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

[Craig Tuffin]

I agree Sergei...an excellent portrait!

[Craig Tuffin]

Scan of a whole plate neg using Agfa Ht-g. Developed in Rodinal 1:120 for 10 mins.
I've exposed and developed to produce higher density for salt prints. I actually like the glowing highlights in this scan but the neg will perform best with an alternative POP (hopefully) :rolleyes:

https://farm6.staticflickr.com/5614/15670718172_4eea670853_b.jpg

[mdarnton]

Nice. One of the things I'm finding particularly easy to make happen with x-ray film is glowing highlights, which I really like.

[ImSoNegative]

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.

Excellent!!

[ImSoNegative]

Scan of a whole plate neg using Agfa Ht-g. Developed in Rodinal 1:120 for 10 mins.
I've exposed and developed to produce higher density for salt prints. I actually like the glowing highlights in this scan but the neg will perform best with an alternative POP (hopefully) :rolleyes:

https://farm6.staticflickr.com/5614/15670718172_4eea670853_b.jpg

that is really nice!

[Shen45]

Scan of a whole plate neg using Agfa Ht-g. Developed in Rodinal 1:120 for 10 mins.
I've exposed and developed to produce higher density for salt prints. I actually like the glowing highlights in this scan but the neg will perform best with an alternative POP (hopefully) :rolleyes:

https://farm6.staticflickr.com/5614/15670718172_4eea670853_b.jpg


Looking extremely good Craig, did I mention extremely good ? :)

Steve

[stradibarrius]

how do you choose between blue & green x-ray film?

[NiNo]

how do you choose between blue & green x-ray film?

i dont :) i just have blue, but i d like to try green too

[premortho]

There are other differences, but basically blue is mildly orthochromatic, green is more orthochromatic, and Kodak Ektascan is the most orthochromatic of all x-ray films. It is also backed with an anti light-scattering material. It costs twice as much as other x-ray films. Orthochromatic means "all colors", and it looked like it was compared to "ordinary film", but it still couldn't record red. Then came panchromatic film which does record tones of red.
how do you choose between blue & green x-ray film?

[StoneNYC]

There are other differences, but basically blue is mildly orthochromatic, green is more orthochromatic, and Kodak Ektascan is the most orthochromatic of all x-ray films. It is also backed with an anti light-scattering material. It costs twice as much as other x-ray films. Orthochromatic means "all colors", and it looked like it was compared to "ordinary film", but it still couldn't record red. Then came panchromatic film which does record tones of red.

Also... And more importantly

Green = 400ASA
Blue = 100ASA

Half or double is just that, so green half speed is 200ASA

For some reason I'm doubting the Blue speed, it's possible Blue is 200 and Half Speed Blue is 100.... Sorry for the cryptic info, green is definitely 400...

[mdarnton]

I'm happily shooting Green at 80 . . . .

[StoneNYC]

I'm happily shooting Green at 80 . . . .

I don't mean to tell people what to shoot it at, I'm telling you the rated (by the manufacturer) speed of the film, your exposure index is your own business ;)

[Ralph Weimer]

I believe the 100 and 400 speed refers to system speed: The imaging system consisting of the film and the proper intensifying screens that fluoresce under x-rays to expose the film. Place the wrong kind of film into the wrong kind of screens and the resulting system speed drops to around 10 (as I guesstamate from my experience in x-ray). So green x-ray film isn't the same speed when exposed by light in a camera as TMAX 400, nor is blue x-ray film the same speed as Delta 100. I don't believe any ASA/ISO number has been assigned to x-ray film used in-camera and exposed to white light.

Ralph

[premortho]

I believe the 100 and 400 speed refers to system speed: The imaging system consisting of the film and the proper intensifying screens that fluoresce under x-rays to expose the film. Place the wrong kind of film into the wrong kind of screens and the resulting system speed drops to around 10 (as I guesstamate from my experience in x-ray). So green x-ray film isn't the same speed when exposed by light in a camera as TMAX 400, nor is blue x-ray film the same speed as Delta 100. I don't believe any ASA/ISO number has been assigned to x-ray film used in-camera and exposed to white light.
I think you are right. I also find it interesting that some folks think that film speed is more important than tonal rendition, and whether or not the film has anti-haloid backing.
Ralph

[premortho]

I did something wrong on the above post, 2161. My comment is in the last two sentences. Thank you, and sorry for the confusion.

[dynamo]

a first test to check if it works at all.
http://www.dynamo.de/filmwasters/xray_9x12_001.jpg
Crown Graphic, 6.8/90mm Angulon,
Fuji AD-M, 18x24, cut into 9x12 sheets, iso 100,
Rodinal 1+120, 18°C and 8min. (approx.)
slightly adjusted in Lightroom.

[Harold_4074]

I believe the 100 and 400 speed refers to system speed: The imaging system consisting of the film and the proper intensifying screens that fluoresce under x-rays to expose the film. Place the wrong kind of film into the wrong kind of screens and the resulting system speed drops to around 10 (as I guesstamate from my experience in x-ray). So green x-ray film isn't the same speed when exposed by light in a camera as TMAX 400, nor is blue x-ray film the same speed as Delta 100. I don't believe any ASA/ISO number has been assigned to x-ray film used in-camera and exposed to white light.

Based on a very recent foray into industrial radiography at work, this is correct, except that the "film speed" is the contribution to the "system speed" that is not due to the "screen speed". So a 400-speed film with a matching "fast" screen will have a system speed of 800, for which there is no parallel in the photographic world.

Combining a blue-sensitive film with a green-emitting screen will give lousy results. When I learned this, it suddenly dawned on me why I had to expose CSG at an E.I. of 80 when using strobes, but 64 or less if the exposure was made with only the (tungsten) modeling lights. And when one of the modeling lights was dimmed to match a low flash output, the results were strangely unlike I expected. You might expect that someone who started taking pictures in the 1960s, when film boxes had both "daylight" and "tungsten" ratings marked on them, would remember that even tungsten-halogen lamps aren't the same color temperature as a strobe!

[ImSoNegative]

this was shot today using a titan 8x10 pinhole camera, I have a filter on the inside and I forgot to add a bit of exposure for it, green sensitive xray film, f288 6 min. exposure. There was a bit of evening light coming in.

https://farm4.staticflickr.com/3953/15085001674_a8570c212d_z.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/oZ1zrL)goforth creek, pinhole 8x10 (https://flic.kr/p/oZ1zrL) by goldenimageworks65 (https://www.flickr.com/people/126756312@N03/), on Flickr

[Tin Can]

this was shot today using a titan 8x10 pinhole camera, I have a filter on the inside and I forgot to add a bit of exposure for it, green sensitive xray film, f288 6 min. exposure. There was a bit of evening light coming in.

https://farm4.staticflickr.com/3953/15085001674_a8570c212d_z.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/oZ1zrL)goforth creek, pinhole 8x10 (https://flic.kr/p/oZ1zrL) by goldenimageworks65 (https://www.flickr.com/people/126756312@N03/), on Flickr

Nice! We may as well throw out all our expensive gear.

[SergeiR]

Nice! We may as well throw out all our expensive gear.

yeah. well... just shout when you do ;) i can use some of your lenses ;))))

[SergeiR]

this was shot today using a titan 8x10 pinhole camera, I have a filter on the inside and I forgot to add a bit of exposure for it, green sensitive xray film, f288 6 min. exposure. There was a bit of evening light coming in.

turned out quite well, despite all the forgetting, imho

[Tin Can]

yeah. well... just shout when you do ;) i can use some of your lenses ;))))

Not dead yet!

[Jim Fitzgerald]

One can never have to many lenses :-)

[Tin Can]

One can never have to many lenses :-)

I'm working on it. :)

[Harold_4074]

One can never have to many lenses :-)

I think the rule is the same one which applies to clamps for woodworking: you will have too many at exactly the point where you no longer have enough room to use them. The corollary to this is: the only reasonable solution to insufficient shop/studio space is to get more space....

[SergeiR]

8x10 xray csg, 12m Adonal 1:100 rotary

https://farm4.staticflickr.com/3955/15707952202_9e89c75a42_c.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/pW4mW7)Scan-141102-0003www (https://flic.kr/p/pW4mW7) by Sergei Rodionov (https://www.flickr.com/people/24930737@N05/), on Flickr

[ImSoNegative]

a couple more xray shot today with the ole 8x10 pinhole, the FL of this pinhole camera is 150mm@f288

https://farm8.staticflickr.com/7471/15086388264_d6eb20c3f5_z.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/oZ8FCu)pinhole 8x10 2 (https://flic.kr/p/oZ8FCu) by goldenimageworks65 (https://www.flickr.com/people/126756312@N03/), on Flickr

https://farm6.staticflickr.com/5613/15707933072_8613b45843_z.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/pW4gfh)pinhole 8x10 (https://flic.kr/p/pW4gfh) by goldenimageworks65 (https://www.flickr.com/people/126756312@N03/), on Flickr

[Tin Can]

With pinhole, no need for expensive ND filters.

Nice water!

[Rory_5244]

8x10 xray csg, 12m Adonal 1:100 rotary

https://farm4.staticflickr.com/3955/15707952202_9e89c75a42_c.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/pW4mW7)Scan-141102-0003www (https://flic.kr/p/pW4mW7) by Sergei Rodionov (https://www.flickr.com/people/24930737@N05/), on Flickr

Love this one.

[ImSoNegative]

Love this one.

+1

[ImSoNegative]

With pinhole, no need for expensive ND filters.

Nice water!

at f288 the only thing you really have to have is good batteries in your stop watch :)

[Peter Lewin]

Many (I think the majority) of these x-ray film shots look quite dark. Is it possible to do a high-key shot on x-ray film? Is the general darkness a function of the material, or a conscious choice by the photographer?

[northcarolinajack]

This shot was with my Kodak 8x10, a 5x7 back, the lens a Gundlach Radar lens using Green x-ray film, process in HC110.

https://farm4.staticflickr.com/3941/15708058451_c6db23c595_z.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/pW4UvZ)18091-Vase with Leaves-5x7 on 2D-Fuji Xray-Hc110-Radar Lens copy (https://flic.kr/p/pW4UvZ) by jackharrisphotography (https://www.flickr.com/people/56479130@N08/), on Flickr

[Tin Can]

Pretty Space Age stuff, Radar lenz on X-Ray.

Great image response! :)

[Jim Noel]

Many (I think the majority) of these x-ray film shots look quite dark. Is it possible to do a high-key shot on x-ray film? Is the general darkness a function of the material, or a conscious choice by the photographer?

Certainly a high key image can be made. It has to do with shadows and colors. Reds will be black, oranges dark gray, etc. A rim lit nude against a white background would be a great subject for a high key image. I have everything I need to make this image, except the subject.

[Jim Noel]

Many (I think the majority) of these x-ray film shots look quite dark. Is it possible to do a high-key shot on x-ray film? Is the general darkness a function of the material, or a conscious choice by the photographer?

