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

[Jim Fitzgerald]

Andrew, I was being funny! Nice to have them together.

[Fr. Mark]

Xray summary was way too big to post here. I tried to cover everything that seemed relevant that had been asked 100 times the outline went something like this:

kinds of film: blue, green, the colors refer to the design of the sensitivity of the emulsion and they were paired with intensifying screens that fluoresce in those colors because we try not to kill people with diagnostic X-rays. When printed, Blue looks more like wet plate, Green looks more like 1940s films (though, i think pan film was available long before that).
single and double sided, some vendors listed. Cost comparisons
8x10 fits in 8x10 film holder w/o cutting unlike 8x10 paper
You can cut it to any size you like if you are careful. Comes in lots of sizes not just 8x10 but even some big sizes like 14x17 and larger. Also smaller, a lot smaller, for X-rays of teeth, and scraps from cutting to 810 to 57 can be fun in small cameras but this LFPI...
Safe lights--Red LED's are fairly safe within reason. Most films don't like Orange safelights.
Exposure ratings (all over the map) but often around 100 ASA in mid day (but being ortho film, film speed changes with lighting)
Reciprocity failure characteristics
Developers and starting points: Rodinal and Pyrocat HD are common on this forum but just about any developer I'd ever heard of (and some I'd not) have been used, usually fairly diluted to tame contrast issues. NB can develop by inspection because its a red-blind film.
Don't necessarily treat Xray like lithography films, they are pretty different even if they both tend to high contrast. Xray is a lot faster on exposure. Maybe 4-5 stops faster.
It scratches easily when wet. Film hangers are a help, some people use ziplock bags or trays with glass in them. Single sided films are less of a problem. Rotary development is possible, but may require removal of the emulsion facing the tube.
Stripping emulsion: tape the negative to a piece of glass and hit it with 3-4% Sodium Hypochlorite in strong Sodium Hydroxide (better known as laundry bleach) and after some time scrub off the gelatin on the one side and pray that the valuable negative doesn't get bleach on the front under the tape. Don't ask how I know to caution this...
11x14 film holders labeled Xray follow the same dimensions as 11x14 holders for "regular" film, assuming we are talking ones that follow the standards, which a lot of ULF holders, particularly old wood ones don't.

It ran to several pages, developers and types of films taking up most of it, I think.

[Tin Can]

Thanks for posting. I suppose with have the same 3 or 5000 character limit to normal posts that we do with PM's.

Pity.

I was hoping you hit post 4000 so we could tell people go read 4000...

[Andrew O'Neill]

Oh well... it's a fantastic thread full of great information. If I find anything of interest, I book mark it.

[Corran]

Nice start. I didn't want to write it but I would be willing to edit/add to it. Fr. Mark, do you want to send the whole thing as a document to me (email) and perhaps I can help edit and such and then host on my website?

[seezee]

Just developed my first four x-ray EB/RA shots, and they came out okay. Problem is that they are scratched to hell. I knew they were fragile, but man, not this fragile. I'm not sure where I messed up. I always rigorously agitate by lightly rocking the tray. I use my fingers to switch between trays. Only other place I can imagine they were scratched was in the cutting process.

Should I wear nitrile gloves during development, and cut it over a cushioned surface instead of right on the wood art-scythe-board thing? Do you guys have any tips for keepin' 'em scratch free?

I wear nitrile gloves at all stages, both to keep my skin out of the pyro (toxic) and to avoid marks on the emulsion (it's very soft when wet & can even take fingerprints). I use a guillotine cutter (this one (http://smile.amazon.com/Dahle-North-America-18E-Guillotine/dp/B00T89GJAO/)) & place the film directly on the cutter board, but I lay a towel underneath it so the cutoffs fall on a soft surface. I like this cutter because it holds the film in place while cutting, which also helps avoid scratches.

Some members have noted that it's possible to scratch the film while loading in the holder. I've certainly done it when removing the film from the holder.

If you're having a hard time sourcing glass for your developer tray, try a charity shop or builders salvage — you might find some window glass you can have cut to size. I use vintage enamel developer trays I find on eBay, but smooth-bottomed plastic trays are available new. Just make sure all of your trays have smooth bottoms (or glass insert): soak, developer, stop, fix, and wash. If you want to try tanks + hangers, use only the Kodak steel hangers — if you go thru this thread, you'll see numerous posts about why. Another possible method is the 'taco' method, but I haven't personally tried it and I don't remember seeing anyone else on the forum saying they have, either.

[Fr. Mark]

Corran---let me try the moderator/QTluong approach one more time when I get back to my computer. Meanwhile, thanks for the offer.

[senderoaburrido]

Sezee:

How am I actually meant to take the negatives out of the holder? I try and place them in very carefully, but when taking them out, I struggle because I have no nails. I figured that using a tool or implement might be more of a risk for scratching them than nails.

Taco method is attractive, but I feel like I'd be at even greater risk of scratching the negatives. I have awful clumsy hands.

[martinyanus]

Hi everybody!

I´m not completely new to the Forum but this is the first time I´m posting something here.
Here is my problem:
After a couple of test developments I still don´t get good uniform negatives.
There are always some streaks or marks visible on them, doesn´t matter how I rotate/agitate.
The overall tonality is very promising though, so I would not like to give up this film.

My setup is:
1. 24x30 cm Min-R 2000 Plus mammography (one-sided) film by Carestream at 50 ASA;
2. Paper tray or Jobo drum 4541 with a Durst Comot engine
3. Rodinal 1+100, 6 min. at 16 Celcius degrees;

What do I do wrong?
And, more importantly, what is the best way to develop this film without streaks?

I would really appreciate your help, guys.
Cheers,

Marcin
:-)

[seezee]

Sezee:

How am I actually meant to take the negatives out of the holder? I try and place them in very carefully, but when taking them out, I struggle because I have no nails. I figured that using a tool or implement might be more of a risk for scratching them than nails.

Taco method is attractive, but I feel like I'd be at even greater risk of scratching the negatives. I have awful clumsy hands.

I load the film with the rounded corner at the bottom of the holder and slip a fingernail under it to lift the negative. On some occasions when the nitrile gloves are just too much in the way, I use the point of a pocket knife and very gently lift. You could use tweezer or forceps, too, I suppose. The emulsion isn't as soft when dry, so if you're careful, you wont scratch it. And if you do, it's at the edge where it can be safely cropped (or ignored).

Do ensure that your hands/gloves are dry before attempting to unload.

[Andrew O'Neill]

Marcin, does it look like the film is getting enough development? 6 minutes for both tray and rotary doesn't sound right. I've developed in the same dilution in a flat-bottomed tray for longer, tubes for less. Make sure when working with trays, your giving the film enough agitation.

[martinyanus]

Thank you, Andrew.
From what I see, the negative looks just right for traditional wet darkroom (no albumen or Pl-Pd density).
My speed is rather low 50 ASA and the drum rotation also contributes to the relatively short developing time.

[Andrew O'Neill]

It's really odd that you are getting streaks/marks using both methods. Are you also presoaking the film before development? I skip this.

[Max Hao]

Hi all, I've been experimenting rotary developing double-sided Xray film, and not having had much success to get rid of marks on the back side. I'm using a JOBO tube. Any ideas how to eliminate the marks? I know tray development in a darkroom could do. But really want to find a way to do rotary as it is a much cleaner and tidier way. Thanks in advance.
Max.

[Thodoris Tzalavras]

This one is from the summer of 2008.

I was walking in down town Nicosia with my Speed Graphic and some film holders loaded with x-ray film (cut down from 15x30cm sheets) looking for something interesting to shoot.

Enter a group of teenagers with their skateboards in front of the neoclassical Faneromeni school.

It was late afternoon, so light was getting low. Asked if I could take some pictures of them, and quickly setup the camera pre-focusing on the spot where they were doing their jumps.

For some reason I decided to try stand development on these negatives. First and last time I did that with the Jobo 2509n reel and the 2521 tank. This negative has about 4mm on the long edge (top of the picture) significantly overdeveloped.

Didn't find the processing notes, but at the time I was using mostly Rodinal in dilutions between 1/100 and 1/300. Time must have been between 10 and 20 minutes. The negative is slightly under developed, which makes it a bit thin.

The picture here is a scan (cropped the top out) from a contact print I did a couple days ago on Ilford MG Warmtone RC Pearl.

https://farm2.staticflickr.com/1564/24216371192_590c484acf_b.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/CTVetf)[/url][url=https://www.flickr.com/photos/tzalavras/] (https://flic.kr/p/CTVetf)

[captainscot]

144957

Bought some 8x10 Ektascan B/RA, cut it down to 4x5 for some testing, rated at IS0 50, developed in a beseler drum on a motor base in Rodinal for 7mins. @ 1:100 then printed in Palladium on Arches Platine. Its still a bit contrasty but i like it.

[Fr. Mark]

At least the skaters aren't doing "grinds" on classical marble...
Cyprus is a place I'd love to visit someday, in part for what it is now but also to honor the memory of some heroes, i.e. Epiphanius the 4th C bishop.

Captainscot: on my phone the print does not look excessively contrasty to me. I rate Ektascan a stop faster than you do but develop for new cyanotypes and I hope Carbon printing someday using Pyrocat HD but I know a lot of people use 1:100 Rodinal.

[Andrew O'Neill]

Looks great, captainscot!

[Jim Noel]

Fr. Mark,
That is a very good synopsis.

[Jim Noel]

144957

Bought some 8x10 Ektascan B/RA, cut it down to 4x5 for some testing, rated at IS0 50, developed in a beseler drum on a motor base in Rodinal for 7mins. @ 1:100 then printed in Palladium on Arches Platine. Its still a bit contrasty but i like it.

I rate it at 100 except early morning or near sunset. If it is still too contrasty for you try reducing your development time to 5 1/2 or 6 minutes.

[captainscot]

I rate it at 100 except early morning or near sunset. If it is still too contrasty for you try reducing your development time to 5 1/2 or 6 minutes.

I have just started with this film but so far i really like it, it will need some more testing on my part in different scenarios, i will try less development time and maybe a higher dillution as well, but i feel i am getting pretty close...and thank you Andrew for the comment...Mark i tried Pyrocat HD and FP4 for Palladium printing but my UV exposure times were too long so i gave up on it for now but will certainly retry it in the near future.

[Thodoris Tzalavras]

Cyprus is a place I'd love to visit someday...

You're the second person to mention visiting Cyprus.
It's a lovely place. Lots of sunshine and blue skies.
But if you do visit, remember that it's a small place.
It's got pretty much everything, from snowy mountains (in the winter/early spring) to deserts and canyons and cliffs and every kind of beach you can imagine. And of course historic sites. But.
Everything here is to scale. There's more subtle beauty, than jaw dropping.
I've never been to the US but I can imagine that standing on top of Half Dome late in the afternoon must be a religious experience.
So, if you're a landscape photographer, keep that in mind so you don't get disappointed.
And if you do visit, let me know.

[Dan O'Farrell]

" ... I've never been to the US but I can imagine that standing on top of Half Dome late in the afternoon must be a religious experience ... ",

If you think the size of the U.S. is a religious experience for landscape photography, then you should visit Canada.....!!!

[Thodoris Tzalavras]

If you think the size of the U.S. is a religious experience for landscape photography, then you should visit Canada.....!!!

Dan, it's on my list...

First light (as they say in astronomy) for my new/old 5x7" Rittreck View camera which I converted to 18x24cm.

There is nothing like moving up a format size (or two) to get a new perspective over bulk and weight.

Apo Gerogon 300mm
Agfa x-ray film (CP G+) at 100asa.
Tray developed by inspection in Ilford MG 1+100 at 22C for 7.5min.
Scan from negative, finished in PS.

https://farm2.staticflickr.com/1652/24396038996_40fa73fcd2_b.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/DaN5s1)[/url][url=https://www.flickr.com/photos/tzalavras/] (https://flic.kr/p/DaN5s1)

[Andrew O'Neill]

If you think the size of the U.S. is a religious experience for landscape photography, then you should visit Canada.....!!!

Yes, how many times does the US fit into Canada? ;)

Nicely done, Thodoris.

