minutes.

https://farm8.staticflickr.com/7474/15639810696_1143570501.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/pQ37Qy)titan and xray film (https://flic.kr/p/pQ37Qy) by goldenimageworks65 (https://www.flickr.com/people/126756312@N03/), on Flickr

[ImSoNegative]

no filter, 4.5 minutes, very high contrast, this pinhole camera is f288

https://farm8.staticflickr.com/7518/15475517750_4d66080a20.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/pzw5gy)Titan 8x10 and xray film pt2 (https://flic.kr/p/pzw5gy) by goldenimageworks65 (https://www.flickr.com/people/126756312@N03/), on Flickr

[ImSoNegative]

Yesterday I've took my camera out for first time and here is the result.

https://farm4.staticflickr.com/3941/15616382156_32e70d4d4e_o.jpg

https://farm4.staticflickr.com/3940/15640094395_f2132a7a9b_o.jpg

Nice Images!!

[SergeiR]

another, my ghost, I was timing the exposure, this one was 16 minutes.

https://farm8.staticflickr.com/7474/15639810696_1143570501.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/pQ37Qy)titan and xray film (https://flic.kr/p/pQ37Qy) by goldenimageworks65 (https://www.flickr.com/people/126756312@N03/), on Flickr

Yup. Its a bit peculiar thing i noticed too. Never had to compensate for longer exposures, at it seems be have enough latitude to allow for 2-3 stops miscalculations (every now and then i think i have gone too long or too short, but .. nope. Comes out right). Of course you still can goof it up, but it seems to be harder to do so.

[SergeiR]

8x10 Kodak CSG, 10m rotatry in 1:100 Adonal

Another cool part is that it dries up in about 15 minutes in drying cabinet so you can shoot batch and have ready results within 45 minutes ;)

https://farm8.staticflickr.com/7476/15661583591_f715fcf917_o.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/pRXHai)Scan-141030-0001www (https://flic.kr/p/pRXHai) by Sergei Rodionov (https://www.flickr.com/people/24930737@N05/), on Flickr

[Jim Noel]

Sergei,
A beautiful portrait of a beautiful woman.

[Tin Can]

Sergei,

You have captured Noir sweetness, the lady smiles with her eyes and smoulders with her slightly off focus lips, which softens them.

+1


8x10 Kodak CSG, 10m rotatry in 1:100 Adonal

Another cool part is that it dries up in about 15 minutes in drying cabinet so you can shoot batch and have ready results within 45 minutes ;)

[SergeiR]

Thanks guys :) I was lucky enough to marry woman who not only doesn't mind me photographing and dorking with cameras in general , but also who doesn't mind me to come home after long work and at like 10pm shout "hey! lets try shooting this!" :) And then patiently wait while i doing all the stuff ;)
And encouraging me to do more photography b/c she knows I like it.

[ScottPhotoCo]

Thanks guys :) I was lucky enough to marry woman who not only doesn't mind me photographing and dorking with cameras in general , but also who doesn't mind me to come home after long work and at like 10pm shout "hey! lets try shooting this!" :) And then patiently wait while i doing all the stuff ;)
And encouraging me to do more photography b/c she knows I like it.

Keeper!

[SergeiR]

Keeper!
Yup :)