Here is a portion of a recent high key test with CSG. I hope since I don't usually put images in here.
124585

[mdarnton]

Many (I think the majority) of these x-ray film shots look quite dark. Is it possible to do a high-key shot on x-ray film? Is the general darkness a function of the material, or a conscious choice by the photographer?

In my case, my work is in general getting lower and lower keyed, however, the material isn't dictating that. My negatives are looking really nice, by my usual standards. One of the things I have noticed about the stuff is that high toned things are rendered really nicely, and shadows can be very open, too, which leaves a lot of room for interpretation. The only real difference, in my case, is that I'm developing to quite a higher contrast than I would use for silver printing, but that's my intention, for the type of scanning I do, and the carbon printing I intend to try in the future.

[stradibarrius]

Michael, can you explain your method of development?

[mdarnton]

D23, 1:6.
10 minutes, room temp, agitation every two minutes, in hangers in tanks.

I save and reuse the developer for maybe five or six weeks.

[mdarnton]

Shot today. 8x10, Fuji Green in D23, 1:6, 12 min.
Just trying to be a 1965-vintage studio portrait photographer . . . .

https://farm4.staticflickr.com/3948/15712144021_d88a2411f4_b.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/pWqR1R)

Roger Chase (https://flic.kr/p/pWqR1R) by michael.darnton (https://www.flickr.com/people/118045067@N03/), on Flickr

[ImSoNegative]

nice portrait

[Tin Can]

Shot today. 8x10, Fuji Green in D23, 1:6, 12 min.
Just trying to be a 1965-vintage studio portrait photographer . . . .

https://farm4.staticflickr.com/3948/15712144021_d88a2411f4_b.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/pWqR1R)

Roger Chase (https://flic.kr/p/pWqR1R) by michael.darnton (https://www.flickr.com/people/118045067@N03/), on Flickr

Nice job, he is really a 130 now?

Kidding. :)

What was the lens?

[NiNo]

very nice portrait
i need try green x-ray

Shot today. 8x10, Fuji Green in D23, 1:6, 12 min.
Just trying to be a 1965-vintage studio portrait photographer . . . .

https://farm4.staticflickr.com/3948/15712144021_d88a2411f4_b.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/pWqR1R)

Roger Chase (https://flic.kr/p/pWqR1R) by michael.darnton (https://www.flickr.com/people/118045067@N03/), on Flickr

[mdarnton]

Thanks.

Randy, the lens is a 17" Copying Ektanon, f10 at f16.

I am really liking what x-ray film does for skin tones, though it perhaps shows too much--skin inconsistencies pop right out. However, learning retouching is also on my calendar.

[Ricardo de Oliveira]

Testing Agfa HDR-C mammo film. Shot with incandescent light. Parodinal 12 min. Toyo 45C, Schneider 210 Simmar S, f.8.
Having problems cutting the 18x24 sheet in the dark. Lots of scratches here. Difficult to find a safelight in the local market.
124593

[SergeiR]

Shot today. 8x10, Fuji Green in D23, 1:6, 12 min.
Just trying to be a 1965-vintage studio portrait photographer . . . .


that is VERY good result

[stradibarrius]

WOW...I was trying to decide if I wanted to try some X film but this and SergeiR's work make me say yes!

[AF10]

Hi! This is a print from the negative or a digital output?

[QUOTE=mdarnton;1185327]Shot today. 8x10, Fuji Green in D23, 1:6, 12 min.
Just trying to be a 1965-vintage studio portrait photographer . . . .

[angusparker]

Testing Agfa HDR-C mammo film. Shot with incandescent light. Parodinal 12 min. Toyo 45C, Schneider 210 Simmar S, f.8.
Having problems cutting the 18x24 sheet in the dark. Lots of scratches here. Difficult to find a safelight in the local market.
124593

Check out red LED lights - about $20. Work for me and X-ray film.

[mdarnton]

I put a light pad* on the floor, and shot the neg on it with a Nikon D300 and 55/3.5 Micro-Nikkor. There's more resolution in the neg than that brought out, and possibly a bit of vibration in my copying setup, which isn't the same as the one I use for 35mm. I'm hoping there will be a V700/750/800/850 scanner under the Christmas tree this year so I can scan 8x10 negs, of which I have made only a couple, so far.

* http://www.amazon.com/Huion-Inches-Artcraft-Tracing-Light/dp/B00J3NRAV2

[mdarnton]

WOW...I was trying to decide if I wanted to try some X film but this and SergeiR's work make me say yes!

Sergi's work is ALWAYS inspiring! His stuff is what flipped me on to trying x-ray film. You can only see so much like that before you have to try it yourself.

[SergeiR]

Thanks guys, but i believe that most of credit is due to people who started all the experiments , although no longer posting here much - Jim is one of them to certainly be named ;)

[Jim Fitzgerald]

Sergei and everyone who is posting, thanks. The wealth of knowledge in this thread is amazing. One of the reasons I started it. I'll get back to posting soon. I've been busy building my camera and recently got back from a trip to the Redwoods shooting all four of my cameras. A lot of film to develop and since I never post scans it will take me time to get carbon prints done and posted..... only not in this thread as I shot the other kind of film on this trip.

I will get back to working on my carbon transfer portraits using x-ray film very soon and in the meantime keep the great images coming and please give us your details as I love to learn as well. The work has been stunning and can't wait to see more. Thanks.

[ImSoNegative]

A couple I shot today using the Rittreck View w/ 8x10 back, 355 RD Artar, green xray film

https://farm6.staticflickr.com/5614/15697446566_2c6f5bcc08_z.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/pV8vYs)falls (https://flic.kr/p/pV8vYs) by goldenimageworks65 (https://www.flickr.com/people/126756312@N03/), on Flickr

https://farm8.staticflickr.com/7524/15719260871_38b0645e5c_z.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/pX4jBa)Julia (https://flic.kr/p/pX4jBa) by goldenimageworks65 (https://www.flickr.com/people/126756312@N03/), on Flickr

[Jim Fitzgerald]

Awesome Images both of them!

[ImSoNegative]

Thanks Jim!!

[stradibarrius]

These shots are beautifl but "Julia" is the best! is this green or blue?

[ImSoNegative]

thank you stradibarrius, I say its green because that is what I ordered but what I ordered was Fuji HR U but what I got was Fuji HR T, not sure what the difference is, Jim probably knows. I exposed it at 100, developed in ilfosol 3

[mdarnton]

My victim from the other day came by yesterday and said he'd like to use one of the others from the take for PR, one that
wasn't so morose, so I shopped it up appropriately for publication use. The reason for the visit was gluing up a seam on his
viola, thus the clamps. I wasn't planning that he'd actually want to use it. :-)

Someone asked about the inevitability of high contrast and low key. This one's processed to look normal. Skin tones will
always be a bit dark relative to pan films because of x-ray film's lack of red sensitivity, which will render anything that's
red, or partially red such as skin, darker than pan film would do it.

https://farm8.staticflickr.com/7550/15538524999_b272fb90a6_b.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/pF618r)

Roger Chase 2--PR version (https://flic.kr/p/pF618r) by michael.darnton (https://www.flickr.com/people/118045067@N03/), on Flickr

[stradibarrius]

Thanks...it seems most people are using green???
I am shooting 4x5 and would have to cut 8x10 into 4- 4x5 sheets. Is Xray film easily scratched?

[mdarnton]

It's easy to scratch the emulsion when it's wet, just as with regular film. I haven't had any scratches from my paper cutter, though.
You should probably take this type of question over to the x-ray technical thread.....keep this one for photos, as per it's title.
http://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/showthread.php?48099-X-ray-Film-example-and-comparison

[rdelung]

What would be the average speed for Green and Blue film? Using Rodinal developer, what consentration and developer Temperature would be suggested for a starting point? Shorty from the West Cost

[mdarnton]

What would be the average speed for Green and Blue film? Using Rodinal developer, what consentration and developer Temperature would be suggested for a starting point? Shorty from the West Cost

The thread that will answer all of your technical x-ray film questions!
http://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/showthread.php?48099-X-ray-Film-example-and-comparison

[andrewch59]

124951
Great and do start a new thread.

Thanks to the terrific reference material from the pro's on this site I have managed to produce some half decent pics methinks!
Please feel free to critique, its all valuable info to me. These were taken on a Deardorff 11x14 studio with an old dallmeyer at f4.6 and a Derogy wide open and an old piece of tin as a shutter.
The blue half speed 11x14 film needed a bit of care getting in and out of the film holder and during developing but should be more robust after a coating of hairspray, apologies but all have been digitized by camera to upload as I don't have a scanner
124950

[StoneNYC]

124951

Thanks to the terrific reference material from the pro's on this site I have managed to produce some half decent pics methinks!
Please feel free to critique, its all valuable info to me. These were taken on a Deardorff 11x14 studio with an old dallmeyer at f4.6 and a Derogy wide open and an old piece of tin as a shutter.
The blue half speed 11x14 film needed a bit of care getting in and out of the film holder and during developing but should be more robust after a coating of hairspray, apologies but all have been digitized by camera to upload as I don't have a scanner
124950

I'm confused about this first color image, would you elaborate please thanks

[mdarnton]

Hand coloring, I think.

I suspect the negative will be more vulnerable with hairspray than without. I have trouble with damage only when the film is wet, and have been able to track every scratch to wet handling, except for the piece I dropped on the floor. Once it's dry, it's as tough as any film. Wet it's like jello on a sheet of glass and just looking at it too hard will scratch it.

Someone (sorry, don't remember exactly who--one of our two or three most ancient members) suggested loading film by opening the slide all the way, positioning the film as far in as possible, then setting one edge under the track, then the other, finally pushing it home only 1/2 inch or so, rather than sliding it in all the way from one end. For large film this works great. 5x7, maybe; 4x5 not at all. But it's great for 8x10, etc.

[StoneNYC]

Hand coloring, I think.

I suspect the negative will be more vulnerable with hairspray than without. I have trouble with damage only when the film is wet, and have been able to track every scratch to wet handling, except for the piece I dropped on the floor. Once it's dry, it's as tough as any film. Wet it's like jello on a sheet of glass and just looking at it too hard will scratch it.

Someone (sorry, don't remember exactly who--one of our two or three most ancient members) suggested loading film by opening the slide all the way, positioning the film as far in as possible, then setting one edge under the track, then the other, finally pushing it home only 1/2 inch or so, rather than sliding it in all the way from one end. For large film this works great. 5x7, maybe; 4x5 not at all. But it's great for 8x10, etc.

I was actually thinking that if I use a print drum for developing my double-sided x-ray film next time, what usually happens to me is that I get scratches where the lines are inside the drum, but it occurred to me that maybe I could add a second layer of some kind of non-scratching material behind one side of the film as a barrier against the lines on the drum itself, i'm not sure if this would cause some kind of overall scratching, or if it would actually completely prevent the scratching, but it was a thought and I plan to experiment with it once my 11 x 14 camera is built (by me).