[Jim Fitzgerald]

Yes, how many times does the US fit into Canada? ;)

Nicely done, Thodoris.

I'll be closer next month! :-)

[jon.oman]

Yes, how many times does the US fit into Canada? ;)

Thodoris.

1.013 times. (3.855 million mi sq)/(3.806 million mi sq)

[mollypix]

Does anyone know if it is possible to intensify x ray negatives?
Thanks

[seezee]

Does anyone know if it is possible to intensify x ray negatives?
Thanks

Do you mean increase contrast? Exposure? Are your negatives too thin? Too dark? Too light? Can you post an example so we can see what you're trying to accomplish?

[koraks]

I have no experience with this, but since they're basically just silver negatives, they should intensify just like regular negatives.

[Thodoris Tzalavras]

Nicely done, Thodoris.

Thanks Andrew.


Does anyone know if it is possible to intensify x ray negatives?
Thanks

Have used selenium with Ortho Litho film in the past. It did work, adding density to the highlights in the negative. It resulted in an increase of contrast of about one paper grade in the print. Didn't do an extensive testing though, so it might be possible to push it even further.

Also, if the above is combined with selenium toning the print (adding density to the shadows) it could lead to a total increase of about two paper grades, give or take.

I was thinking of trying negative intensification when printing from some old x-ray negatives a couple weeks ago. They were a bit thin, requiring grade 5 to produce usable prints.

So, if anyone has any experience with it, I too would be very interested in your findings.

[Alan9940]

Seeking help from the cumulative wisdom of all you LF x-ray users,

For a couple of months now (off-n-on), I've been playing around with 8x10 Ektascan B/RA. I shoot it at EI 80 and process as follows: Jobo 3005 Expert Drum, CPP-2, Rodinal at 1:100 at 68F, speed 4 rotation (same speed I've used for 20 years of developing LF film on my Jobo.) I use 3ml of stock Rodinal per 8x10 sheet to ensure an adequate quantity of developer. For pt/pd printing, I've been developing for 6 1/2 mins, though I think that may be a tad long...haven't decided, yet. Oh, I should probably mention that I'm following my usual procedure of 5 mins pre-soak, develop, 1 min stop, 5 mins fix (rapid fix), wash as usual.

OK, all that said I'm seeing uneven development which is especially easy to see in the tonality of bald, clear blue sky. Any ideas? Maybe I'm spinning the drum too fast? In 20 years of using my Jobo for LF film development, I've never once seen uneven development from any of my Expert Drums.

Thank you.

[Peter De Smidt]

That is strange. I haven't developed any Ektascan in my Jobo with an Expert Drum yet, but a friendly person gave me some recently, and so I'll give it a try soon. You might try eliminating the pre-soak. I doubt that X-ray (and similar) films used them, and it's possible that they have wetting agents built into the film that can get washed out with a pre-soak.

How many sheets are you developing at a time?

[Alan9940]

How many sheets are you developing at a time?

2 - 3 sheets per run so far.

[Jody_S]

Seeking help from the cumulative wisdom of all you LF x-ray users,

For a couple of months now (off-n-on), I've been playing around with 8x10 Ektascan B/RA. I shoot it at EI 80 and process as follows: Jobo 3005 Expert Drum, CPP-2, Rodinal at 1:100 at 68F, speed 4 rotation (same speed I've used for 20 years of developing LF film on my Jobo.) I use 3ml of stock Rodinal per 8x10 sheet to ensure an adequate quantity of developer. For pt/pd printing, I've been developing for 6 1/2 mins, though I think that may be a tad long...haven't decided, yet. Oh, I should probably mention that I'm following my usual procedure of 5 mins pre-soak, develop, 1 min stop, 5 mins fix (rapid fix), wash as usual.

OK, all that said I'm seeing uneven development which is especially easy to see in the tonality of bald, clear blue sky. Any ideas? Maybe I'm spinning the drum too fast? In 20 years of using my Jobo for LF film development, I've never once seen uneven development from any of my Expert Drums.

Thank you.

I've had uneven development using drums on an Ilford motorized base, I had to go back to rolling them by hand. I also went to using 1.5-2ml of developer per sheet, ensuring that I was developing to exhaustion, that seems to give me better control of contrast.

[stiganas]

For anyone interested. Foma have a Mamo single side notched emulsion film. It is called:

MEDIX MAMMO Plus available (only) in 18x24cm and 24x30cm
http://www.foma.cz/produkty-medix-mammo-plus-detail-1755

I think it is very much the equivalent of the Ektascan BR/A with european dimensions.

The price is very good - 45 EUR+VAT/box of 100 pcs. and is always in stock at Foma distributor from Romania. More info after I have one in my hands.

[Jim Noel]

Seeking help from the cumulative wisdom of all you LF x-ray users,

For a couple of months now (off-n-on), I've been playing around with 8x10 Ektascan B/RA. I shoot it at EI 80 and process as follows: Jobo 3005 Expert Drum, CPP-2, Rodinal at 1:100 at 68F, speed 4 rotation (same speed I've used for 20 years of developing LF film on my Jobo.) I use 3ml of stock Rodinal per 8x10 sheet to ensure an adequate quantity of developer. For pt/pd printing, I've been developing for 6 1/2 mins, though I think that may be a tad long...haven't decided, yet. Oh, I should probably mention that I'm following my usual procedure of 5 mins pre-soak, develop, 1 min stop, 5 mins fix (rapid fix), wash as usual.

OK, all that said I'm seeing uneven development which is especially easy to see in the tonality of bald, clear blue sky. Any ideas? Maybe I'm spinning the drum too fast? In 20 years of using my Jobo for LF film development, I've never once seen uneven development from any of my Expert Drums.

Thank you.

I don't pre-soak this film although I do so with others. I develop either in a tray, or a jobo at the absolutely slowest speed possible. Itunr it on and as soon as it begins turning, I leave it there.

[koraks]

For anyone interested. Foma have a Mamo single side notched emulsion film. It is called:

MEDIX MAMMO Plus available (only) in 18x24cm and 24x30cm
http://www.foma.cz/produkty-medix-mammo-plus-detail-1755

I think it is very much the equivalent of the Ektascan BR/A with european dimensions.

The price is very good - 45 EUR+VAT/box of 100 pcs. and is always in stock at Foma distributor from Romania. More info after I have one in my hands.

This is VERY interesting given the difficulties of getting Ektascan BR/A in Europe. I'm going to look into it and see if I can order a box at a reasonable price.

[ihavenosoul]

Just a Quick Question I have a box of 8x10 on the way. I am going to cut it to 4x5. What are you folks using to store the film once it is cut? I have no 4x5 film boxes and can't find any 4x5 paper safes online.

[Tin Can]

I used to cut extra, but I found it bad for me, so I cut and load holders in one sitting.

[ihavenosoul]

I don't have a space for a darkroom so I have to do everything in a changing bag and there just isn't room for my trimmer, film holders and the 8x10 box.

[Fr. Mark]

Like Randy, I tend to cut as needed and fill holders. I've put the cut pieces in the light proof bags printing printing paper comes in, too. I've also stored it in my 8x10 paper safe as well as film boxes. You could probably make something out of cardboard or black foam core or may board, too.

[ihavenosoul]

Like Randy, I tend to cut as needed and fill holders. I've put the cut pieces in the light proof bags printing printing paper comes in, too. I've also stored it in my 8x10 paper safe as well as film boxes. You could probably make something out of cardboard or black foam core or may board, too.

Thanks all guess I'll just have to try to cobble something together

[seezee]

Like Randy, I tend to cut as needed and fill holders. I've put the cut pieces in the light proof bags printing printing paper comes in, too. I've also stored it in my 8x10 paper safe as well as film boxes. You could probably make something out of cardboard or black foam core or may board, too.

Ditto this. I cut & load in one sitting & store the uncut film in the original bag & box inside the shipping box & then keep that in a dark cupboard. It's in my bathroom, which isn't ideal because of temperature & humidity, but that's also my darkroom & I'm using it up fast enough that I'm not worried about it degrading.

[redrockcoulee]

For 4X5 we usually cut 24 sheets at a time and load the holders and the rest goes into a film box. We don't yet have spare film boxes for the WP and 5X7 so just fill the holders for now. My wife does the cutting and I check the fit and load the holders or boxes. I figure if she is going to shoot some of it and I do all the developing she can do the cutting. We are using 8X10 for the 4X5 and 14X17 for the other two sizes.

[Andrew O'Neill]

For a couple of months now (off-n-on), I've been playing around with 8x10 Ektascan B/RA. I shoot it at EI 80 and process as follows: Jobo 3005 Expert Drum, CPP-2, Rodinal at 1:100 at 68F, speed 4 rotation (same speed I've used for 20 years of developing LF film on my Jobo.) I use 3ml of stock Rodinal per 8x10 sheet to ensure an adequate quantity of developer. For pt/pd printing, I've been developing for 6 1/2 mins, though I think that may be a tad long...haven't decided, yet. Oh, I should probably mention that I'm following my usual procedure of 5 mins pre-soak, develop, 1 min stop, 5 mins fix (rapid fix), wash as usual.

OK, all that said I'm seeing uneven development which is especially easy to see in the tonality of bald, clear blue sky. Any ideas? Maybe I'm spinning the drum too fast? In 20 years of using my Jobo for LF film development, I've never once seen uneven development from any of my Expert Drums.


2 - 3 sheets per run so far.

I use 5ml per sheet... in a tray or BTZS tube for Ektascan and Green Latitude. I never do more than two sheets (one at a time). Then it's discarded. Never had any streaking issues. Perhaps you need to increase your stock solution amount?

[Fr. Mark]

A rotatrim cutter might be easier to use in a changing bag without cutting the bag or other unfortunate events. they are expensive though compared to guillotine cutters. Personally, I'd light tight a room somehow, run a red LED (not close by some of them are so intense they will fog film if close and shined directly on it---guess how I know this...) and just fill the holders while in the room. Its not a bad idea to check individual sheets for fit as you cut anyway. But, as said before, there are ways to make boxes light tight, even aluminum foil if you are clever.

[salvatore]

For anyone interested. Foma have a Mamo single side notched emulsion film. It is called:

MEDIX MAMMO Plus available (only) in 18x24cm and 24x30cm
http://www.foma.cz/produkty-medix-mammo-plus-detail-1755

I think it is very much the equivalent of the Ektascan BR/A with european dimensions.

The price is very good - 45 EUR+VAT/box of 100 pcs. and is always in stock at Foma distributor from Romania. More info after I have one in my hands.

Hi Stiganas,
The technical notes (in english) of the czech documentation shown by the above link says that this is a double sided emulsion film.
Am I wrong?

[stiganas]

I got the film. Surprise:

In the box is AGFA MAMORAY HDR-C Plus - Made in in Belgium.

I think it it the same film, made by Agfa or Foma:

Two emulsion technologies working together
MAMORAY HDR-C Plus is a single-sided orthochromatic
mammography film that is part of the Agfa HealthCare
film/screen system for mammography. The film uses
both Split Emulsion Layer (S.E.L.) and the Cubic Crystal
technologies.
Agfa’s Split Emulsion Layer technology provides
the MAMORAY HDR-C Plus film with three emulsion
layers on one side of the film. Each layer consists
of monodispersed Cubic Crystals of identical size.

The other boxes are from FOMA -MEDIX XG - green.


This is VERY interesting given the difficulties of getting Ektascan BR/A in Europe. I'm going to look into it and see if I can order a box at a reasonable price.

[koraks]

Ah, so I suppose I might just as well contact Agfa? I tried contacting foma but they haven't responded yet. Sounds like there is a plan B!

[Thodoris Tzalavras]

30 seconds exposure on x-ray film.
Rittreck view with 18x24cm back.
Fujinon W 250 at f32
Scan from negative, finished in PS.

https://farm2.staticflickr.com/1507/24064473553_6c424772a1_b.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/CEuHAr)[/url][url=https://www.flickr.com/photos/tzalavras/] (https://flic.kr/p/CEuHAr)

[Thodoris Tzalavras]

For anyone interested. Foma have a Mamo single side notched emulsion film.

I'd be very interested to see your results.
It doesn't say anything about anti-halation on the pdf though (one of the main attractions of the Ektascan BR/A).

[Fr. Mark]

Premortho asserted that Ektascan BR/A is the only Ortho film on the market that has an anti halation backing. No idea if this is true, but I've not heard of another.

[stiganas]

I have no idea from where I got this antihalation info but it doesn't matter because I have the film in my hands :)

It has antihalation, it is a deep blue dye that come off very easy and the film is safe under a red led. I can't say anything else from the short test I've done except that I didn't like the look of the negative, it reminds me of lithofilm.
145760

but this means nothing - it is just one test sheet.

[Thodoris Tzalavras]

I have no idea from where I got this antihalation info but it doesn't matter because I have the film in my hands :)

It has antihalation, it is a deep blue dye that come off very easy and the film is safe under a red led. I can't say anything else from the short test I've done except that I didn't like the look of the negative, it reminds me of lithofilm.
145760

but this means nothing - it is just one test sheet.

It seems to be a little under exposed and a lot over developed (at least for what I'm shooting for, for silver printing and scanning.)
I would suggest to dilute your developer quite a bit, to get some control over the density of the highlights.

[stiganas]

It seems to be a little under exposed and a lot over developed (at least for what I'm shooting for, for silver printing and scanning.)
I would suggest to dilute your developer quite a bit, to get some control over the density of the highlights.

True at both counts - I just want to show the notches on the film. It goes perfect in the 18x24 holder (same size as the normal 8x10 holder just the internal mask smaller)

[premortho]

If I didn't say that Ektascan BR/A is the only Orthchromatic film on the market with an anti-halation backing that I know of - - I should have.

[mdarnton]

I have no idea from where I got this antihalation info but it doesn't matter because I have the film in my hands :)

It has antihalation, it is a deep blue dye that come off very easy and the film is safe under a red led. I can't say anything else from the short test I've done except that I didn't like the look of the negative, it reminds me of lithofilm.
145760

but this means nothing - it is just one test sheet.

Yes, that does look like lith film. My xray negs (Fuji double sided) don't look anything like that. A bit high contrast sometimes, but not like that. The developer I use was suggested in one of the first posts here, and that's D23, 1:6 or 1:7 or something. It's very gentle, and if I do it right I can get negs that are really beautiful. I've been saving it and reusing it, but have noticed that it works even better as it gets old and weak, so I'm thinking of doubling the dilution and using it as a one shot, since the cost is really negligible. Developing by inspection means I don't have to let it go past when the development is good, which your neg certainly has, so I certainly recommend you get yourself one of those red LED bulbs people are using so successfully, if you don't already have one:
https://www.superbrightleds.com/moreinfo/led-globe/2-watt-g11-globe-bulb-360-degree/440/#/attributes/13

[Will Frostmill]

Yes, that does look like lith film. My xray negs (Fuji double sided) don't look anything like that. A bit high contrast sometimes, but not like that. The developer I use was suggested in one of the first posts here, and that's D23, 1:6 or 1:7 or something. It's very gentle, and if I do it right I can get negs that are really beautiful. I've been saving it and reusing it, but have noticed that it works even better as it gets old and weak, so I'm thinking of doubling the dilution and using it as a one shot, since the cost is really negligible. Developing by inspection means I don't have to let it go past when the development is good, which your neg certainly has, so I certainly recommend you get yourself one of those red LED bulbs people are using so successfully, if you don't already have one:
https://www.superbrightleds.com/moreinfo/led-globe/2-watt-g11-globe-bulb-360-degree/440/#/attributes/13

I was just looking at Ansel's The Negative today, at his discussion of D23, and I'm wondering if the reason your D23 gets better and better is because it's picked up some bromide from interacting with the film.

I was also looking at your examples of green x-ray in D23. Very nice. I really liked the violin portrait. Do you still rate it at 80, and run it at 1:6 for 8 minutes? How much agitation do you use? Can you tell me what kind of max density you get with your usual dev time?

[mdarnton]

I don't have a time v temp feel for it, now that I develop by inspection. Now that it's winter and I'm developing by inspection my temps have gone down, and my times up.

Current times run around 10 minutes. Agitation is very little, every two minutes. Hangers in tanks, I bump them back and forth a couple of times, then gently lift them out once, drop them back in gently, and bump them back and forth a couple of times. That takes about 15 seconds. I don't believe that much if any is really necessary. Traditionally, xray films are developed by hanging them in the dev, walking away for a while and then coming back and pulling them out---no agitation at all. This does work, but it makes me feel guilty.

I don't have any concrete figures on density. If I were printing them on Polycontrast, I think they would want about a (non-existent) 00 filter at their contrastiest, and would print with a 2 at the flattest. Because I'm scanning, not printing, I develop until I like how the shadows have built up, and let the highlights go where they will. With scanning this attitude works just fine. However, with the first batch the highlights go up quite a bit, and by the last batch, when the shadows are good the highlights look sort of normal. The exhaustion is rapid and obvious, and I would never do this with Tri-X, for instance. The results would be too unpredictable, and the film wouldn't stand for it. The interesting thing to me about the xray film is that it doesn't block up at all. No matter how badly I mess up, you can't see it in the final results, and scanning and printing are just as easy. It must have a straight line curve that reaches to the moon, the way it acts.

I guess it would be easy enough to run some faux-densitometer tests with my lightmeter; I just am not much into that kind of thinking. If you are into the zone system mindset, well. . . . I'm a 35mm, meterless, hip-shooting retro-Leica, don't-need-no-stinkin'-zones barbarian and all of that stuff doesn't mean much to me. I hadn't even owned a meter for the last 30 years until I started using strobes in the studio two years ago, and bought a meter for testing lighting ratios. Now it's back not being used again.

What I would really like to do is get consistently flatter negs, which is why I'm considering more dilution. The current effects could be bromide build-up, but it could easily be exhaustion. I say this because once I pushed too far, and nothing was coming out at all---I mixed a new batch of D23 right there in the dark and continued on. So obviously the previous run was right at the end of its life.

I can be very controlled in my processes if I want to, but I'm doing this for fun, experimentally, and having a lot of fun seeing how far I can push the materials. The one thing that isn't varying at all in this is my exposures which have settled down to EI 50.

[Will Frostmill]

Thanks Michael,
That is a better, more complete answer than I think I deserve! Neat! I'm not much of a zonie, but I've got a superstitious dread of blocked highlights. Which, from everything you've told me is a total non issue for scanning, which would be the one place I'd be really worried about it. Awesome!

One more question - what kind of light are you shooting in, that you are rating it at iso 50? I keep reading about the wildly different isos people use depending on time if day, or forest shade vs other kinds.

[mdarnton]

Ortho and blue sensitive films are very susceptible to color temperature changes. Daylight is very blue; with lots of blue, blue sensitive films act like they're fast. Tungsten lights can look bright, but with hardly any blue they don't write on xray film all that aggressively, and so the film acts like it's slow. I'm guessing that EI 50 in daylight might translate to EI 12-20 in tungsten. Likewise for time of day--bluest at noon, blueless at sunset, in between in between. It's not an inscrutable problem: it's simply a function of how blue the light is vs being yellow-red.

I'm using mostly strobes--that's functionally daylight. When I'm shooting under primitive hot lights--100W bulbs or similar--I open up a stop or two from what I normally would.

Yeah, scanning is a dream. One of the things you can do with regular film is drag out shadows and pop their contrast, and do the same in the other direction with highlights, pull them down and snap them up, so you can get a succulent dynamic range that is simply impossible with silver printing from film, without a whole lot of work. I love it. I can pull a solid 16+ -stop dynamic range out of a 35mm Tri-X neg--that's like a sunlit outside wall and under a table in a dark interior in the same photo--and make the resulting print look totally normal.

With the inherently high contrast of xray film, this ability is even more valuable.

I'm a good silver printer and spent a lot of my early life working as a custom printer in a series of labs, but there's no way you could drag me back into the darkroom for printing now. It would be like forcing me to eat with a toothpick. Silver is so dead. . . :-)

[Michael E]

I'm a 35mm, meterless, hip-shooting retro-Leica, don't-need-no-stinkin'-zones barbarian and all of that stuff doesn't mean much to me

The thought of correcting your working EI from 80 to 50 while refusing to use a light meter is intriguing. :-)

[Peter De Smidt]

Michael, for lower contrast with x-ray, have you tried rating the film at, say, 25, and developing by inspection until you see the shadows that you like? I used to do a fair amount of Lith printing, ala Tim Rudman. I got the best results right on the edge of developer exhaustion, but that was with printing. When the developer would go over the edge, all that was lost was one sheet of printing paper. With film development, though, something would be lost permanently when the developer gets too far gone.

[mdarnton]

The thought of correcting your working EI from 80 to 50 while refusing to use a light meter is intriguing. :-)

When I got the strobes, I couldn't find a way to put up my finger to measure strobelight so for a brief period I did actually use the meter correctly until I understood the lights. Remember, I've been shooting film seriously since around 1961, but studio strobes were completly new, so give me a break. :-) Now that I have a feel for them, though, I change my exposures from my base according to the old way, as everyone did pre flash meters. How many feet away is it, how big is the source, is there anything coming off the walls, etc.

[mdarnton]

Michael, for lower contrast with x-ray, have you tried rating the film at, say, 25, and developing by inspection until you see the shadows that you like?
With the developer as it now is, when things start happening, they happen too quickly for me to feel comfy ripping the film out. (Thinking about uneven developing, here.) I'm hoping that diluting the dev will slow down the short major activity period when everything is happening. The film acts a lot like old, pre-developer-incorporation photo paper, in that it sits there for about eight minutes, and then a lot happens suddenly, then after that it gradually matures. You'd want to be ripping it out during the phase when things are changing fast.

Thanks for the confirmation about the possible effects of exhaustion. Maybe diluting it, and then adding some potassium bromide (thanks, Will!) might do what I want. That's certainly easy enough to try.

I've always liked the look of old film and am a huge http://shorpy.com fan, so discovering xray film and trying to make it work is very exciting to me. The =1975 film price doesn't hurt any, too.

[premortho]

A little bit of hydro-quinol will stretch out your development. Metol alone is a slow, very much nothing, then suddenly, bingo developer. That is why they developed a M-Q developer.

[mdarnton]

Thanks. Maybe I should try hyper-dilute D76 instead of D23? What do you think of that idea? Or would that be too much hydroquinone and I could make a hybrid? I'm open to anything that I can mix up myself.

[Jim Noel]

I use D-23 undiluted with Ektascan RA film in a tray with limited agitation.. It produces a beautiful long scaled image for palladium or salt printing.

[premortho]

For me, the problem with D-76 is too much Metol. I would just try adding a little Metol to D-23. D-23 has a fantastic tonal range. I wouldn't want to give up that tonal range to get an easier development regimen. Bye the way, another way to slow down D-23 is to develop at a lower temperature. 65 degrees works for me.

[premortho]

Oops, I meant D-76 has too much hydro-quinol. So just add a little hydro-quinol to D-23. Or try reducing developer temperature.
For me, the problem with D-76 is too much Metol. I would just try adding a little Metol to D-23. D-23 has a fantastic tonal range. I wouldn't want to give up that tonal range to get an easier development regimen. Bye the way, another way to slow down D-23 is to develop at a lower temperature. 65 degrees works for me.

[plaubel]

Surprise:

In the box is AGFA MAMORAY HDR-C Plus - Made in in Belgium.

I think it it the same film, made by Agfa or Foma:



In spring of last year I wanted to buy Foma Medix Xray, but the only source I have found in the web was the polnish guy in Norway.

I emailed Foma directly because oft some questions around the Medix, and surprisingly they told me that they quitted the production of Medix Xray.

Maybe the same with this Mammo film?
Agfa sounds good, I have to do some research, but unfortunately, normally the mammo film in germany is max. available in 24x30cm, way too small for my 30x40cm camera.

Ritchie

[stiganas]

In Romania Medix is still available, expiration date 09.2017.

146052

I've done some more test and discovered that my red light is fogging the film. I've bought some red LED and is fogging the film big time so for now I am back to the old red bulb (I just change the position to dim the light).