[Jim Fitzgerald]

Someone (sorry, don't remember exactly who--one of our two or three most ancient members) suggested loading film by opening the slide all the way, positioning the film as far in as possible, then setting one edge under the track, then the other, finally pushing it home only 1/2 inch or so, rather than sliding it in all the way from one end. For large film this works great. 5x7, maybe; 4x5 not at all. But it's great for 8x10, etc.

You can do this I guess but in the red light I've never found it to be a problem loading and unloading film the regular way. That is sliding it in, even with 14x17. One must be careful.

[Andrew O'Neill]

That's a pretty clever idea... definitely wasn't mine. I'm not ancient yet or that clever.

[StoneNYC]

Someone (sorry, don't remember exactly who--one of our two or three most ancient members) suggested loading film by opening the slide all the way, positioning the film as far in as possible, then setting one edge under the track, then the other, finally pushing it home only 1/2 inch or so, rather than sliding it in all the way from one end. For large film this works great. 5x7, maybe; 4x5 not at all. But it's great for 8x10, etc.

You can do this I guess but in the red light I've never found it to be a problem loading and unloading film the regular way. That is sliding it in, even with 14x17. One must be careful.

My issues were scratches during agitation

[Andrew O'Neill]

Gentle agitation in a flat-bottomed tray when using double-sided. I have just enough developer (pyrocat-hd) to go up to the first joint of my index finger. I don't get scratches or scuff marks. Another method is pulling the film out of the tray, and placing it back in, pushing it to the bottom very gently. Twice per agitation cycle. This works well even with 14x17. Wear gloves. Keeps chems out of your system, and keeps finger nails from scratching the film. Don't forget ziplock bags method, too.

[andrewch59]

Hi StoneNYC yes, it is hand colouring, a cotton bud and some SHIVA Veronica Cass, unfortunately no longer sold.
I had a few probs getting the double sided film in and out, it would scrape on the wood at the end at the material hinge. I solved this quite easily by sacrificing another negative, I slide the good film over the old negative and it stops the contact with the wood

[andrewch59]

Woops forgot to add, the same technique with the second negative also works well in developing trays, I use glass plate in the bottom of the developing tray so the film cant scratch against the imperfections in the tray, and have another negative in the other trays. I just turn my developing negative over a few times so that both sides get equal amounts of chemical
Cheers

[stradibarrius]

From the first few post then skipping to the last few post the knowledge of working with the xray film has grown. Based on that if you were going to try xray film for the first time in a 4x5 what film would you try?

[StoneNYC]

From the first few post then skipping to the last few post the knowledge of working with the xray film has grown. Based on that if you were going to try xray film for the first time in a 4x5 what film would you try?

Do you mean cutting it down yourself? They don't make 4x5 X-Ray film, there are companies that cut it down for you at a premium of course. But then you're limited in what they cut.

I always say 8x0 Ektascan (carestream) because it's single sided.

[ndg]

With all the recent 4x10 work being posted by Chris Barrett (http://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/member.php?44980-Christopher-Barrett), I caught the 4x10 bug again. I dusted off my 4x10 reducing back, cut down some Xray film and took the Shen Hao out yesterday to my favorite place.
125128
Shot on Fuji HRT Green Xray film
125129
Shot on Agfa Ortho Green Xray film
Both images were shot at iso 400 with the Fuji 210 mm f5.6 lens at f32 with a No 8 yellow filter.
Developed with Rodinal 1:100 in the Jobo system.

[Jim Noel]

Do you mean cutting it down yourself? They don't make 4x5 X-Ray film, there are companies that cut it down for you at a premium of course. But then you're limited in what they cut.

I always say 8x0 Ektascan (carestream) because it's single sided.

I agree with your thoughts.

[Jim Noel]

With all the recent 4x10 work being posted by Chris Barrett (http://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/member.php?44980-Christopher-Barrett), I caught the 4x10 bug again. I dusted off my 4x10 reducing back, cut down some Xray film and took the Shen Hao out yesterday to my favorite place.
125128
Shot on Fuji HRT Green Xray film
125129
Shot on Agfa Ortho Green Xray film
Both images were shot at iso 400 with the Fuji 210 mm f5.6 lens at f32 with a No 8 yellow filter.
Developed with Rodinal 1:100 in the Jobo system.

Terrific images!

[Jim Noel]

I have been following this thread since its inception, and I am currently using Ektascan but have a need to move to a double sided film and cut it down for larger unusual sizes. Several entries have indicated cutting down film, a task at which I have rarely been successful, but none have described their method.
I need some ideas of methods used by those who are regularly successful with this task.
Do you use a jig?
Is a razor knife superior to a rolling cutter?
What is your method of holding them film steady?
Thanks for you ideas.
Jim

[mdarnton]

I use a rolling cutter. For most sizes the film holder needs film a little less than 1mm smaller than the nominal size. I'd recommend taking one piece and by trial and error figure out what exact sizes you want to cut, the first time.

I use a lots-of-plastic Fiskars disk cutter that cost me something like $20 at Office Depot. More $$$ now, apparently:
http://www.amazon.com/Fiskars-Classic-Rotary-Paper-Trimmer/dp/B000YAJHVE/

Word: I have never trusted the ability of any paper cutter I've used to make a square cut. When it's been important, I have set up a fence of tape at the right distance from the blade, and use that to brace the opposite end from the one I'm cutting, at the correct distance. Most paper cutters are a bit casual about making their side fences 90-degrees to the cutter.

I make a stack of about five pieces of 5" long masking tape, and lay that on the cutter's board as a fence, starting with cutting 8x10 into 5x8. So, first I put the fence at 5" minus about .6mm. I don't like handling the film a lot, so I cut a pile of about 5 sheets, in multiple passes, both holding down the holder on the cutter, and with my hand flat on the stack so it doesn't move. Then I take the pieces I cut off, and trim them from 5"+ to 5"-, again as a stack in multiple passes.

I store it that way, as 5x8. If I need 5x7, I cut to 7"-- using the tape fence-- in a pile as before. If I need 4x5, I cut the stacks of 5x8 as I made the initial cuts--once cut of 4"-, then taking the off cuts and cut the little strip off of them.

It sounds complex, but it really isn't. I make a pile of 5x8 when I feel like it, then cut it down later to what I really need at that moment.

Two things: I've never gotten scratches from cutting and handling. When it's dry, it's just as tough as regular film, so if you don't scratch Tri-X you won't scratch x-ray. Second, I am lucky in that I don't have oily hands, nor do I have acidic skin, so I don't leave any prints on film (that was handy when I was printing in commercial labs! :-) If you have oil or acid, you may have to wear cotton gloves or something.

[Tin Can]

I use a dedicated Dahle 18E that I use ONLY for cutting film. I gaff tape a production stop to the bed. I make sure everything is dust free and my hands are not oily, I don't use gloves. I keep a paper safe nearby and as I cut I put film in it, until I change to the second cut. I cut down 11x14 CSG and Ektascan. I cut many sizes and have very little scrap.

The Dalhe has a soft rubber gripper to hold your film in place. I don't use the supplied plastic stop.

I plan to buy a second smaller one for the second cut.

See video here. (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LbjF8vXHqgA)

[ndg]

I have been following this thread since its inception, and I am currently using Ektascan but have a need to move to a double sided film and cut it down for larger unusual sizes. Several entries have indicated cutting down film, a task at which I have rarely been successful, but none have described their method.
I need some ideas of methods used by those who are regularly successful with this task.
Do you use a jig?
Is a razor knife superior to a rolling cutter?
What is your method of holding them film steady?
Thanks for you ideas.
Jim

Jim, i use a Rotatrim. I use it to cut down sheets all the way up to14" x 36". Works rather well.

[ndg]

Jim, thanks!

[Jim Noel]

Thanks to all for your replies. You have given me some good directions to try.

Jim

[ImSoNegative]

Yes very nice ndg

[SergeiR]

8x10, Kodak CSG, rotary 6m, Adonal 1:100

https://farm9.staticflickr.com/8681/15623037859_b9e1bb2982_o.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/pNy9RH)SFlower study 26 (https://flic.kr/p/pNy9RH) by Sergei Rodionov (https://www.flickr.com/people/24930737@N05/), on Flickr

[UlbabraB]

A couple of Van Dyke prints from 14x17" Kodak T-Mat xray films developed in Pyrocat-HD 1:1:100 for 10 minutes in trays. Both shot with a 450mm extra rapid aplanat.

https://farm6.staticflickr.com/5612/15629579980_ae0e9a74ac_c.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/pP8FAU)Katori Shinto Ryu sunday training (https://flic.kr/p/pP8FAU) by Filippo Natali (https://www.flickr.com/people/98545448@N00/), on Flickr

https://farm8.staticflickr.com/7571/15812563711_25f55c6e69_c.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/q6iwhP)Nicola with catch net (https://flic.kr/p/q6iwhP) by Filippo Natali (https://www.flickr.com/people/98545448@N00/), on Flickr

Thank you all for alle the infos and images posted on this thread, it's very useful and inspiring.

[premortho]

These are truly stunning!
A couple of Van Dyke prints from 14x17" Kodak T-Mat xray films developed in Pyrocat-HD 1:1:100 for 10 minutes in trays. Both shot with a 450mm extra rapid aplanat.

https://farm6.staticflickr.com/5612/15629579980_ae0e9a74ac_c.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/pP8FAU)Katori Shinto Ryu sunday training (https://flic.kr/p/pP8FAU) by Filippo Natali (https://www.flickr.com/people/98545448@N00/), on Flickr

https://farm8.staticflickr.com/7571/15812563711_25f55c6e69_c.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/q6iwhP)Nicola with catch net (https://flic.kr/p/q6iwhP) by Filippo Natali (https://www.flickr.com/people/98545448@N00/), on Flickr

Thank you all for alle the infos and images posted on this thread, it's very useful and inspiring.

[SergeiR]

Filippo - very nice prints. Well done!

[UlbabraB]

Thanks!!

[Tin Can]

Here it comes. Just got an email from ZZ medical announcing the discontinuation of one type of X-Ray film.

Surely more to come. :(


Fuji Film Co. recently announced the end of production for their RXU Half Speed Blue x-ray film. If you are using the RXU x-ray film in a Blue system you can switch to the Carestream CSB.5 without any change in the speed of your system. RXU has the unique capability to work in either Green or Blue systems so Z&Z Medical sold this product as a Half Speed Blue x-ray film and as a High Speed Green x-ray film. If you were using the RXU in a Green system the Carestream CSB.5 will NOT work in your system. Z&Z Medical will not allow the return of opened boxes of x-ray film and will NOT be liable for customers trying the CSB.5 x-ray film in their Green system. Green system alternative films will be Fuji HRT, HRU or Carestream CSG. All of these products will cause your film speed to drop about 33% therefore you will need to increase your MAS 33%. If you are using the RXU film with Green Regular screens you can purchase Green Fast screens and achieve the same film speed.

If you are unsure of the color output of your system you can call Z&Z Medical at 800-410-9575 with the name of your intensifying screens and we will determine the color output for you. You can also perform this simple test: remove the film from your cassette. Place your opened cassettes where the screen can be exposed to radiation from your x-ray equipment and you can see the screen. Set your system for a long exposure time and then turn the light down or off in the x-ray room. Expose the screen and watch for it to glow during exposure. Green systems will put off a green light and Blue systems will put off a blue light. If you have any questions or need help with this transition please feel free to contact us at 800-410-9575.

[SergeiR]

Thanks for the push, Randy. I kept forgetting to order new box of film and my current ones are about to run out . Not that i shoot Fuji

[Tin Can]

Thanks for the push, Randy. I kept forgetting to order new box of film and my current ones are about to run out . Not that i shoot Fuji

I saw that and ordered a case of Ektascan.

[angusparker]

I saw that and ordered a case of Ektascan.

Good thinking. Time to order more 8x10 Ektascan!

[Tin Can]

I think it may ship better in a case, and ground shipping is only $14.

It may be time to order more 14x17!

I fear Ektascan is a tiny market, who exactly takes pictures of oscilloscopes these days? We stopped doing that well over 25 years ago at our lab, and we always used Polaroid, then went to video output onto a Sony printer, that was quicker than Polaroid.


Good thinking. Time to order more 8x10 Ektascan!

[StoneNYC]

I think it may ship better in a case, and ground shipping is only $14.

It may be time to order more 14x17!

I fear Ektascan is a tiny market, who exactly takes pictures of oscilloscopes these days? We stopped doing that well over 25 years ago at our lab, and we always used Polaroid, then went to video output onto a Sony printer, that was quicker than Polaroid.

Thought the 14x17 Ektascan wasn't available anymore?

[Tin Can]

Thought the 14x17 Ektascan wasn't available anymore?

14x17 was available in the last year and several us bought a 2 cases together in 2 single case buys. I still have 180 sheets to cut to 11x14 and 5x7. I don't shoot 11x14 as fast as I do 8x10 and I hope to use my incoming 500 sheets of 8x10 over a few years.

Then what's a guy to do?

I suggest others here start a buying group, if you want Ektascan.

Regular Kodak CSG which I also use is widely available. And 1/2 the price of Ektascan. Many of the alt printers are very happy using double sided X-Ray, such as CSG.

All depends on what you want.

I have a friend near me here, who thinks X-Ray is garbage and I should only shoot 'real' film. I do shoot 'real' film, but less often.

I really like that I can be free to experiment with X-Ray in all sizes and not worry about costs.

[axs810]

Do you think 8x10 Ektascan is close to being discontinued? What would be the benefit of buying as a group vs individually? Is it cheaper if so by how much?

[Tin Can]

8x10 is easy to get. 14x17 is tougher.

I have no idea if it will be discontinued soon, but I am sure it will be one day as everybody is going digital. It used for X-Rays not straight photography.

I like it, so I stocked up.

Maybe it will be cheaper soon, nobody knows and if they do they are not talking.

I have written and called X-Ray film sellers they will not tell me anything. I am sure their market has been disappearing very quickly.

Do what YOU think best. Good luck!

[Will S]

So I've been trying to figure out why my developer was getting exhausted too quickly and it hit me that I'm developing both sides of the film! I would think the blank side wouldn't use any developer up. Am I reading this right that the ektascan is single-sided emulsion? I'm using the fuji green at present. Thanks, Will

[NiNo]

some portraits on kodak br/a

https://c2.staticflickr.com/8/7520/15248721974_3ccc9bcf04_z.jpg

https://farm8.staticflickr.com/7502/15683461418_9f362f204b_z.jpg

[SergeiR]

some portraits on kodak br/a

standing processing?

[NiNo]

standing processing?
No, tray developement with continious non-stop agitation in rodinal 1:100
i think i know what you mean.
That what you see is something on the front lens. i thought that will not affect the image, but i was wrong. Now i know :(

[SergeiR]

No, tray developement with continious non-stop agitation in rodinal 1:100
i think i know what you mean.
That what you see is something on the front lens. i thought that will not affect the image, but i was wrong. Now i know :(

Пятно на передней линзе?

Мне все же кажется что это с процессом что то , у меня подобные пятна выразили когда то с пленкой листовой при "стоячей" проявке. В кювете по идее быть не должно, но кто знает. А барабана нет попробовать, повращать? Потому что края замечательные, резкость отличная и тона тоже.

[StoneNYC]

Пятно на передней линзе?

Мне все же кажется что это с процессом что то , у меня подобные пятна выразили когда то с пленкой листовой при "стоячей" проявке. В кювете по идее быть не должно, но кто знает. А барабана нет попробовать, повращать? Потому что края замечательные, резкость отличная и тона тоже.

Too much Russian!!

Я ничего не знаю!!!

:)

[ndg]

"In an Arc"
125507
Shot on 4"x10" Kodak Ortho Green Xray film (cut down 8" x 10" film)
Fuji 450 mm f12.5 lens @ f32, no filter
Developed with Rodinal 1:100 in Jobo

[SergeiR]

Nn
Too much Russian!!

Я ничего не знаю!!!

:)

Yep. Secret code :) just tried to bypass extra translation steps and share what I think might go funny with development there vs lens.

[premortho]

Yes it is single sided, and also has an anti-halation coating on the back.
So I've been trying to figure out why my developer was getting exhausted too quickly and it hit me that I'm developing both sides of the film! I would think the blank side wouldn't use any developer up. Am I reading this right that the ektascan is single-sided emulsion? I'm using the fuji green at present. Thanks, Will

[Tin Can]

More sales from ZZ. (http://www.zzmedical.com/standard-mobile-workstation-closeout-limited-quantities.html?utm_source=Closeout+Pricing+-+Mobile+Computer+Cart&utm_campaign=Sizzling+Summer+Deals&utm_medium=email)

This a digital cart, but also used to show scans of analog imaging.

I post this only to show all things analog X-Ray are ending before our eyes.

This cart would be useful for a variety of imagings methods.

Buy more film.

[SergeiR]

8x10 Kodak CSG , 1:100 Adonal rotary

https://farm8.staticflickr.com/7569/15885429072_83aaac4e84_b.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/qcJYC9)Black Diamond voyages - 3 (https://flic.kr/p/qcJYC9) by Sergei Rodionov (https://www.flickr.com/people/24930737@N05/), on Flickr

[Tin Can]

8x10 Kodak CSG , 1:100 Adonal rotary

https://farm8.staticflickr.com/7569/15885429072_83aaac4e84_b.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/qcJYC9)Black Diamond voyages - 3 (https://flic.kr/p/qcJYC9) by Sergei Rodionov (https://www.flickr.com/people/24930737@N05/), on Flickr

Childs play, eh!

I have used dragons for years, or perhaps they used me...

Interesting!

[Will S]

One of my first attempts with xray film:
Fuji Green Xray
Goerz Artar 19"
Ilford Warmtone

[Andrew O'Neill]

Nice. Why are there two? Do they differ by exposure?

[Will S]

Thanks! I couldn't figure out how to get rid of the image after attaching it by mistake again. I was hoping it would tell me how large the image could be when I uploaded too, but I didn't see that. I'll have to hunt around and find that before posting another image. This film really scratches easy, but I think I have the processing down now. I used Rodinal 1:200 but seems like 1:100 gives better contrast. I'm doing dbi and because the back side is emulsion I'm not seeing the highlights like I do with regular film, but 9-12 minutes seems in the ballpark. Anyone have any pointers on what to look for? Seems like you can only look at the highlights on the exposed emulsion side by tilting the film slightly in the light. No inspection by transmission...

thanks, Will

[SergeiR]

8m , Rodinal 1:150, rotary

8x10 Kodak CSG

https://farm9.staticflickr.com/8679/15903163455_3281b9525f_b.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/qeiSrn)Short break (https://flic.kr/p/qeiSrn) by Sergei Rodionov (https://www.flickr.com/people/24930737@N05/), on Flickr

[StoneNYC]

8m , Rodinal 1:150, rotary

8x10 Kodak CSG

https://farm9.staticflickr.com/8679/15903163455_3281b9525f_b.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/qeiSrn)Short break (https://flic.kr/p/qeiSrn) by Sergei Rodionov (https://www.flickr.com/people/24930737@N05/), on Flickr

Great shot!!! Also looks exactly like a girl I know! Great :)

[SergeiR]

Great shot!!! Also looks exactly like a girl I know! Great :)

thanks :) for 1/2s exposure it actually did work out very well :)

[logan.egbert]

125768

Ektascan @80 ISO | HC-110 H Rotary

My first 8x10 shot and first X-ray shot! Question for X-ray shooters: Why is this showing up almost solarized? Is it the film or a scanning issue?

edit: It could be that I overdeveloped and it looks like this as a result of bringing everything down keep highlights from blowing out. I'm not sure, I hate scanning. I need to contact print it.

[SergeiR]

Logan, I never seen solarizing effect except for loading film backwards when it's one sided :)

[logan.egbert]

Sergei, I'm pretty sure both sheets were loaded with the emulsion facing the right way. Maybe "solarizing effect" was a bad way for me to describe it, but I think if you look at my image and your image above it, you can see that the tones are WAY different.

[premortho]

Could it be over exposed? That's what in the old days was called "soot and whitewash". If you had two sheets of film in the cutfilm holder, you could have tried one at 80 and one at 160, then you would know more. But that's a good first effort.
Sergei, I'm pretty sure both sheets were loaded with the emulsion facing the right way. Maybe "solarizing effect" was a bad way for me to describe it, but I think if you look at my image and your image above it, you can see that the tones are WAY different.

[angusparker]

So I've been trying to figure out why my developer was getting exhausted too quickly and it hit me that I'm developing both sides of the film! I would think the blank side wouldn't use any developer up. Am I reading this right that the ektascan is single-sided emulsion? I'm using the fuji green at present. Thanks, Will

Yes, Ektascan is single sided, another benefit of using this film.

[SergeiR]

Logan - you referring to flat bright surfaces with lot of grain? (just trying to figure out then). If so - then it means negative was too dense or too thin. Scanner doesn't handle either condition too well, when pushed to extreme.

[logan.egbert]

Logan - you referring to flat bright surfaces with lot of grain? (just trying to figure out then). If so - then it means negative was too dense or too thin. Scanner doesn't handle either condition too well, when pushed to extreme.

You're dead on, Sergei! Thank you!

[logan.egbert]

https://farm8.staticflickr.com/7484/15732260968_d31b8b913f_c.jpg

Another shot, this time at ISO 100 developed in Rodinal 1:100 for 7:30 rotary.