I've done some test with all x-ray film I have and for sure the Agfa Mamo have some problems, again with the naked eyes is halfway between regular film and ortho litho film, all the other xray films are very similar and closer to regular film. Nothing to show for now because of the fogging. I use one year old FOMADON EXCEL W27 in trays. First try was with Foma R09 in rotating drum.

I just checked and Kodak (Carestream) have 3 mamo film in Romania (Europe): Min-R S, Min-R 2000, Min-R EV only in 18x24 and 24x30cm. Maybe I'll try a box of Min film, the distributor is near me and very friendly.



In spring of last year I wanted to buy Foma Medix Xray, but the only source I have found in the web was the polnish guy in Norway.

I emailed Foma directly because oft some questions around the Medix, and surprisingly they told me that they quitted the production of Medix Xray.

Maybe the same with this Mammo film?
Agfa sounds good, I have to do some research, but unfortunately, normally the mammo film in germany is max. available in 24x30cm, way too small for my 30x40cm camera.

Ritchie

[Thodoris Tzalavras]

Petra Tou Romiou, from last week.

Looking east, a few minutes before sunset.

18x24cm Agfa CP-G+
Fujinon W 250
Developed by inspection in MG 1+100
Scan from negative, finished in PS.

https://farm2.staticflickr.com/1639/24524761660_b0d6a3ff6f_b.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/DnaPdh)[/url][url=https://www.flickr.com/photos/tzalavras/] (https://flic.kr/p/DnaPdh)

[drgoose]

Eastman 2D
Nikkor 300mm f/9
Fuji HR film. Rodinal 1:100 7 min

146072

[angusparker]

Petra Tou Romiou, from last week.

Looking east, a few minutes before sunset.

18x24cm Agfa CP-G+
Fujinon W 250
Developed by inspection in MG 1+100
Scan from negative, finished in PS.

https://farm2.staticflickr.com/1639/24524761660_b0d6a3ff6f_b.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/DnaPdh)[/url][url=https://www.flickr.com/photos/tzalavras/] (https://flic.kr/p/DnaPdh)

How did the negative look prior to PP in PS? This image looks like it has a nice tonal range which is hard to do with contrasty X-ray film, I assume you made some adjustments using curves or gamma? What is your strategy in PP? You have great results.

[Thodoris Tzalavras]

How did the negative look prior to PP in PS? This image looks like it has a nice tonal range which is hard to do with contrasty X-ray film, I assume you made some adjustments using curves or gamma? What is your strategy in PP? You have great results.

Angus,

It's hard to fully appreciate a negative without holding it in your hands, or better yet doing your own darkroom printing or scanning, with it.

As far as my PP goes I was already a darkroom printer before discovering PS, so I'm using multiple layers with masks in PS in a similar way that I use a sequence of exposures at different grades (while masking parts of the image during each exposure) in the darkroom. PS's preview, undo, and history functions are major advantages over darkroom working for me. It's not a one way street though. I've taken the concept of layer masks from PS back to the darkroom, using x-ray and ortho-litho films to create burning masks for complex shapes.

Regarding this particular picture.

This is the scan as it came out of the V700, unedited – though the scanner itself, the software, and my technique are still in play, even in the raw scan:
https://farm2.staticflickr.com/1471/24745484051_5dbd577824_b.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/DGF5hK)[/url] (https://flic.kr/p/DGF5hK)

This is a picture of the negative held above the scanner, shot with a digital camera – only editing done was desaturation:
https://farm2.staticflickr.com/1477/24212091093_1bdfccbfc5_b.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/CTxi9r) (https://flic.kr/p/CTxi9r)

And this is a picture of the set-up at the scene, with my phone:
https://farm2.staticflickr.com/1618/24838938165_483767ca8c_b.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/DQW3Wz)[url=https://www.flickr.com/photos/tzalavras/] (https://flic.kr/p/DQW3Wz)

By the way, the notion that x-ray film has very high contrast, period, is a misconception.
That is, it has extremely high contrast when developed in certain developers/dilutions/temperatures. BUT, it's VERY responsive to changes in development. I base what I'm saying in extensive testing of Agfa CP-G+, a green sensitive film with no anti-halation backing. However, looking at the published data for most other films mentioned in this thread, I feel confident that it holds across the board. Actually, x-ray film can even give very flat negatives. Negatives that need grade 5 to produce satisfactory prints.

One advise I can share with anyone interested, is this.
If you're consistently getting high contrast, make multiple exposures of the same scene (film is cheap) and then develop the first five negatives in a sequence for 4, 5, 6, 8, and 10 minutes in your favorite developer at a high dilution. (No need to make fresh developer each time yet; this is just to get in the ballpark). You'll notice that each negative looks very different to the next. Say that the shadows start kicking-in in the negative developed for 6min, but the highlights are already too dense. Dilute your developer further (fresh batch) and develop three negatives in sequence for 6,8, and 10 minutes. Let's say that this time the shadows start kicking-in in the negative developed for 8min, and the highlights are still too dense. You continue this process until you get a negative that you like. There is a limit in how much you can dilute a developer. If you reach that limit before you get a negative you like, then you need to change developers. Alternatively, you could add a restrainer to your favorite developer, and keep on testing.

Now, I do not consider myself an expert on, or claim to have completely tame, x-ray film. I still straggle with it and some of the issues I encounter I can't even pinpoint their source, let alone solve them (yet). More to this point, I only post here the pictures I deem worthy. Out of the 40 or so pictures I shot last month, only 5 or 6 will find their way here. Just to give you some perspective.

Hope that something in the above was helpful.

Cheers,
Thodoris

[Tin Can]

Very helpful, well written and documented. :)

I have 'toyed' too long and am setting up for better experiments.

I will now incorporate your methods.

Thank you

[Corran]

I fooled around with a lot of different developers since starting with x-ray film but today I went back to good ol' Rodinal, 1:100, for 7-8 minutes in trays (mostly due to temperature, it's really cold in my darkroom right now).

I think I should just stick with that formula because it works great. Shot at ISO 100, which makes a slightly thin negative that scans really well. First time shooting x-ray in a long time.

http://www.oceanstarproductions.com/photosharing/810wehmantest-2904_stitchss.jpg

[Peter De Smidt]

Looks great, Bryan.

[koraks]

Bryan, that looks gorgeous. And your processing and results seem to match with my experience. Rodinal 1+100 to 1+200 works great for xray.

[Luke79]

i am currently testing xray , i will try a test image on fuji rx and kodak tmat 13x18 today in the jobo 3010, lets see what i get ,
i was using mamography film till now, only single layer , so i am excited ... hope it works ....

[Corran]

Thank you Peter and koraks. For years I was stubborn and refused to do tray processing but I admit it is pretty easy. I use the tray that came with my 4x5 BTZS tubes since it's not ribbed and just the right size to use for 8x10, but I'm still too chicken to do more than one sheet at a time, especially with this delicate film.

I shot the same image on an extra sheet of Delta 100 to compare, scanning that now, might post comparison crops on my blog. Kind of blew the highlights on the Delta though.

[Tin Can]

Peter and I shot back to back Ektascan and Delta 100 with exact same setup & Rodinol Gas Burst developing. Maybe I will post them. Need to consult with Peter first.


Thank you Peter and koraks. For years I was stubborn and refused to do tray processing but I admit it is pretty easy. I use the tray that came with my 4x5 BTZS tubes since it's not ribbed and just the right size to use for 8x10, but I'm still too chicken to do more than one sheet at a time, especially with this delicate film.

I shot the same image on an extra sheet of Delta 100 to compare, scanning that now, might post comparison crops on my blog. Kind of blew the highlights on the Delta though.

[Corran]

I'd definitely like to see that. I just posted my shots and comparison on my blog. The differences amount mostly to my ISO and development on the Delta 100, so, definitely not a definitive test but might be interesting anyway. Also I posted 100% crops (scan was 2000 DPI).

[Tin Can]

I'd definitely like to see that. I just posted my shots and comparison on my blog. The differences amount mostly to my ISO and development on the Delta 100, so, definitely not a definitive test but might be interesting anyway. Also I posted 100% crops (scan was 2000 DPI).

I cannot post yet,and we also missed the ISO on the X-Ray as we shot all at 100. My poor decision.

I think these X-Ray to 'normal' film posts are a great idea.

[Tin Can]

Straight out of scanner. No Photoshop, Picasa resize to LFPF 750 pixel standards.

Really bad scans, but they show the exposure mistake I made by rating Ektsacan at 100 ISO instead of 50 ISO, but I wanted same same. My decision, not Peter's. It was my ball.

Both 8X10 Ektascan and Delta 100 were shot at 100 ISO, same lens 480mm Ronar Deardorff 11x14 with 8x10 back, shutter speed 1/100 fstop 32, one studio flash and reflector. Same development. Rodinol 1/100 10 minutes gas burst, water stop, TF5 fix gas burst. Another set coming after lunch. I cannot explain the big differences between sitters.

146273146274146275146276

[Corran]

Randy, mind mentioning which is which film on each of these?

[Tin Can]

Randy, mind mentioning which is which film on each of these?

I thought I would make you guess!

I know #3 is Ektascan as you can see the notch. That makes # 4 Delta.

I can't see the notches on 1&2, but on my light table the Ektascan has higher contrast, so it's # 2 and obviously #1 is Delta.

4 more coming same system but a SF lens on different camera.

[jon.oman]

In number 4, there is a light leak?

[Tin Can]

Same session. same films as last post. 8X10 Ektascan and Delta 100.

Linhof 8x10 camera with 360mm Imagon H5.8 holes open, so softest setting. Packard shutter and DIY flash sync to same single strobe and reflector. Notice I shot the beauty dish.

Same processing, same scanning etc.

Guess first and then we will figure the order out.


146277146278146279146280

[Tin Can]

Really look at them, I may have confused which lens was used for which group, but I know that each were all shot with same lens...

[Tin Can]

In number 4, there is a light leak?

Could be, the bellows are all good, but there are other ways...

[Corran]

Thanks, I was guessing on the first round but I was wrong. Interesting results. This of course reaffirms how important the scan process is in this. Wet prints will of course be a whole different animal.

[Tin Can]

Thanks, I was guessing on the first round but I was wrong. Interesting results. This of course reaffirms how important the scan process is in this. Wet prints will of course be a whole different animal.

My goal is always wet prints. I scan just to show others, like you at a distance.

[SergeiR]

8x10 Xray Kodak CSG, 1:100 R09 (Adonal), 12 m rotary

Colored in scan, dorking around with lith processing, seeing as am fresh out of lith developer and not going to get new one in near future :(

https://farm2.staticflickr.com/1718/24795059551_5ba8220096_b.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/DM4amK)On the road (https://flic.kr/p/DM4amK) by Sergei Rodionov (https://www.flickr.com/photos/sergeistudio/), on Flickr

[seezee]

8x10 Xray Kodak CSG, 1:100 R09 (Adonal), 12 m rotary

Colored in scan, dorking around with lith processing, seeing as am fresh out of lith developer and not going to get new one in near future :(

https://farm2.staticflickr.com/1718/24795059551_5ba8220096_b.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/DM4amK)On the road (https://flic.kr/p/DM4amK) by Sergei Rodionov (https://www.flickr.com/photos/sergeistudio/), on Flickr

Sergei, your examples never fail to make me smile. Well done, sir!

[Thodoris Tzalavras]

Looking West, a few minutes before sunset.

18x24cm Agfa CP-G+
Fujinon W 250
Developed by inspection in MG 1+100
Scan from negative, finished in PS.

https://farm2.staticflickr.com/1525/24306568104_2a4133bbfa_b.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/D2TvSq)[/url][url=https://www.flickr.com/photos/tzalavras/] (https://flic.kr/p/D2TvSq)

[premortho]

Lovely!
Looking West, a few minutes before sunset.

18x24cm Agfa CP-G+
Fujinon W 250
Developed by inspection in MG 1+100
Scan from negative, finished in PS.

https://farm2.staticflickr.com/1525/24306568104_2a4133bbfa_b.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/D2TvSq)[/url][url=https://www.flickr.com/photos/tzalavras/] (https://flic.kr/p/D2TvSq)

[Tin Can]

Ektascan cut to 4x5 f22 30 seconds first as scanned then tweaked. First night shots ever. I looked at the negs and almost tossed them as they were so clear. But decided to scan anyway.