[logan.egbert]

https://farm9.staticflickr.com/8622/15917899221_9070b3bfd1_z.jpg

And the other. This one rated at ISO160.

Wish I would have thought about blocking the light from hitting the damn backdrop, but them's the breaks.

[SergeiR]

You're dead on, Sergei! Thank you!

no problem :) not sure if it helped much though :) But generally, at least with Kodak CSG (double sides) - i am yet to see "overdevelopment" . I can screw up exposure every now and then, but i left properly exposed film in R09 (which is pretty active formula) developer for periods up to 1 hour without any ill effect, while experimenting with various dilution ratios.

[ImSoNegative]

shot a few with the pinhole camera and xray film, 8x10 a fellow that was there asked me if it was medium format

https://farm8.staticflickr.com/7524/15741249997_7a36f4f1e6_z.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/pZ12d2)family plot (https://flic.kr/p/pZ12d2) by goldenimageworks65 (https://www.flickr.com/people/126756312@N03/), on Flickr

https://farm8.staticflickr.com/7465/15741249277_6894e7bea5_z.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/pZ11ZB)giant bible (https://flic.kr/p/pZ11ZB) by goldenimageworks65 (https://www.flickr.com/people/126756312@N03/), on Flickr

https://farm8.staticflickr.com/7577/15307337773_d64fd56047_z.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/pjE7dM)first commandment (https://flic.kr/p/pjE7dM) by goldenimageworks65 (https://www.flickr.com/people/126756312@N03/), on Flickr

[Will S]

That last one is very Walkerish. Very nice.

[SergeiR]

810 CSG, 8m rotary in 280ml of 1:150 Adonal

Playing with Dallmeyer 3D here, trying to figure out uses.

https://farm9.staticflickr.com/8672/15748337140_f667239e7a_o.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/pZCkY9)Flower study #32 (https://flic.kr/p/pZCkY9) by Sergei Rodionov (https://www.flickr.com/people/24930737@N05/), on Flickr

[UlbabraB]

wow I love the smoothness of this one!

[SergeiR]

Yeah, every new sheet i make with that lens seems to draw me more and more in awe of how well those handmade lenses were.

(same processing as above)

https://farm9.staticflickr.com/8614/15749868067_893bbd4de4_o.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/pZLc4r)Flower study #33 (https://flic.kr/p/pZLc4r) by Sergei Rodionov (https://www.flickr.com/people/24930737@N05/), on Flickr

[towolf]

Ordered a box of 18x24 Fuji HR-E 30, which it cut down to 9x12. Much easier to work with than the decades old Kodak XDM that I got from my lab.

http://i.imgur.com/JbCeUrOl.jpg (http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7578/15951664091_f6748272e2_k.jpg)

http://i.imgur.com/h9PtGREl.jpg (http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8655/15331347014_d72c227e3a_k.jpg)

http://i.imgur.com/GfHPx8g.gif (http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8665/15331345384_79e8a87756_k.jpg)

[nede]

very nice Towolf!!!

[JeRuFo]

Large format stop motion, you don't see that every day.

[towolf]

Ja, I couldn’t decide on a version. First has the best smoke, second has best exposure, and third has better DoF for texture on the pomegranates in the background. Hence I made a little flipbook.

[SergeiR]

Nice results Twowolf!

[Andrew O'Neill]

Go to this website, scroll down and take a look at the spectral sensitivity of this particular Chinese X-ray film. When I look at the chart, it appears to be sensitive to UV, and blue, yellow to red, but not to green. They recommend working under a very dark green safelight filter. I would love to check this film out... if it's still available.

http://www.luckyfilm.com/html/product/mastersite/en/2010/8/17/165931_91.html

[vdonovan]

[url=https://flic.kr/p/q6oUoF]https://farm9.staticflickr.com/8680/15813613619_367beb725b_z.jpg
This was shot on Fuji HR-S x-ray film, rated at ISO 80, using a Sinar P 8x10 camera and a Fujinon 210w lens. Exposure was 16 seconds at f/11. Developed in Kodak Xtol at a dilution of 1:1 for 6 minutes.

[SergeiR]

Nice results Twowolf!
apologies for misspelling.

Towolf.

[towolf]

Oh, no problem at all. At work they kept calling me zweiwolf, duowolf, biwolf, doublewolf, etc. Those sysadmins were bored out of their wits I think.

I got bored myself and made a macro abstract (phone preview to test my new 4x5 LED light plate)

http://i.imgur.com/lOmKdwu.jpg

[ndg]

Wow!


Oh, no problem at all. At work they kept calling me zweiwolf, duowolf, biwolf, doublewolf, etc. Those sysadmins were bored out of their wits I think.

I got bored myself and made a macro abstract (phone preview to test my new 4x5 LED light plate)

http://i.imgur.com/lOmKdwu.jpg

[Jim Noel]

Fascinating!

[Peter De Smidt]

I agree. I opened the thread, and Whoa!

[Milosz Wozaczynski]

Fuji super rx blue

http://www.wozaczynski.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/Untitled-2.jpg

[hamradio]

I have a question, if nobody minds me asking. I've lurked here for a long time, but have never had a reason to post...

After reading a large chunk of this thread, I'm still unsure on which film I want to buy. I never bothered with xray film in 4x5, since Arista Edu 100 is so cheap, but recently decided to play with 5x7, and my film options are far more limited and more expensive. Xray seems to be the budget hero. My plan is to buy 8x10 stock, cut it down, notch the sheets, and then strip the emulsion from the 'back' side. I'd probably just contact print the negs, since I only have a 4x5 enlarger.

What's a reliable go-to film/developer combination to start with? I was planning to dev with rodinal 1:100 in a print drum (hence stripping the back side off, since usually my negs stick to the inside of the drum). I was planning to buy either Fuji HR-T green, or Carestream's private label Kodak green product.

[Will S]

I discovered from this thread that ektascan is one sided: http://www.zzmedical.com/8x10-in-carestream-kodak-ektascan-b-ra-single-emulsion-video-film.html Might cut the need for the stripping part out of your plan. I use rodinal 1:100 and pyrocat-hd 2:2:100 with the kodak green, but I use a slosher tray made from acrylic cut out with a laser cutter similar to the one that photo formulary has. Thanks, Will

[premortho]

I discovered from this thread that ektascan is one sided: http://www.zzmedical.com/8x10-in-carestream-kodak-ektascan-b-ra-single-emulsion-video-film.html Might cut the need for the stripping part out of your plan. I use rodinal 1:100 and pyrocat-hd 2:2:100 with the kodak green, but I use a slosher tray made from acrylic cut out with a laser cutter similar to the one that photo formulary has. Thanks, Will
Yes, I also reccomend Kodak's Carestream Ektascan as it is not only one sided, but has anti haloid backing. When you cut your film to fit your holders, just make a notch in the cutoff piece match the one left from the 8X10 sheet. Rodinal works very well, and so does D-23. I like a water bath rinse as well.

[StoneNYC]

I recommend getting an 8x10 camera so you don't have to cut anything :) but yea Ektascan in Rodinal is good, still haven't quite gotten it down yet.

[premortho]

Yes, I also reccomend Kodak's Carestream Ektascan as it is not only one sided, but has anti haloid backing. When you cut your film to fit your holders, just make a notch in the cutoff piece match the one left from the 8X10 sheet. Rodinal works very well, and so does D-23. I like a water bath rinse as well.
Remember to keep the existing notch in the upper right corner when cutting. Then notch the other one the same way (emulsion side up, notch upper right corner.)

[logan.egbert]

Hey all, I'm curious if anyone has travelled with X-Ray Film.

I have a box of Ektascan that I'd like to take with me when I move to S. Korea and then to a few other places when we do some travel.

Any chance I get away having my box hand-checked? I'm assuming that x-ray exposure is a big no-no...

[dave_whatever]

Xray film isn't any more sensitive to X-rays than standard photographic film. The image on an xray film when used in medical imaging is formed by visible light from the fluorescent xray screen, not (or hardly at all) from direct xray exposure. So only the same issues apply when travelling with xray film as normal film.

[logan.egbert]

That's great to know.

Cheers, Dave!

[logan.egbert]

127224

Part of a short series I did this holiday season with my family members and my Grandfather's favorite sweater.

Ektascan | Rodinal 1:100 | Ektar 12" 4.5 @ 8

[Nicolasllasera]

Im having trouble finding 11x14 xray film. The usual sellers dont have any, any ideas?

[jon.oman]

Im having trouble finding 11x14 xray film. The usual sellers dont have any, any ideas?

Try this: http://www.cxsonline.com/index.tmpl?command=showpage&sn=459265&cart=1420298340171631

There are some of that size listed.

[mdarnton]

I'm really liking what x-ray film does for portraits. I'm running through a shoot,
so there will be more of these on my flickr LF page, as I get them done.

https://farm9.staticflickr.com/8565/16003803507_d02a27e857_c.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/qocFdF)

Alex Hersh 2 (https://flic.kr/p/qocFdF)
by michael.darnton (https://www.flickr.com/people/118045067@N03/), on Flickr

[angusparker]

I have a question, if nobody minds me asking. I've lurked here for a long time, but have never had a reason to post...

After reading a large chunk of this thread, I'm still unsure on which film I want to buy. I never bothered with xray film in 4x5, since Arista Edu 100 is so cheap, but recently decided to play with 5x7, and my film options are far more limited and more expensive. Xray seems to be the budget hero. My plan is to buy 8x10 stock, cut it down, notch the sheets, and then strip the emulsion from the 'back' side. I'd probably just contact print the negs, since I only have a 4x5 enlarger.

What's a reliable go-to film/developer combination to start with? I was planning to dev with rodinal 1:100 in a print drum (hence stripping the back side off, since usually my negs stick to the inside of the drum). I was planning to buy either Fuji HR-T green, or Carestream's private label Kodak green product.

Consider Ektascan if you are using 8x10, it has numerous advantages over Green but It's pricier.

[Andrew O'Neill]

Since I use both films, the advantages I can think of is: Ektascan is single-sided, so easily processed in drums or tubes; is sharper; less chance of scratching. Tonally, I feel Green lat is nicer, though.

[hamradio]

Awesome, thanks for the input, all! I picked up a box of fresh 8x10 Fuji green stock on eBay for peanuts, and it should arrive in a few days. My plan is to cut a few sheets down to 5x7, burn them in my Graflex, and see how it contact prints.

Eventually I'll get my hands on some single-sided stock like Ektascan, but I'm not in a huge rush. I'd rather keep an eye out for some at a price I like than buy/ship just one box from an xray supplier.

[towolf]

Some more macro of a chinese spoon compass replica

https://farm8.staticflickr.com/7515/15574165164_46eefa9b96_n.jpg (https://farm8.staticflickr.com/7515/15574165164_1dd5aec51f_o.jpg)https://farm8.staticflickr.com/7508/16007603908_62611b04d2_n.jpg (https://farm8.staticflickr.com/7508/16007603908_1965b28324_o.jpg)https://farm9.staticflickr.com/8662/16194670815_8a98416641_n.jpg (https://farm9.staticflickr.com/8662/16194670815_781d56e533_o.jpg)

Should’ve done that in color, the spoon’s underside is shiny and iridiscent in color.

[Peter De Smidt]

Alex Hersh 2

Michael, that's a very fine portrait. Nicely done!

[mdarnton]

Thanks!


Alex Hersh 2

Michael, that's a very fine portrait. Nicely done!

[Tin Can]

I'm really liking what x-ray film does for portraits. I'm running through a shoot,
so there will be more of these on my flickr LF page, as I get them done.

https://farm9.staticflickr.com/8565/16003803507_d02a27e857_c.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/qocFdF)

Alex Hersh 2 (https://flic.kr/p/qocFdF)
by michael.darnton (https://www.flickr.com/people/118045067@N03/), on Flickr

I agree, this portrait has qualities, that must be Ektascan related, and your skills are obvious. Best I have seen on any film

[Mattk]

Long time no shutter. Beard goes tomorrow as its back to work. This is the first sheet of LF film in a long time-felt good even if I over exposed about 3 stops and scratched the daylights out of the neg. I have around 800 sheets of the stuff-might as well start ripping through it! Eagerly waiting to get into the new home and building out the darkroom.
Slight crop and tint- diagonal line artifacts are from the 4990 when the negs get too dark.

Velostigmat on 5
Fuji green
f/5 and 8 seconds

[SergeiR]

Very good portrait series, Michael

[Chauncey Walden]

Developed some of my first test shots on XRay film today - CSX Green. Based on combing through this thread I shot most at 80 and some at 50. For development I used some popular developers and times I found here also. They were: (at 80) Rodinal 1:100 7:30; Rodinal 1:50 7:00; PMK 6:00 and (at 50) Rodinal 1:100 4:30. I started with a Jobo 3005 on a motor base. I only used 1 tube and 400ml of developer after a prewash. The first one (Rodinal 1:100 7:30) was fairly dense but the back side was under chemicaled in areas. For the second (Rodinal 1:50 7:00) I aligned the joint of the film to the outside edge of the tube and reversed the rotation half way through each step. This worked well, but was really dense. The third (PMK 6:00) wasn't too dense but again suffered from back side surfeit. In desperation I turned to an old enclosed rocking tray and tried Rodinal 1:100 at 7:00. This worked fine but was really really dense (and a pain to rock for that long). This tray used to be motorized but one of the gears gave up. Anyone have one they aren't using? For one last try this evening I used a negative exposed at 50 back in the Jobo with Rodinal 1:100 at 4:30 but increased the chemistry to 800ml to try to get more action on the back side. Again I reversed rotation half way through - yeah, I know Jobo says this isn't necessary but the first test had favored one edge of the back. This was evenly developed but again really dense. I'll contact them tomorrow and see how they will print.

[stiganas]

I am from Romania, here (as I suppose all over Europe) the easily available sizes are only metric:
13x18, 18x24cm and so on.

My question is:

it will go in 18x24 holder without trimming ?

I know that 8x10 xray doesn't need trimming.

To buy an 18x24 holder is not easy or cheap. If the film need additional trimming I'll better search more for 8x10 film.

[stiganas]

I managed to buy 3 holders from ebay Germany. After I have the holders and the film I'll post here if the film goes in the holder without trimming.

[andrewch59]

I managed to buy 3 holders from ebay Germany. After I have the holders and the film I'll post here if the film goes in the holder without trimming.

It seems that everybody has deserted the site, I am also a beginner, all I can say is that if you can avoid trimming, then do so. Xray film is very easily scratched.
Regards

[StoneNYC]

It seems that everybody has deserted the site, I am also a beginner, all I can say is that if you can avoid trimming, then do so. Xray film is very easily scratched.
Regards

Deserted what site?

[SergeiR]

Deserted what site?

well you know.. no one answers within hour... ;) Place is deserted, just dust bunnies and old leafs...

[StoneNYC]

So I created this YouTube video to show people how to remove the emulsion on double-sided x-ray film. I posted a new thread about it, but wanted to link here so that people could see it.

http://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/showthread.php?t=119362

[andrewch59]

So I created this YouTube video to show people how to remove the emulsion on double-sided x-ray film. I posted a new thread about it, but wanted to link here so that people could see it.

http://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/showthread.php?t=119362

Hi Stone, do you find it a bit troublesome removing the emulsion from one side? Could you tell me the benefits, as I still leave both sides intact and with a bit of care the negs still come out pretty good. If removing the emulsion is advantageous then I will try it.
Andrew

[stiganas]

OK, I tested Carestream 13x18 Green film and is going perfect in the 13x18 holder.

I'll write a little more because I am very happy.

Last year I bought (impulse bidding) of ebay a strange 5x7 camera, Ilko (the final price about 100 EUR). It is an awful camera, bad shape, with some no marking holders. I put it aside and never touch it for a year and never bought film for it.
128066

After a long photo pause I started to play with Ilko, it is still bad but usable. Today I had the bright idea to measure the holders.

To my surprise the holders are in fact 13x18cm and not 5x7 (as described on ebay). I run to the film supplier and bought a pak of green Xray film for about 10 EUR.

I exposed two sheets and developed in an exhausted, one year old Foma LQN. To my surprise the negatives look really, really good.
128071 This is a (partial) scan on Epson 3200.

I tried to do a contact print but the timer give up and I had to expose by felling and the print is not so good.

128072128073 My darkroom (bathroom) is really, really low tech, the lamps are attached to the aquarium stand.

The xray film is cheaper than paper and for me easier to buy, just walk in the dealer office, say hello and 5 minutes later walk out with the film.

[Tin Can]

We are happy with you!

[StoneNYC]

Hi Stone, do you find it a bit troublesome removing the emulsion from one side? Could you tell me the benefits, as I still leave both sides intact and with a bit of care the negs still come out pretty good. If removing the emulsion is advantageous then I will try it.
Andrew

You should watch the video as most of your questions are answered simply by watching it.

I find it easy, and if you have no trouble then there's no reason to remove one side, if you are like me, then your development times and densities are too heavy with both sides, and you get scratches on one side with using a rotary tank which is what I have trouble with, so I remove the scratch side and this gives me the right density for printing and allows me to have a clean image with no scratches

[StoneNYC]

8x10 300mm f/11@1/8th

Ektascan @80 in DD-X

Still trying to get better (reduced) contrast with this film.

128223

[StoneNYC]

I think I shared with the wrong X-Ray thread before so adding to this one too

8x10 300mm f/11@1/8th

Ektascan @80 in DD-X

Still trying to get better (reduced) contrast with this film.

128225

[Peter De Smidt]

Try Divided Pyrocat: http://www.pyrocat-hd.com/

[premortho]

What's wrong with the contrast in this pic? Looks great to me. But if you have a subject that needs less contrast, try using a stop less exposure. Also Sepia Toning was a traditional way of reducing contrast. On a wet print, of course. Sepia control on computer prints doesn't work, in my experience.
I think I shared with the wrong X-Ray thread before so adding to this one too

8x10 300mm f/11@1/8th

Ektascan @80 in DD-X

Still trying to get better (reduced) contrast with this film.

128225

[Andrew O'Neill]

I think I shared with the wrong X-Ray thread before so adding to this one too

8x10 300mm f/11@1/8th

Ektascan @80 in DD-X

Still trying to get better (reduced) contrast with this film.

Which wrong X-ray thread? This one? http://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/showthread.php?48099-X-ray-Film-example-and-comparison&highlight=xray+film+comparison That was the first thread on X-ray and I still think this one should be merged with it. Why have two threads?

[Corran]

But if you have a subject that needs less contrast, try using a stop less exposure.

Don't you mean a stop more exposure?

[Andrew O'Neill]

Try pre-exposing the film. I have and it works very well.

[StoneNYC]

What's wrong with the contrast in this pic? Looks great to me. But if you have a subject that needs less contrast, try using a stop less exposure. Also Sepia Toning was a traditional way of reducing contrast. On a wet print, of course. Sepia control on computer prints doesn't work, in my experience.

"In contrast" (pun) this is the same shot but using HP5+@250 in DD-X (posting for example purposes I know it's not x-ray film) to show you how the contrast is much reduced.

128239

[Andrew O'Neill]

How much are you diluting DDX? Have you tried exposing more and developing less? Are you printing the negative or just scanning them?

[StoneNYC]

How much are you diluting DDX? Have you tried exposing more and developing less? Are you printing the negative or just scanning them?

I was told this is the newer X-Ray thread, responses here...

http://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/showpost.php?p=1208746

[Andrew O'Neill]

Told by whom?

[jon.oman]

"In contrast" (pun) this is the same shot but using HP5+@250 in DD-X (posting for example purposes I know it's not x-ray film) to show you how the contrast is much reduced.

128239

I think I like the x-ray version better. I like the contrast.....

[mdarnton]

It always seemed simple to me--there's one thread for technical discussions, one for images. Both are running and active, except when someone inevitably seems to want to start a technical run in the image thread.

[StoneNYC]

I think I like the x-ray version better. I like the contrast.....

Thanks, I do too, BUT for certain things I want less, and learning to control that contrast would be useful. Still working on it.

[Michael E]

My darkroom (bathroom) is really, really low tech, the lamps are attached to the aquarium stand.


You have an aquarium in your bathroom?

[Michael E]

Why?

[stiganas]

I have a bathroom with a custom made aquarium stand (3 aquariums). It is in the bathroom because I continuously change the water by droplet (another low tech setup), and now it also act from time to time as a darkroom, only for tray development and contacts.
128256128255128257
timer/ working table +trays/drying table




You have an aquarium in your bathroom?

I put a blank xray film on the bottom of the tray and I have zero scratches. I really love this film, workable under safe light, easy to cut, easy to process, cheap. For the first time I dare to take some pictures with the Zeiss Tengor.
128258
And I can cut a 13x18 sheet in 2 for the 9x12 holder and exactly in 4 for the Mamiya RB67 Type J holder.

[Andrew O'Neill]

It always seemed simple to me--there's one thread for technical discussions, one for images. Both are running and active, except when someone inevitably seems to want to start a technical run in the image thread.

Hence the need for one thread. Technical and images combined, saves the trouble of going between two threads. Even if you have a thread solely for images, someone is going to ask something technical about it.

[premortho]

Thinking on this problem, I think you can reduce contrast with various strengths of yellow filters. I like the shot done on ortho (x-ray) film better than the one on pan film (hp 5). It would be interesting to re-shoot that one on two sheets of film. One like you did the first one, and one with a 2X yellow filter. That would tell us for sure if a yellow filter reduces contrast. There is nothing wrong with the one you already shot, but by shooting them one right after the other it eliminates some of the variables. I'm sure you know that "2X" means requires twice the exposure. I put that in there for those who might be reading this and don't know what it means.
Thanks, I do too, BUT for certain things I want less, and learning to control that contrast would be useful. Still working on it.