I meant to expose more at 1 to 5 stops longer, but it was dark, cold and in a very lonely place. I got nervous. I shot 2, the other is the same but f32 60 seconds. Almost point and shoot as I set up real fast, focused barely, forgot the cable release, so pushed shutter gently and counted.

edit, after looking at the images posted, they look the same here, but different on my monitor...

146356146357

[Tin Can]

Also Ektascan cut to 4x5. All negs I post today were batch developed 16 at once with gas burst Rodinol, 1/100, 10 minutes, 1 minutes tap water still stop, 5 minutes TF5 gas burst. 10 minute tap wash, all temps 70F.

This is Plastica. A very good sitter.

12 total negs shot of Plastica last night. This is the pearl set. 2 shot with 360mm Sironar-N Copal 3 shutter used, 1/30th at f8 and f16 equalized main light and 2 with 360mm Imagon both at H5.8 holes open, Packard shutter with sync only 1 stop light diff. Focus was on closest lower eyelid white paint. 3 more sets in a bit.

As scanned no PS, sized to LFPF 750 in Picasa.

146361146362146363146364

[Tin Can]

This will be 2 posts. 6 images Imagon 360 with all 3 hole plates. 2 more Sironar 360mm. See if you can tell them apart. Not easy with small scans reduced to LFPF 750.

First 4. Before the pearls showed up. No PS.

146369146370146371146372

[Tin Can]

And 4 more first 2 Imagon, second 2 Sironar.

146374146375146376146377

[Tin Can]

I think they look really similar, but they are 2 different lenses, that use very different bellows extension. The Imagon needs about 3 more inches than a Sironar-N for the exact same proportion. The tripod and subject never moved, only rear standard. Lighting was bumped up and down for different apertures. The Sironar used a good Copal 3 at 1/30th for flash sync and the Packhard shutter sync on this setup I think matches well. That was a test goal.

While no Imagon pics were shot with holes closed, I did focus with them closed and changed focus set for each set of holes. Much sharper without holes and I can see the change of softness on GG when I switch.

And I think Ektascan is working well at ISO 50 with the PCB studio strobes.

Now where is that live model...

[Jim Noel]

Ektascan cut to 4x5 f22 30 seconds first as scanned then tweaked. First night shots ever. I looked at the negs and almost tossed them as they were so clear. But decided to scan anyway.

I meant to expose more at 1 to 5 stops longer, but it was dark, cold and in a very lonely place. I got nervous. I shot 2, the other is the same but f32 60 seconds. Almost point and shoot as I set up real fast, focused barely, forgot the cable release, so pushed shutter gently and counted.

edit, after looking at the images posted, they look the same here, but different on my monitor...

146356146357

I see a very slight difference in the shadows whichis all I would expect at these exposures.

[Tin Can]

I see a very slight difference in the shadows whichis all I would expect at these exposures.

Yes, next time I bracket widely.

First time.

[mdarnton]

Following up on a line from a couple of pages back, suggesting I should add some hydroquinone to my D23, I ran some film last night in D76 diluted 1:7 = 8. Twenty minutes at 70 degrees, and the result was a very nice, normal contrast neg, just a bit thinner than I like but with a very nice tonality like I usually get with Tri-X in D76 but not in D23 , so I will continue to test along that line.

I had always thought that the reason to throw away one-shot developers was because they would go bad, but my 1:7 D23 was lasting for months. So I think what I am going to do is mix up a batch of less dilute D76, maybe like 1:3 = 4, and try keeping it, with replenishment. I do want to spin out the development time a bit, but twenty minutes seems a bit much.

Randy, how's the gas working, anyway?

[Tin Can]

Following up on a line from a couple of page back, suggesting I should add some hydroquinone to my D23, I ran some film last night in D76 diluted 1:7 = 8. Twenty minutes at 70 degrees, and the result was a very nice, normal contrast neg, just a bit thinner than I like but with a very nice tonality like I usually get with Tri-X in D76 but not in D23 , so I will continue to test along that line.

I had always thought that the reason to throw away one-shot developers was because they would go bad, but my 1:7 D23 was lasting for months. So I think what I am going to do is mix up a batch of less dilute D76, maybe like 1:3 = 4, and try keeping it, with replenishment. I do want to spin out the development time a bit, but twenty minutes seems a bit much.

Randy, how's the gas working, anyway?

The gas is working perfectly. I am getting far more consistent results.

Next will be small round gas burst tanks for roll film.

Long term is big tanks for ULF for gas burst.

I find gas burst with light tight covers very relaxing.

[seezee]

edit, after looking at the images posted, they look the same here, but different on my monitor...

146356146357

2nd looks slightly darker to me.

[seezee]

Now where is that live model...

The way I started getting people to sit for me was to start a defined project with an end goal. In my case, it's portraits of Oklahoma musicians (past & present) shot on 4×5″ x-ray film. Once you get a few to sit for you they start telling their friends. I use social media to find more subjects.

I spent a lot of time being timid about actually getting live models over here. Lots of excuses to myself. "I need to nail down the lighting. I need a different lens. I need to improve my darkroom technique." It was time wasted. Just do it.

My point is, make a project for yourself and then go out an find the subjects you need for it — it's much easier than it sounds.

[Tin Can]

The way I started getting people to sit for me was to start a defined project with an end goal. In my case, it's portraits of Oklahoma musicians (past & present) shot on 4×5″ x-ray film. Once you get a few to sit for you they start telling their friends. I use social media to find more subjects.

I spent a lot of time being timid about actually getting live models over here. Lots of excuses to myself. "I need to nail down the lighting. I need a different lens. I need to improve my darkroom technique." It was time wasted. Just do it.

My point is, make a project for yourself and then go out an find the subjects you need for it — it's much easier than it sounds.

Good advice and I have done that.

I will get going again.

[Jim Noel]

Yes, next time I bracket widely.

First time.

My suggestion for bracketing low light shots is to double for each exposure. The laws of reciprocity cause these to be not quite one stop apart.
Example: 1,2,4,8,16. . . whether seconds, minutes or hours.
Jim

[Tin Can]

My suggestion for bracketing low light shots is to double for each exposure. The laws of reciprocity cause these to be not quite one stop apart.
Example: 1,2,4,8,16. . . whether seconds, minutes or hours.
Jim

Thanks Jim!

That was my plan, but I got cold and very nervous in the isolated spot 'down by the river.' Looks civilized, but Chicago can be dicey.

I will shoot that location again when it warms up. I think a lot of Chicago river shots are done by boat as I cannot find the best angles on land.

I have shot from our water taxi, but it vibrates a lot and moves quickly, however cheapest boat ride anywhere.

[SergeiR]

Thanks Jim!

That was my plan, but I got cold and very nervous in the isolated spot 'down by the river.' Looks civilized, but Chicago can be dicey.

I will shoot that location again when it warms up. I think a lot of Chicago river shots are done by boat as I cannot find the best angles on land.

I have shot from our water taxi, but it vibrates a lot and moves quickly, however cheapest boat ride anywhere.

theoretically you can do it from spots where water is not scary deep by using tripod in water. But yes, there are dodgy places along the riverwalk. Bring people with you, Randy ;) Don't be loner ;)

[Tin Can]

theoretically you can do it from spots where water is not scary deep by using tripod in water. But yes, there are dodgy places along the riverwalk. Bring people with you, Randy ;) Don't be loner ;)

Understood. I am not shooting the downtown River Walk but much farther North. I am a loner. But when one is alone, you meet more people and make new friends. That's why I prefer to travel alone. Works for me. :)

[Thodoris Tzalavras]

Late Afternoon Light

The winter sun sets a bit too fast.
The window of time between beautiful afternoon light with long elongated shadows, and the moment the sun sets behind the hills in the west, is very short.
If you don't pay attention, you can easily miss it.
Especially with the time it takes to set up the LF camera.
But it's worth it.

18x24cm camera
Fujinon W 250
Agfa CP G+ (x-ray film) at 100asa.
Tray developed by inspection in Ilford MG 1+100 at 22C for 7min
Scan from negative, finished in PS.

https://farm2.staticflickr.com/1505/25062781891_11245ce310_b.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/EbHiTa)[/url][url=https://www.flickr.com/photos/tzalavras/] (https://flic.kr/p/EbHiTa)

[senderoaburrido]

Okay, so I got a Wratten no. 44a filter on ebay, cut it down to size, placed it in a cokin gelatin holder and, with the aid of adapters, slapped it on my spot meter. Now that my spot meter is "seeing" roughly what the EB/RA Carestream single-side emulsion film does, I'd like to establish a static ISO approximation. Has anyone narrowed it down with a similar setup as mine? Or do I just figure it out by experimentation?

[Tin Can]

I think most now believe ISO on this film changes by angle of Sun. I see people choosing 50, 80, 100. I shoot it 'now' at 50 under studio strobes. Which is working for me in studio.

But most advice here on ASA is find your personal EI.




Okay, so I got a Wratten no. 44a filter on ebay, cut it down to size, placed it in a cokin gelatin holder and, with the aid of adapters, slapped it on my spot meter. Now that my spot meter is "seeing" roughly what the EB/RA Carestream single-side emulsion film does, I'd like to establish a static ISO approximation. Has anyone narrowed it down with a similar setup as mine? Or do I just figure it out by experimentation?

[senderoaburrido]

I understand what you are saying. The thing is that the filter I chose is cyan (discovered it as a "minus-red" filter), which should be blocking the majority of the red light coming through to the spot meter. Regardless of my source of light, the meter ought to be giving me readings that are consistently parallel with the specific sensitivities of the film, no? I figured this would allow me to establish a baseline ASA/ISO.

[Tin Can]

I understand what you are saying. The thing is that the filter I chose is cyan (discovered it as a "minus-red" filter), which should be blocking the majority of the red light coming through to the spot meter. Regardless of my source of light, the meter ought to be giving me readings that are consistently parallel with the specific sensitivities of the film, no? I figured this would allow me to establish a baseline ASA/ISO.

I cannot advise on your scenario.

Why not try it both ways? This stuff is cheap. I cut to 4x5 and run through a bit finding my way through the smoke.

[premortho]

That's an interesting statement. I thought every photographer knew ortho films speed changes with sun angle and latitude. Yes, the film is faster at the 50th latitude then at the 45th latitude. Sun angle is directly connected with the amount of red in the light, ortho film is insensitive to red, so the redder the light, the slower the film at that time.
I think most now believe ISO on this film changes by angle of Sun. I see people choosing 50, 80, 100. I shoot it 'now' at 50 under studio strobes. Which is working for me in studio.

But most advice here on ASA is find your personal EI.

[senderoaburrido]

How would I go about establishing a fixed number by experimentation? Do I set different ISO's on my meter, then take pictures, and compare the results against my little gray card by eye?

[Corran]

EI calibration is a big topic, and it depends on how much you want to delve into the Zone System. Here's a good place to start on the LFP site:

http://www.largeformatphotography.info/articles/conrad-meter-cal.pdf

I highly suggest reading Ansel Adams' "The Negative" back-to-front as well. But the extremely watered-down version is yes, set a few different ISOs on your meter (a.k.a., bracket) on the same photo and find out what EI works best for your setup.

[Michael E]

But the extremely watered-down version is yes, set a few different ISOs on your meter (a.k.a., bracket) on the same photo and find out what EI works best for your setup.

"Expose for the shadows, develop for the highlights" is the rule to remember when judging your test exposures.

[j.e.simmons]

Or expose for the mid-tones, develop for the shadows and agitate for the highlights - see Minor White.

Perhaps this sun angle thing is why I don't find BTZS to be accurate for x-ray film. My cold light probably puts out more blue light in testing while the sunlight here has more red.

[senderoaburrido]

My cold light probably puts out more blue light in testing while the sunlight here has more red.

It's that influence that I'm trying to eliminate by leaving the minus-red filter on my spot meter. No more red-variance corrupting the readings and making all this guesswork necessary.