[StoneNYC]

Thinking on this problem, I think you can reduce contrast with various strengths of yellow filters. I like the shot done on ortho (x-ray) film better than the one on pan film (hp 5). It would be interesting to re-shoot that one on two sheets of film. One like you did the first one, and one with a 2X yellow filter. That would tell us for sure if a yellow filter reduces contrast. There is nothing wrong with the one you already shot, but by shooting them one right after the other it eliminates some of the variables. I'm sure you know that "2X" means requires twice the exposure. I put that in there for those who might be reading this and don't know what it means.

I've not heard about that filter, I have a standard yellow and a #12 yellow. That's all I've got.

[Andrew O'Neill]

I have experience with yellow and green filters with xray film. I have posted info with examples on the other xray thread, as well as reciprocity data. Ignoring reciprocity can result in a very contrasty negative... in my experience, especially for silver printing and scanning.

[SergeiR]

Still trying to get better (reduced) contrast with this film.

Use less modern lenses ;)

[Andrew O'Neill]

That certainly is a good way! Or an even better way is in-camera pre-exposure.

[Jim Noel]

The images primarily show the difference in color response of orthochromatic and panchromatic emulsions. You can not get the same response onthe two films. If you want the look of the HP5+, use it, not orthochromatic x-ray film.

[Mkillmer]

Is anyone familiar with Fuji dry imaging film? Can it be developed conventionally?

[StoneNYC]

The images primarily show the difference in color response of orthochromatic and panchromatic emulsions. You can not get the same response onthe two films. If you want the look of the HP5+, use it, not orthochromatic x-ray film.

Well I don't mind some of the contrast but there in the crook of the tree it went completely black, that isn't just because it is Ortho film, it's because I need to adjust my process to lower the contrast. I've seen some BEAUTIFUL imagery by one lady who's shooting something in the 14x17 range size cameras portraits, and they look Increadibly smooth and low contrast, so I know it can be done with ortho film, I'll try the yellow filter trick.

[Andrew O'Neill]

No, it cannot be developed conventionally. It relies on heat to reveal the image.

[andrewch59]

No, it cannot be developed conventionally. It relies on heat to reveal the image.

Great video Andrew, very informative

[SergeiR]

Well I don't mind some of the contrast but there in the crook of the tree it went completely black, that isn't just because it is Ortho film, it's because I need to adjust my process to lower the contrast. I've seen some BEAUTIFUL imagery by one lady who's shooting something in the 14x17 range size cameras portraits, and they look Increadibly smooth and low contrast, so I know it can be done with ortho film, I'll try the yellow filter trick.

Could you share link, if its not too much trouble? I am always looking for interesting portraiture photographers

[StoneNYC]

Could you share link, if its not too much trouble? I am always looking for interesting portraiture photographers

I wish I could right now, unfortunately Facebook recently blocked me from access because they said my name "Stone NYC" was not the name I go by and real-life, I assume when they say that they mean my giving legal name, however this is the name I go by real life and anyway they have blocks access until that whole thing is sorted out, and I only know her through Facebook and a large-format group on Facebook. she has a very unique name and I'm not quite sure how to spell it.

I'll try to remember if and when I gain access to Facebook again and will look her up and post here.

[Jim Noel]

Well I don't mind some of the contrast but there in the crook of the tree it went completely black, that isn't just because it is Ortho film, it's because I need to adjust my process to lower the contrast. I've seen some BEAUTIFUL imagery by one lady who's shooting something in the 14x17 range size cameras portraits, and they look Increadibly smooth and low contrast, so I know it can be done with ortho film, I'll try the yellow filter trick.

If a portion went completely black, it is under-exposed. Since shadows are inherently blue, adding a yellow filter will only cause it to get even less exposure.

[Corran]

I suggest exposing for the shadows, developing for the highlights........

[StoneNYC]

If a portion went completely black, it is under-exposed. Since shadows are inherently blue, adding a yellow filter will only cause it to get even less exposure.

I would obviously compensate for the filter factor, but yes, that was my point, my metering was no different between the two films that I used, the only thing that changed was the exposure index I chose to use with each found in the development time, I'm finding that the ektascan (supposedly roughly normally an ASA100 film) shot at EI 80, is still not enough, so might have to go to EI50, however using Rodinal, I'm running into development times that would be difficult, under 5 minutes for EI 50. I'm going to experiment with diluting 1:100 instead of 1:50 to avoid this issue, but I'm worried about the small amount of developer, 1:100 with 300ml of developer for 5 sheets of 8x10 ektascan might put me in the exhausted developer arena, though perhaps that would be good and would fix this contrast issue?

Anyway, I won't have time to "experiment" as much for a while but will try something different next time.


I suggest exposing for the shadows, developing for the highlights........

Yes, I know, but first you have to know what the true speed of the film is for daylight AND a good dev starting point, I've seen lots of people with various opinions about that but I haven't seen their negatives to know the densities they find acceptable etc, best to test until you can get it down yourself for your own personal tastes.

[Corran]

I suggest Rodinal 1:100 like you say. It's worked just fine for me with Fuji HR-T, and that has the double-sided emulsion.

You don't have to know the true speed of anything, you just need to evaluate your negs. If you are having shadow values that are too low, give it more exposure, and if you want to pull your highlights, give it less development.

[Peter De Smidt]

You determine film speed. Shoot a evenly lit black card in shade. Use your best educated guess as to what the EI of the film is. Set that on your meter. Now meter the card and place the resulting value on Zone I, i.e. close down 4 stops from the meter reading. Take the photo. Close down one more stop and take another photo. Open up two stops and take a photo. You now have exposures bracketing your estimated film speed by 1 top over and under. You can do more if you're really unsure, but for 8x10 I'd just do the three. Develop the film using your best guess. Read the negatives with a densitometer. You want Zone 1 to read _at least_ .1 above film base plus fog. I prefer the value to be about .15. Does that correspond to one of your sheets? If it falls between the ranges your sheets give you, estimate the EI value that'll give you what you want. If there's not enough density, do the test again, starting with 2 stops more exposure than the first test. If it's more, do the same but giving 2 stops less for the starting exposure.

Once you have your film speed, do a development test. Photograph an evenly lit blank white card in sunlight. Set the EI you determined on your meter. Meter the card, making sure it's evenly lit. Read your meter and open your lens to 3 stops more than the meter reading, which places that value on Zone VIII. Take two more exposure exactly the same. Develop one of your negatives. For diffusion printing, the value should be about 1.3 above film base plus fog. If you're not there, estimate the change in development. Develop the next sheet, measure, estimate, and develop the last sheet if needed. If you're development is way off, you might have to do it again.

You now have your N development. You can test it by exposing one neg for the black card placing it on Zone I.....

This sounds complicated, but it really isn't. It also doesn't take much time to do.

[StoneNYC]

Thanks Peter and Corran, Peter, that sounds like the most perfectionist way to do things, however I don't know that it's exactly quick to do, that would take me at least a whole day to do, and I don't own a densometer (nor can I figure out how to spell it right so that spell check agrees). I go by the general look of the density of the negative, this has served me well all along. My "testing" is usually done by shooting, and not by performing a lot of tests, even "bad" exposures are usable they just take a little more effort to print, so I find doing lab tests to be time consuming, don't hurt me, I know they are the most accurate way to do things, but I also need to make sure not to deviate too far from my current working habits or that throws everything off as I'm changing too many variables at once. If I can't find an acceptable negative in my next attempt then I'll try out Peter's system, I know it totally makes sense, but again, this would take me a whole day, I work out of my kitchen so the setup and cleanup and developing and processing, I don't have a lot of days to set aside to developing work that I'll never use. YMMV (obviously), but I value the suggestions.

[Peter De Smidt]

It's not my system. :) The whole point is to eliminate variables and simplify getting to good exposure and development. Having that well in hand would save you a lot of time, money, frustration and lost opportunities in the long run. There have to be a number of people near you that have densitometers. Any pro film lab will have one. In addition there have to be a bunch of people here who would help you, including some that live in your area, but if that's not available, send the film to me, and I'll take readings for you.

[StoneNYC]

It's not my system. :) The whole point is to eliminate variables and simplify getting to good exposure and development. Having that well in hand would save you a lot of time, money, frustration and lost opportunities in the long run. There have to be a number of people near you that have densitometers. Any pro film lab will have one. In addition there have to be a bunch of people here who would help you, including some that live in your area, but if that's not available, send the film to me, and I'll take readings for you.

Yes, there are a few in boston if I want to drive about 3 hours (one way) and some in NYC if I want to fight traffic for 2-3 hours (one way) and then if they don't want money for the borrowing.

There's a few LF'er's in the state (somewhere) but they all meet in Massachusetts, and I haven't joined that LF New England group yet. There's no one within a 1 hour drive that I know of, so again, it's a little far to go, we'll see where I get with the next batch.

[Andrew O'Neill]

Thank you! Are you referring to my carbon transfer video?

[premortho]

Personally, I've only done one of those film tests in my life. About 50 years ago, when ortho film became hard to get (it's easier now than it has been for 50 years!). With ortho film I did then and still develop under a red safelight in trays. It takes a few shots to learn when to pull it out of the developer, but you get a feel for that soon enough. I am so used to doing that, Stone, that I forgot to mention it earlier. As to filters, a 2X is about a medium yellow. The yellow filter holds back the uv, violet and sky blue part of the spectrum. For me it gives (allows) more exposure of the shadows without blowing out the highlights as easily.
Yes, there are a few in boston if I want to drive about 3 hours (one way) and some in NYC if I want to fight traffic for 2-3 hours (one way) and then if they don't want money for the borrowing.

There's a few LF'er's in the state (somewhere) but they all meet in Massachusetts, and I haven't joined that LF New England group yet. There's no one within a 1 hour drive that I know of, so again, it's a little far to go, we'll see where I get with the next batch.

[StoneNYC]

Thanks!

Yes I've actually done ortho developing in trays before and can pull the film when needed, just like print paper, I'm working on a small project now with that.

Thanks.
Personally, I've only done one of those film tests in my life. About 50 years ago, when ortho film became hard to get (it's easier now than it has been for 50 years!). With ortho film I did then and still develop under a red safelight in trays. It takes a few shots to learn when to pull it out of the developer, but you get a feel for that soon enough. I am so used to doing that, Stone, that I forgot to mention it earlier. As to filters, a 2X is about a medium yellow. The yellow filter holds back the uv, violet and sky blue part of the spectrum. For me it gives (allows) more exposure of the shadows without blowing out the highlights as easily.

[andrewch59]

Andrew, yes, you make it look easy, I haven't tried it yet, but it is on my bucket list

[stiganas]

For anyone who might be interested.

The 18x24 xray film goes perfect, without trimming in the 18x24 holders.

Nice Carbon Transfer Video, I start dreaming (and searching for chemicals) about it.


I am from Romania, here (as I suppose all over Europe) the easily available sizes are only metric:
13x18, 18x24cm and so on.

My question is:

it will go in 18x24 holder without trimming ?

[towolf]

Somehow I can’t stop using this decades old grunge stock. It’s so blue the skin of his dark complexion barely registers.

https://farm8.staticflickr.com/7532/16133944300_f980ba0b38_z.jpg (https://farm8.staticflickr.com/7532/16133944300_a42a758940_h.jpg)

[premortho]

I think that is a great portrait!
Somehow I can’t stop using this decades old grunge stock. It’s so blue the skin of his dark complexion barely registers.

https://farm8.staticflickr.com/7532/16133944300_f980ba0b38_z.jpg (https://farm8.staticflickr.com/7532/16133944300_a42a758940_h.jpg)

[SergeiR]

Somehow I can’t stop using this decades old grunge stock. It’s so blue the skin of his dark complexion barely registers.
Considering how dark everything else is - it might be just a lack of light too.

[SergeiR]

8x10, Kodak CSG , rotary, 8min , 1:125 Adonal, unstripped.

https://farm8.staticflickr.com/7530/15718199843_45d4805521_o.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/pWXTcz)Typewriter (https://flic.kr/p/pWXTcz) by Sergei Rodionov (https://www.flickr.com/people/24930737@N05/), on Flickr

[Jiri Vasina]

8x10, Kodak CSG , rotary, 8min , 1:125 Adonal, unstripped.

Typewriter (https://flic.kr/p/pWXTcz) by Sergei Rodionov (https://www.flickr.com/people/24930737@N05/), on Flickr

I really like this one, Sergei...

[SergeiR]

Thank you, Jiri. She finally recovered to point where i can ask her to pose for me again :) So we broke out wee Quadra lights and had a quick revisiting for wet plate we did a little over the year ago, but with film this time ;)

[hamradio]

I picked up a box of Fuji HR-S green on ebay for fifteen bucks, and have been burning up this stuff like it's candy. I'm not exactly sure how the various Fuji stocks differ–the datasheets I've found for HR-T and HR-S have basically identical MTF curves and seem to have the same sensitivity. Hopefully HR-T works basically the same, since it seems like I wont be able to find another box of HR-S. I'm impressed with this stuff enough that Ektascan will probably replace Foma 100 in my freezer, for single-sided stuff.

I started tray developing my 5x7s, but it was getting scratched to high hell. I figured out how to cut it without scratching, though I get faint scuff marks from loading/unloading my holders. The septums of the Grafmatic seem to not scratch it, however. I've been cutting sheets down to 4x5 for testing. On a whim, I loaded a print drum with the stuff and developed as I normally would on a motor base. I expected the reverse side emulsion to look terrible and unevenly developed, but most of the time, I get results as consistent as 'real' film. I've burnt a ton of sheets at different EIs and tried a range of different times. I've settled on EI100, 6:30 in 1:100 Rodinal on my motor base. I tried shooting some at 50 and developing longer, and then stripping the reverse side emulsion. This worked decently well, but the resulting negative was incredibly flat and lacking any decent contrast. The double-sided emulsion doesn't really present a sharpness problem for me with 5x7s...it's a little noticeable with 4x5.

Here's a 4x5 test from a projection petzval, when I was figuring out if it would adequately cover or not.

https://farm9.staticflickr.com/8618/16315796436_e655acef09_c.jpg

[Luis-F-S]

You determine film speed. Shoot a evenly lit black card in shade. Use your best educated guess as to what the EI of the film is. Set that on your meter. Now meter the card and place the resulting value on Zone I, i.e. close down 4 stops from the meter reading. Take the photo. Close down one more stop and take another photo. Open up two stops and take a photo. You now have exposures bracketing your estimated film speed by 1 top over and under. You can do more if you're really unsure, but for 8x10 I'd just do the three. Develop the film using your best guess. Read the negatives with a densitometer. You want Zone 1 to read _at least_ .1 above film base plus fog. I prefer the value to be about .15. Does that correspond to one of your sheets? If it falls between the ranges your sheets give you, estimate the EI value that'll give you what you want. If there's not enough density, do the test again, starting with 2 stops more exposure than the first test. If it's more, do the same but giving 2 stops less for the starting exposure.

Once you have your film speed, do a development test. Photograph an evenly lit blank white card in sunlight. Set the EI you determined on your meter. Meter the card, making sure it's evenly lit. Read your meter and open your lens to 3 stops more than the meter reading, which places that value on Zone VIII. Take two more exposure exactly the same. Develop one of your negatives. For diffusion printing, the value should be about 1.3 above film base plus fog. If you're not there, estimate the change in development. Develop the next sheet, measure, estimate, and develop the last sheet if needed. If you're development is way off, you might have to do it again.

You now have your N development. You can test it by exposing one neg for the black card placing it on Zone I.....

This sounds complicated, but it really isn't. It also doesn't take much time to do.

Basic photographic sensitometry; what Oliver Gagliani taught in his workshop, except Oliver used .3 neutral density filters to change each stop rather than the aperture. Felt it was more accurate. Also shows why you need a densitometer to shoot B&W right. L

[Peter De Smidt]

I picked up a box of Fuji HR-S green on ebay for fifteen bucks, and have been burning up this stuff like it's candy. <snip>

Looks good!

You folks have inspired me to get my Century No. 9 8x10 portrait camera operational again.

[hamradio]

I should add, it's really great being able to work with this stuff under a red safelight. I use a little red LED 'bulb' in my darkroom and experience no fogging at all.

https://www.superbrightleds.com/moreinfo/g-series-minature/2-watt-g11-globe-bulb-360-degree/440/

[Tin Can]

8x10, Kodak CSG , rotary, 8min , 1:125 Adonal, unstripped.

https://farm8.staticflickr.com/7530/15718199843_45d4805521_o.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/pWXTcz)Typewriter (https://flic.kr/p/pWXTcz) by Sergei Rodionov (https://www.flickr.com/people/24930737@N05/), on Flickr

How do you keep your 'Day Job'? This is great!

Wonderful model and props.

As usual! :)

[JeRuFo]

8x10, Kodak CSG , rotary, 8min , 1:125 Adonal, unstripped.

Typewriter (https://flic.kr/p/pWXTcz) by Sergei Rodionov (https://www.flickr.com/people/24930737@N05/), on Flickr


You've hit a nice groove lately, Sergei, really getting the most out of your lenses.

Having somebody that plays along with your ideas doesn't hurt either, I suppose.

[SergeiR]

How do you keep your 'Day Job'? This is great!

Wonderful model and props.

As usual! :)


:) Thank you, Randy, you are too kind. I actually do like my day job , thats the thing :) I been doing it for a living since i was 14 years old, and its a good fun. Dull sometimes too, no doubt, but most of time its a puzzle solving , moving pieces fitting together and stuff. Kinda like photography - so both things work awesome for me.

[SergeiR]

You've hit a nice groove lately, Sergei, really getting the most out of your lenses.

Having somebody that plays along with your ideas doesn't hurt either, I suppose.

Thank you.
She is awesome and i am truly lucky to have her.

And i was lucky enough to have LFPF people helping me to locate/buy some of gear i was trying to get or just to try

There are still bits and pieces i want , but i got to limit myself - we need some money for upcoming therapy for my wife (we hoping to get her into HSCT therapy , as everything else is failed), so saving mode is on now.

[Tin Can]

Thank you.
She is awesome and i am truly lucky to have her.

And i was lucky enough to have LFPF people helping me to locate/buy some of gear i was trying to get or just to try

There are still bits and pieces i want , but i got to limit myself - we need some money for upcoming therapy for my wife (we hoping to get her into HSCT therapy , as everything else is failed), so saving mode is on now.

Damn. Good luck, I wish your family well.

[Peter De Smidt]

Damn. Good luck, I wish your family well.

Absolutely!

[SergeiR]

Thanks guys.

[stradibarrius]

This may be one of the best yet! lighting, shadows everything is great!

8x10, Kodak CSG , rotary, 8min , 1:125 Adonal, unstripped.

https://farm8.staticflickr.com/7530/15718199843_45d4805521_o.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/pWXTcz)Typewriter (https://flic.kr/p/pWXTcz) by Sergei Rodionov (https://www.flickr.com/people/24930737@N05/), on Flickr

[ckagy]

Fingers are crossed for you and your wife, Sergei

[Old-N-Feeble]

8x10, Kodak CSG , rotary, 8min , 1:125 Adonal, unstripped.

https://farm8.staticflickr.com/7530/15718199843_45d4805521_o.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/pWXTcz)Typewriter (https://flic.kr/p/pWXTcz) by Sergei Rodionov (https://www.flickr.com/people/24930737@N05/), on Flickr

What a beautiful lady. I feel as though she sees right through me. You're a very lucky man, Sergei.

[SergeiR]

thanks, folks. Glad you like it.

[jon.oman]

thanks, folks. Glad you like it.

I agree with everyone, you are making some great images!

[salvatore]

I bought an Super HR-E / Super HR-T Fujifilm 18x24 radiographic film.
I have some HC110 developer available.
I diluted it 1:32, as suggested for so called dilution A.
Which development time you suggest for a proper development? This developer is unsuited for such film?
I have tried 5 minutes with poor contrast, but may be the film was unexposed.
Any suggestion?
Thanks in advance.

[NiNo]

2 shots taken with Goerz RP II

FP4+(9x12) & Kodak X-ray Blue(13x18):

https://c2.staticflickr.com/8/7368/16385913312_19712b0fef_c.jpg

https://c2.staticflickr.com/8/7435/16199205328_bbf77e51dc_c.jpg

[SergeiR]

so fuji without backing does same thing as green kodak, i see - halation . Good to know :)
(snow, eh? :))

[NiNo]

yes, snow. i dont realy like this scans (*** epson), too much info is not to see

[SergeiR]

yes, snow. i dont realy like this scans (*** epson), too much info is not to see
Epson should be fine. What do you use for scanning? Vuescan? How dense are your negs for the eye? Which film type and parameters you use when scanning?

[NiNo]

are scans of contact prints, epson scan software, 48 bit color. if i do this as b&w - i dont want to do anything else with bild, too bad resaults. on my contacts i can see enough details in shadows and the prints are looks much more better. but ok, i just cant scan :D

[Peter De Smidt]

Could be some auto clipping in the scanning software.

[premortho]

NiNo, when I looked at those pics, I thought first thing :this is a perfect example why one should use Kodak Ektascan, because it has an anti-halation coating on the back side.
are scans of contact prints, epson scan software, 48 bit color. if i do this as b&w - i dont want to do anything else with bild, too bad resaults. on my contacts i can see enough details in shadows and the prints are looks much more better. but ok, i just cant scan :D