[SergeiR]

"Expose for the shadows, develop for the highlights" is the rule to remember when judging your test exposures.

no its not. Its only when you follow certain school.

[SergeiR]

Sorry, got dragged away by work things.. :)

--

Question of correct exposure is vast and outside of the scope of Xray imho.

In general Randy is totally right. Experimentation is key to get things to your liking. Not to someone else's liking. To yours. Xray is fairly forgiving and cheap, so why not just go and play with it.

[premortho]

I don't know what certain school that would be. But for the Ortho film school (X-ray film is one) it is a very good process to start with. With Pan film, it is much more difficult to do.
no its not. Its only when you follow certain school.

[Peter De Smidt]

One example would be Mortensen's "Expose for the highlights and develop for the shadows" method.

[SergeiR]

I don't know what certain school that would be. But for the Ortho film school (X-ray film is one) it is a very good process to start with. With Pan film, it is much more difficult to do.

Let us be like Chinese proverb "may thousand flowers bloom, may thousand schools prosper".

I for one never expose for shadows.

People can cook bacon in great many ways. And it will be still tasty in most of them.

[SergeiR]

One example would be Mortensen's "Expose for the highlights and develop for the shadows" method.

yup. thats one other way to do it. Except for occasions of great outdoor contrast where he caves in (its in his "Outdoor portraiture") ;)

Other way is to figure out midtone placement & etc.

I honestly think that artistic vision is more important than technical perfection. Never should technical aspect be driving solution. After that it just becomes more of common sense derivative..

Anyway.. Too much talking. Too technical.

8x10, Kodak CSG, R09 (aging) 1:100, 12 minutes rotary, 360mm Heliar @ f5.6, light metered at f11 (-2 stops down to compensate for bellows extension, which i sometime miscalculate)

https://farm2.staticflickr.com/1683/25799411056_ac05cf8d1b_c.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/FiNJ51)Lana (https://flic.kr/p/FiNJ51) by Sergei Rodionov (https://www.flickr.com/photos/sergeistudio/), on Flickr

[Peter De Smidt]

Outstanding, Sergei! (and Lana, of course!)

[mdarnton]

Lana is looking great. Nice to see!

[SergeiR]

Thanks, guys. She wanted new headshot, to sort of document progress on hair growing :)

[Tin Can]

Yes and very nice hair. We all love Lana. You too Sergei!


Thanks, guys. She wanted new headshot, to sort of document progress on hair growing :)

[Alan9940]

Hey SergeiR,

If you don't mind my asking... What temp are you processing at with R09 at 1:100 for 12 mins? I've always sat in awe of the smooth tonal range you're ability to pull out of x-ray film. In all my use of Ektascan, I've not even come close to your results. Really thinking about giving the Kodak CSG film a go now. Lovely portrait!!

Thanks!

[SergeiR]

Hey SergeiR,

If you don't mind my asking... What temp are you processing at with R09 at 1:100 for 12 mins? I've always sat in awe of the smooth tonal range you're ability to pull out of x-ray film. In all my use of Ektascan, I've not even come close to your results. Really thinking about giving the Kodak CSG film a go now. Lovely portrait!!

Thanks!

Thank you.

No secrets about it - its just tap water, around room temp, which for Dallas is about 70 degrees on typical day.

(Dallas is awesome like that, most of time you can do C41 or E6 processing without any true water baths :))

I use two rotary processors - Jobo CPE on film setting (1 i think it is) or Unicolor (single setting) that is a bit faster. I love Unicolor for being water-less and taking less space, but its really annoying trying to catch tank all the time, as it keeps trying to run off the processor ( i am sure i can hack something for it, but oh well)

[DeKlari]

Kodak BioMax XAR Film, I shot as ISO 35, (f4.5, 1/15s) then I ran it through a tray of X-ray film T2 developer (diluted 3 times) for just one minutes. The film was transferred to the water tray and after fix for 5 min. After fixation film was washed for 10-15 minutes in running water.
Carl Zeiss 21cm f4.5 210mm Tessar, Improved Seneca View Camera (1906), 5x7 https://www.flickr.com/photos/126027782@N03/24651776166/in/album-72157646002305868/
148481

[mdarnton]

I have a couple of questions for those who might have actually done their fixing/washing tests homework:

First question: I notice that it takes less than 10 seconds for xray film to clear in the fix. Given the traditional advice to fix for twice the clearing time, does this mean that 20 seconds in the fix is adequate? Has anyone done any chemical tests to confirm anything about this?

Next question: does the quick fixing imply that the film needs less wash time? Has anyone done any tests to determine the proper washing time for xray film, based on the usual chemical tests?

Finally: what's different about xray film that it fixes so quickly? It appears, by the density, that it might have more, not less silver than conventional films, so it would seem that the opposite might happen: slower fixing.

Thanks for any answers.....

[Tin Can]

Might depend on fixer. I also notice very fast clear times with TF-5 and it seems to last a very long time.

[plaubel]

Michael, there is a fix from Tetenal called Super Fix plus; it fixes normal film in 20 to 30 seconds, too, but Tetenal says 2 or 3 minutes.

Fixing a film until he is clear means, that the not exposed bromsilver is removed, and this can happen fast.
But this process brings new chemical connections; they must be removed, too, so I believe in Tetenal's 2 (or 3, I'm not sure) minutes.

Otherwise I have found, that old thin layer film fixes fast, too, but fixing more than 5 minutes destroyed the image in my negatives.

Ritchie

[mdarnton]

That's interesting. I've been fixing for about two minutes, in spite of the clearing time. Maybe I should give a bit more.

Also, I was wondering if it would wash faster, both since it clears quickly, and also is in the fix less time. Not that this matters, because I wash with changes and over-wash even by that plan, since it's so easy.

[Fr. Mark]

It was made for use in automatic processors which zip along, Inthink a friend said either 2 or 4 minutes insert to developed, fixed, dried. But this is hearsay.

[ScottPhotoCo]

Has anyone tried processing Ektascan in XTOL? If so, what was your process and how well did it work for you?

[koraks]

I think the quick fixing times are because the emulsion swells very readily, unlike the somewhat harder emulsions on regular films. Also, I think the emulsion is one layer (per side) only and the physical structure of the grains may have something to do with it as well. Either way, since the emulsiom absorbs fluids so readily, I suspect that washing times don't need to be very long either. I usually fix for one to two minutes, then rinse the film thoroughly under a ranking tap and finally let it soak for 5 to 10 minutes in water with a bit of photoflo. I doubt the longevity of my negatives, but it doesn't worry me too much, to be honest.

[Jim Noel]

That's interesting. I've been fixing for about two minutes, in spite of the clearing time. Maybe I should give a bit more.

Also, I was wondering if it would wash faster, both since it clears quickly, and also is in the fix less time. Not that this matters, because I wash with changes and over-wash even by that plan, since it's so easy.

You can't really wash "faster". Washing is a soaking out process, so speeding up the water flow has little if any effect.

[Vaughn]

...Otherwise I have found, that old thin layer film fixes fast, too, but fixing more than 5 minutes destroyed the image in my negatives. Ritchie

I have a box of 14x17 Agfa X-ray (old and fogged) that I fix-out to use as support material for making carbon tissue. Perhaps I am over-fixing it, as the emulsion on both sides comes off under any pressure. Is that what you mean by your image being destroyed?

mdarnton: Some photo material, and depending on how they are processed, do wash faster than others. But I think you would see the greatest effect of that with fiber base photo paper, with the paper base soaking up fixer. Since the film base does not soak up any chemicals, wash times are much shorter - with unhardened gelatin emulsions probably washing a little faster than hardened emulsions, but as you said, probably not significant in the normal over-washing we tend to do.

[plaubel]

QUOTE=Vaughn;1318443]I have a box of 14x17 Agfa X-ray (old and fogged) that I fix-out to use as support material for making carbon tissue. Perhaps I am over-fixing it, as the emulsion on both sides comes off under any pressure. Is that what you mean by your image being destroyed?
[/QUOTE]

No, I meant a kind of bleaching - if I remember right, it has been long ago.
But I can remember the not desired results, and the following better results after fixing short.
A friend of me gave me the tip of shortening the fixing time depending on the thin layer film.

[Neil Purling]

Is there anywhere one can buy X-ray film in the UK? Either cut down to 4x5 or in original boxes.
It is just that I do not know if there is a place locally with a darkroom and a guillotine so I can cut the film down myself.

[mdarnton]

You don't need a "darkroom"; you need a dark room. I use my laundry room, with a black t-shirt over the window, at night, and a $4 LED red light for a safelight. You will save the cost of a cheap rotary cutter with your first box of film.

[barnacle]

I have been looking around but the best bet looks like getting it from the states... for some reason the UK suppliers are remarkably discreet about how much they charge but one where I did find a price was asking for over two hundred quid a box, which rather defeats the point of the exercise.

Neil

[plaubel]

Neil,
depending on size of film, I can give a german source, but here we use the metric sizes.
And concerning darkroom - why not have a bit fun there while cutting film:-)

Ritchie

[barnacle]

Hi Plaubel,

Being lazy, I'm looking at the Agfa Green 8x10 (20x25cm) which I'll have to cut down to my 4x5 slides. US prices on a well-known auction site are around thirty dollars for a box of a hundred, but about the same for postage.

Seems a bit silly to have to get it from the States when it starts a lot nearer home.

Neil

edit: perhaps FotoImpex are missing a trick here...

[mdarnton]

Yes, I went and checked Ebay UK earlier today, and all of the vendors of xray film were American! That's strange, isn't it?

[plaubel]

Sorry, Neil Barnacle, I was talking to Neil Purling; my mistake.
Neil P. asked for buying in UK, and this is just a jump from germany...

Barnacle Neil, Impex ,Maco and other photo-stuff dealers do not sell Xray in germany.

No, that isn't the whole truth : Hans Mahn CoKG has sold the Xray film worldwide, but almost to countries like India, Afrika and so on.
If they do it today? I don't know. Of course not in small demands, and not to private persons.
But if Ilford and others don't offer film anymore, you can expect that Maco will sell xray as a fantastic photographic film :-)

I always have to buy from medical-stuff dealers, and a lot of them are not willing to sale at private persons. A few are willing...

Ritchie

[Jim Noel]

In the US X-ray film is usually bought from medical sources, not photographic suppliers.

[barnacle]

Ritchie, no worries - both Neil P and I are in the UK, so the same issues apply to both of us. I mentioned Impex because I'm fairly regularly in Berlin (and planning on retiring near there, in the next few years) and so have access.

There are medical suppliers in the UK but as I mentioned, the prices are not cheap. My whole intent for x-ray is experimentation, so £0.10 a sheet of 5x4 (cut down from 10x8) makes it worth the wait from the States, I think. I just grudge paying as much for the postage as the film, even though the film is cheap!

Neil

[plaubel]

[QUOTE=barnacle;1319292 I'm fairly regularly in Berlin (and planning on retiring near there, in the next few years) and so have access.

l[/QUOTE]

Then you could use one of the german medical sources.
Do you have a german base/adress for shipping reasons?

[barnacle]

Yes, in Berlin.

Neil

[plaubel]

http://www.bema-kg.de/Fuji-Super-HR-E30-13x18-cm-100-Bl
You can try this.

In late spring some LF-people will meet again at my house, nearby Berlin, so if you are interested?

Ritchie

[barnacle]

Thanks Ritchie; a good link there in an amazing number of sizes - but not 20x25cm for some reason. The 12x30 would give three 12x10 sheets with no wastage, even cheaper.

Though I am tempted by the possibilities of 30x90cm for some very large format landscapes... if only I had a lens with a meter coverage! (I wonder about a pinhole...)

Can't commit a date at the moment for a meeting, but please keep me informed; I'd love to meet. Life is a bit complicated at present.

Neil

[Neil Purling]

Is there anybody in the UK who cuts down X-ray film to 4x5? I am interested in trying some, but no not have a darkroom to do the trimming.
If anyone can answer please send me a Private Message.

[Thodoris Tzalavras]

After quite a bit of prep work, we're almost ready for the expansion of our little vineyard.

I shot this picture a couple of days ago.
The sun was playing hide and seek with the clouds.
Thankfully, just before it went down behind the hills in the west, the clouds opened for a few minutes, and allowed me enough time to make a couple exposures.
I attempted to make this picture the day before, but the clouds just didn't budge.

This is my first successful exposure on a new (to me) x-ray film that I'm trying out.
It's the Agfa HDR. A green sensitive, single sided, mammography film, with anti-halation layer.

18x24cm camera
Sironar-N 210mm
Agfa HDR (x-ray film) at 12asa.
Tray developed by inspection in Ilford MG 1+100 at 22C for 20min (semistand).
Scan from negative, finished in PS.

https://farm2.staticflickr.com/1664/25963463470_de036d16f6_b.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/Fyix8U)[/url][url=https://www.flickr.com/photos/tzalavras/] (https://flic.kr/p/Fyix8U)

[koraks]

Excellent Thodoris. May I ask where you sourced this film? I've looked before but haven't located a convenient channel yet.

[Thodoris Tzalavras]

Excellent Thodoris. May I ask where you sourced this film? I've looked before but haven't located a convenient channel yet.

I found a couple of expired boxes at my local Agfa distributor. They stopped carrying it after their clients switched to digital a few years back. They still carry the CPG+ however, which is the film I've been using for years.
I'm still in testing mode, so I haven't make my mind up yet.
The first impressions are very positive though.

[koraks]

It looks great. Does it have an anti halation backing? I kind of miss that on my double sided film. The green sensitive stuff isn't too bad, but the blue sensitive film suffers very badly from highlight halation.

[Thodoris Tzalavras]

It looks great. Does it have an anti halation backing? ...

Thank you.
And I can confirm that it has indeed an anti halation backing.

[Fr. Mark]

Thodoris, BTW that photo looks much better on my laptop than my phone! I wonder if the Agfa is available in the US. Not that I need yet another photo project!

[Thodoris Tzalavras]

Thanks Mark.
I could offer to send you a few sheets.
18x24cm is a weird format though. It's very wasteful to cut down to 4x5" or other "regular" sizes.
That's why I went out and built a whole system around it.

[Fr. Mark]

Thodoris, thanks but no thanks. If I did my math right that's approximately 7 and 5/64ths by 9 and 7/16ths. I don't think that's going to fit in an 8x10 unless you use tape. You are right, that's an odd one on this side of the atlantic anyway. sort of close to whole plate, sort of close to 8x10, but I've about a lifetime of projects as it is. The shipping cost from cyprus is silly. If I can't get ektascan or whatever I will look into a US source.

[Jim Noel]

Thodoris, thanks but no thanks. If I did my math right that's approximately 7 and 5/64ths by 9 and 7/16ths. I don't think that's going to fit in an 8x10 unless you use tape. You are right, that's an odd one on this side of the atlantic anyway. sort of close to whole plate, sort of close to 8x10, but I've about a lifetime of projects as it is. The shipping cost from cyprus is silly. If I can't get ektascan or whatever I will look into a US source.
I searched yesterday for the Agfa film - it is not available unless you find some NOS at some distributors. Ektascan works beautifully and is available from ZZ Medical.

[Fr. Mark]

I am using Ektascan B/RA from ZZ Medical. After a bit of a hiatus, recently I've been through 11 5x7's cut from 8x10. I like it and when everything works I'm impressed with it. The everything is me not the film.

That said, Has anyone else seen pinholes in the emulsion? There are sometimes what seem like blank spots. Tiny, not visible to naked eye unless maybe in a densely developed area.

The interest in the Agfa is mainly to have a different source just in case. Single sided with anti halation is not a common thing with X-ray films.

[scheinfluger_77]

Breathtaking! I'm speechless.

Speaking of non-standard dilutions for Rodinal. I came across some notes from when I was a photography student that are over 15 years old. My professor taught us that Rodinal 1:100 was multi-purpose, and 1:31 was high-acutance. Curious where he got the dilution 1:31. 1:25, 1:50, and 1:100, I've noticed, are the most popular. (Not meaning to get off topic too much here).

Sergei's work is always breath-taking... And the photos are good too.

[senderoaburrido]

Is Carestream EB/RA UV sensitive? I've been looking at picking up a pair of filters (one for UV, one to block IR) for UV photography. I like shooting X-ray for the cost. It would be convenient if I could continue to do so for UV photography.

I found this:http://spectrumxray.com/sites/default/files/pdfs/4-4_Ektascan-B.pdf

The graph starts awfully high at 400nm, and I'm thinking it might be sensitive to near UV. Can't be sure, as the graph only starts at 400nm. Would it be weird to email Kodak and ask? Is this film still produced by them, or on license by someone else?

[koraks]

I'd say it is uv sensitive, just like most films.

[Andrew O'Neill]

That said, Has anyone else seen pinholes in the emulsion?

Yes, I have noticed this when I scanned a negative in. Pretty ugly.

[scheinfluger_77]

I take the wet negative from the Jobo Expert drum, and place the keeper side of the negative on a glass plate. No tape is needed. (I have a 1/4" thick 2ft x 2ft piece of glass in my darkroom sink. The bottom rests in the sink, and the top rests against the wall. I normally use it for viewing wet prints.) I have a hose of tempered water running. Dip a cotton towel, brush ... in Clorox diluted 1:1. Dab on the negative in the middle of the negative and swirl a bit. Run a stream of water from the hose over the negative. Dip brush in some more bleach. Repeat, working out to the edges. It really isn't that hard. Practice on a spare negative. I only needed one after listening to Corran's advice.

Wow! 203 pages in and finally someone makes it clear, thanks Peter.

In case anyone is curious this post is from July of 2013 and I'm still not quite half way through. I'm sorry now I didn't start summarizing all the tips from the start, would have made a great reference. Learning a lot from this thread.

[Fr. Mark]

Maybe tomorrow I can put my summary file where it can be seen. It's not perfect, but might help. It's too long to post.

[Fr. Mark]

I was hoping pinholes in my Ektascan B/RA was just my batch. I'm still fairly new at all this, I take it pinholes are not a common problem with other X-Ray films or Ilford's or Kodak's usual picture taking films? Or maybe Andrew and I both got bad samples? I have 17 sheets of 8x10 left and about 30 5x7's I cut then I'm out but that could last me a long time. I'd started to think about ordering more.

[SergeiR]

https://farm9.staticflickr.com/8662/15945954073_15f13e4c36_c.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/qi6bAD)Secret life of potatoes (https://flic.kr/p/qi6bAD) by Sergei Rodionov (https://www.flickr.com/photos/sergeistudio/), on Flickr


So here is short summary on Xray choice/shooting/development from me. Just because.

http://sergeirodionov.com/x-ray-film-photography

[SergeiR]

I was hoping pinholes in my Ektascan B/RA was just my batch. I'm still fairly new at all this, I take it pinholes are not a common problem with other X-Ray films or Ilford's or Kodak's usual picture taking films?

Foma / Arista are extemely prone to it. Apparently its something about chemistry/water used.

[Neil Purling]

Another Forum member just might get some 8x10 Agfa green sensitive and cut it down to 4x5 & I can get some that way.
That is not certain and so I have looked at other options.
Foma list a 10x12cm size in their range for Non-Destructive Testing. I am hoping that would fit a 4x5 holder, although the long axis is 1/4" shorter than 5".
I am seeing If Foma or their re-sellers will deal with a private person & I can get a reasonable amount of film. I have no idea if the stuff is sold in boxes of 100 sheets or a insane amount.

[Jim Noel]

I was hoping pinholes in my Ektascan B/RA was just my batch. I'm still fairly new at all this, I take it pinholes are not a common problem with other X-Ray films or Ilford's or Kodak's usual picture taking films? Or maybe Andrew and I both got bad samples? I have 17 sheets of 8x10 left and about 30 5x7's I cut then I'm out but that could last me a long time. I'd started to think about ordering more.

I am well into my second 100 box of Ektascan and have never had a pinhole. I am careful about temperature tolerance through my processing, including final wash. I do not use a hardening fixer.

[Alan9940]

SergeiR,

Thanks for posting your process/technique with x-ray film...very helpful.

[MAubrey]

https://farm9.staticflickr.com/8662/15945954073_15f13e4c36_c.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/qi6bAD)Secret life of potatoes (https://flic.kr/p/qi6bAD) by Sergei Rodionov (https://www.flickr.com/photos/sergeistudio/), on Flickr


So here is short summary on Xray choice/shooting/development from me. Just because.

http://sergeirodionov.com/x-ray-film-photography

I've added your blog to my feedly reader. Looking forward to more of your writing and photographs!

[barnacle]

Very helpful, Sergei, thanks.

Annoyingly I just discovered the German company I was hoping to use doesn't ship to the UK; bah. There's a dearth of x-ray film from the usual US auction suppliers, still searching.

Neil

[Tin Can]

Are users noticing diminished X-Ray supplies?



Very helpful, Sergei, thanks.

Annoyingly I just discovered the German company I was hoping to use doesn't ship to the UK; bah. There's a dearth of x-ray film from the usual US auction suppliers, still searching.

Neil

[SergeiR]

Thanks for reminder, Randy. Ordered 3 boxes, as i am on my pre-last one ;)

[Neil Purling]

I just ordered some dental stuff off ebay. I am not going to give the number, in case that's taboo.
The stuff is in yellow & purple boxes. The trademark appears to be a red elephant on a white circle.
As the boxes are written in Chinese script I have no idea about the speed of the stuff.
I was gonna have some fun with this, maybe in a pinhole camera.

[Neil Purling]

I mentioned the Non-Destructive Testing X-ray film from Foma, specifically Indux R8 in 10x12cm.
Foma said that the stuff is to order. A minimum order of 63 boxes if they have a master roll in stock, or 213 if they have to coat a roll for you.
I don't think that is going to happen!

[barnacle]

I've just ordered a box of 12.7x30.5 Typon DV-G from Bema, for delivery in Berlin. I'll pick it up in a month or so, the next time I get over there.

Conveniently 12.7x30.5cm is 5x12 inches, so I hope to guillotine three 4x5 from each sheet with no wastage. At 38 Euros for potentially 300 sheets, the price is certainly right... I'll be experimenting with Neil on this batch.

Neil (the one and only original Neil, accept no substitutes!)

[Andrew O'Neill]

Are users noticing diminished X-Ray supplies?

An article from three years ago...

http://www.qmed.com/news/demand-x-ray-film-surges-china

[Andrew O'Neill]

So I suppose when all those hospitals in China go digital, that could spell the end of x-ray film. I would stock up on it while you still can.

[Jody_S]

So I suppose when all those hospitals in China go digital, that could spell the end of x-ray film. I would stock up on it while you still can.

I think half the world is still using film x-rays, since the machines and film are dirt-cheap and readily available as those who can afford it go digital. I expect we have another 20 years to buy new film, though I will certainly stock up if I find more deals at $25/box.

[senderoaburrido]

Has anyone tried taking UV or IR photographs with the x-ray film? I know that x-rays are shorter in wavelength than visible light, so I figured it was probably sensitive to UV. I'm curious if it is to IR. The manufacturer's curve for B/R single side emulsion doesn't show its sensitivity beyond the normal range.

[Tin Can]

Not so fast, a little Googling reveals more. See also the end of the post.

We are discussing 3 years ago in China. China moves fast. This article below says Digital overtook Film in China in 2006. Furthermore they recycle negatives!

'When he came across an advert from a man seeking negatives, he assumed he had found a rival buyer. Instead, he discovered, Xiao Ma worked in the recycling trade and collected X-rays, negatives and CDs so he could drop them into a pool of acid and sell the resulting silver nitrate to chemists.'

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/jan/04/negative-collection-camera-film-china

I also thought the Chinese X-Ray boom for Carestream must be old. The first quoted article was not complete, the last essential quote says what will happen, soon. "But Carestream’s film bonanza may be short-lived. Analog x-ray machines have a life of only five to seven years. By the time China’s devices reach the end of their lives, many Chinese clinics will likely be able to afford to retrofit their analog machines with digital scanners or buy digital systems at the cheaper end of the scale. Luckily for Carestream, the company makes those types of devices too."

http://qz.com/150796/all-of-a-sudden-the-us-is-sending-vast-amounts-of-analog-film-to-china/

[Jim Noel]

X-ray film is no more sensitive to the x-ray or UV spectrums than any other film. There are very good explanations of how X-ray film works in this thread.

[koraks]

Has anyone tried taking UV or IR photographs with the x-ray film?
No, but you can safely assume that the film will work fine with UV and not at all with IR.

[Neil Purling]

Has anyone made images on D, E or F speed dental film?
I know it is only 30x40mm, but I wondered what the effective speed was.
I am aware of the differences between the speed ratings: F being 50% faster than D and 25% faster than E.

[Roger Cole]

Foma / Arista are extemely prone to it. Apparently its something about chemistry/water used.

Not really. The emulsion is very soft when it's wet but doesn't produce pinholes that I've ever seen. Just handle with due care until it dries. Once dry it's just like any other film. I do use the normal amount of hardener in my rapid fix, however. I know many people use non-hardening fix for both film and paper.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk and 100% recycled electrons - because I care.

[plaubel]

I've just ordered a box of 12.7x30.5 Typon DV-G from Bema, for delivery in Berlin. I'll pick it up in a month or so, the next time I get over there.



I have in use the Typon Tyco 30x40 and 13x18 cm. It works fine.
It is of course an Agfa belgium production.
Typon cuts and configs the film in Sitzerland, I was told.

Speaking with Typon, they told me that they will quit the production of their blue sensitive film this or next year.
But they continue with green sensitive film..

Ritchie

[senderoaburrido]

...not at all with IR.

Why would this be?

[koraks]

Why would this be?
It's only sensitive to blue or blue and green light, it is virtually insensitive to red, and IR has an even longer wavelength. Hence, IR sensitivity will be at best equal to sensitivity to red light (i.e. nearly not at all) and likely even less.

[SergeiR]

Not really. The emulsion is very soft when it's wet but doesn't produce pinholes that I've ever seen. Just handle with due care until it dries. Once dry it's just like any other film. I do use the normal amount of hardener in my rapid fix, however. I know many people use non-hardening fix for both film and paper..

eh?

[barnacle]

I have in use the Typon Tyco 30x40 and 13x18 cm. It works fine.
It is of course an Agfa belgium production.
Typon cuts and configs the film in Sitzerland, I was told.

Speaking with Typon, they told me that they will quit the production of their blue sensitive film this or next year.
But they continue with green sensitive film..

Ritchie

Thanks Ritchie. It was not only cheapest in the list but it came in a handy size, and having no previous experience... seemed like a good bet.

One thing - is it double sided, and if so, what do you do about it? I have read of stripping one side, but have no great idea about what this entails.

Neil

[seezee]

Thanks Ritchie. It was not only cheapest in the list but it came in a handy size, and having no previous experience... seemed like a good bet.

One thing - is it double sided, and if so, what do you do about it? I have read of stripping one side, but have no great idea about what this entails.

Neil

See this post (http://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/showthread.php?48099-Use-of-X-ray-film-technical-discussion-with-example-images&p=1157381&viewfull=1#post1157381) in the current thread.

[Neil Purling]

Barnacle: I wouldn't worry about stripping until we have developing technique worked out and have negatives that have a normal contrast you would see in a conventional camera film. I am going to see how the scanned X-ray film looks up against some conventional film and proceed from there.

[Thodoris Tzalavras]

Does anyone have personal experience with long term storage of (unexposed) x-ray film in the freezer?


Also, that's a good summation Sergei:




So here is short summary on Xray choice/shooting/development from me. Just because.

http://sergeirodionov.com/x-ray-film-photography

[plaubel]

One thing - is it double sided, and if so, what do you do about it?

I don't know the DVG, and Typon doesn't say if doublesided or not in their data sheet, but I believe in double side, which not means a lot.

http://www.typon-roentgen.de/fileadmin/user_upload/roentgen-bender.de/de/typon/Produkte/DV-G_ORTH.pdf

I don't like nor need to strip my film, except developing 30x40cm in rotation ( unfortunately no development at the backside).
So, for 30x40cm I switched to tray dev.

13x18cm works fine in rotation, but this depends on my/your tubes; I use an old Photo Union machine.

Ritchie

[Andrew O'Neill]

I have been using X-ray film for close to 10 years, single and double-sided (I prefer double-sided green). I have never had problems developing in flat-bottomed trays with Pyrocat-HD or Rodinal. My development times are 6 to 10 minutes, depending on contrast. I've done rotary, as well as hangers. Very little developer is required for trays. I also did extensive testing stripping double-sided (years ago) and I do not recommend it. The unstripped film looks very nice contact printed as is. This film is also an excellent candidate for carbon transfer printing.

[Roger Cole]

eh?

"I've never had a problem with pinholes on Foma. It is, however, easy to scratch when it's wet of you don't handle it carefully."


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk and 100% recycled electrons - because I care.

[senderoaburrido]

I have been using X-ray film for close to 10 years, single and double-sided (I prefer double-sided green). I have never had problems developing in flat-bottomed trays with Pyrocat-HD or Rodinal. My development times are 6 to 10 minutes, depending on contrast. I've done rotary, as well as hangers. Very little developer is required for trays. I also did extensive testing stripping double-sided (years ago) and I do not recommend it. The unstripped film looks very nice contact printed as is. This film is also an excellent candidate for carbon transfer printing.

Just chiming in here about my own experience. I was always getting crazy amounts of scratches on my negatives during tray development, maybe due to a bit too much agitation. Developing using the taco method, while maybe less efficient chemical wise, was much more successful. The lack of scratches and holes in my emulsion were testament to it.

I'm actually waiting for a jobo 2509n in the mail. We'll see if that provides even development sans opportunity for scratching.

[seezee]

One thing - is it double sided, and if so, what do you do about it?
Unless it is one of the special purpose x-ray films, e.g., meant for mammography (https://www.zzmedical.com/analog-x-ray-supplies/x-ray-film/fuji-x-ray-film/fuji-um-ma-mammography-x-ray-film.html), meant for photography of CRTs (https://www.zzmedical.com/8x10-in-carestream-kodak-ektascan-b-ra-single-emulsion-video-film.html), it's safe to assume it is double-sided.

[SergeiR]

Does anyone have personal experience with long term storage of (unexposed) x-ray film in the freezer?

Also, that's a good summation Sergei:


1) thanks :)

2) Well.. as far as storage - I have X-ray that was sitting in cupboard in garage (TX, so its bloody hot in summer, no AC in garage) and it works fine in 2 years time (I been moving around and 3 of boxes with film just never made it into colder rooms, along with some of 4x5 film till last autumn). 2 years is not 10, but.. :)

[Andrew O'Neill]

Just chiming in here about my own experience. I was always getting crazy amounts of scratches on my negatives during tray development, maybe due to a bit too much agitation. Developing using the taco method, while maybe less efficient chemical wise, was much more successful. The lack of scratches and holes in my emulsion were testament to it.

I'm actually waiting for a jobo 2509n in the mail. We'll see if that provides even development sans opportunity for scratching.

The key is gentle agitation.

[Thodoris Tzalavras]

Well.. as far as storage - I have X-ray that was sitting in cupboard in garage (TX, so its bloody hot in summer, no AC in garage) and it works fine in 2 years time (I been moving around and 3 of boxes with film just never made it into colder rooms, along with some of 4x5 film till last autumn). 2 years is not 10, but.. :)

Sergei, it has happened to me too. To forget a half-full box of x-ray film in a drawer in the darkroom for a couple of years.
I didn't run any comparison tests with fresh film to see how much it was affected (fogged etc), but it definitely worked, in terms of producing useable negatives.

But, I was thinking more in terms of stocking up.
After reading Randy Moe's post about China going digital, I thought of investigating the possibility of putting a dozen (or two) boxes in the freezer for when "winter" comes.

[Tin Can]

Sergei, it has happened to me too. To forget a half-full box of x-ray film in a drawer in the darkroom for a couple of years.
I didn't run any comparison tests with fresh film to see how much it was affected (fogged etc), but it definitely worked, in terms of producing useable negatives.

But, I was thinking more in terms of stocking up.
After reading Randy Moe's post about China going digital, I thought of investigating the possibility of putting a dozen (or two) boxes in the freezer for when "winter" comes.

I don't think anybody knows how long X-Ray film lasts, frozen or not.

One very good reason is liability. Medical users would be very stupid to store and use outdated X-Ray film. What if the old film didn't show medical conditions? Malpractice. Lawsuit!

The second is, how long have 'normal' photographers used X-Ray? Not that long it seems, as this thread is only 7 years old.

Three, my boxes of X-Ray, and I may have too much, say store at 50-75 F =10-25 C at 30-50 RH. Notice the range is well above freezing.

The only film I have frozen is old sealed color film I got from a freezer and all the opened boxes of that film were destroyed, perhaps by freezer thawing, freezer burn or power outages.

I am not a believer in freezing film, but many are.

And don't freeze Fujiroid, that is known. I have a quantity of 8X10 Polaroid with dried pouches...

Good luck.

[Roger Cole]

At least one person has tried freezing Fuji instant and reported no problems at all as long as it was stored horizontally when frozen. The article is on the net somewhere. It was linked in one of the APUG threads about the discontinuation.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk and 100% recycled electrons - because I care.

[Tin Can]

At least one person has tried freezing Fuji instant and reported no problems at all as long as it was stored horizontally when frozen. The article is on the net somewhere. It was linked in one of the APUG threads about the discontinuation.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk and 100% recycled electrons - because I care.

I have Fuji FP series that was frozen, by the Pro that gave it to me. It has been OK. But they don't recommend it. The frozen Polaroid from the same donor is ruined garbage.

The big difference I see is packaging. Fuji seals in metallic foil and Polaroid a sealed paper.

But this thread is about X-Ray and Fujiroid is an entirely different thing.

[Thodoris Tzalavras]

Moonrise Over Newly Planted Vineyard

I'm still in testing mode with the Agfa HDR film.
But I can only take all the mind-numbing curve-plotting up to a point.
Real life pictures is all that matters, so I just couldn't resist trying out a night exposure.

Speed Graphic with Optar 135 at f8
80min exposure
Agfa HDR mammography film
Tray developed by inspection in Ilford MG 1+100 at 22C for 20min (semi-stand).
Scan from negative, finished in PS.

https://farm2.staticflickr.com/1668/26032671174_b2461ab02d_b.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/FEqfbb)[/url][url=https://www.flickr.com/photos/tzalavras/] (https://flic.kr/p/FEqfbb)

[Tin Can]

I think that's a first like that.

Well done!

[Wayne]

150020

Posted this in the pinhole thread but since its the first x-ray image I'm even remotely happy with I'll post it here too. If it turns out half as printable as it looks here, it'll be my first decent print from x-ray film but I don't hold my breath.

Fuji 8x10 HR-T X-ray film, f250 @ 8 minutes in Ansco Universal 8x10, with #11 green and #8 yellow filter (why? why not) Rodinal 1:150 7 minutes in tray with only one or three glaring scratches (I put a blank fixed sheet under it and got a lot fewer scratches). Agitated 20 seconds then 1x/minute. Unadulterated straight scan, which I apparently didn't line up to the scanner's liking so one long edge is missing and I'm too lazy to do it over.

[Thodoris Tzalavras]

I think that's a first like that.

Well done!

Thanks Randy!

And another one:

The Eighth Palm Tree

Yesterday was Worldwide Pinhole Photography Day (WPPD).
This was my contribution.

10sec exposure on a very windy Sunday afternoon
18x24cm homemade camera
150mm focal length
0.5mm pinhole
Agfa CP G+ (x-ray film) at 100asa
Tray developed by inspection in Ilford MG 1+100 at 22C for 7min
Scan from negative, finished in PS

https://farm2.staticflickr.com/1500/26642229875_698d261199_b.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/GAhoJX)[/url][url=https://www.flickr.com/photos/tzalavras/] (https://flic.kr/p/GAhoJX)

[Neil Purling]

The first of my X-ray film has arrived... As you can see it was the box of dental films. I only ordered it on the 19th April & it came from China a week later!
Can anyone read the script on the box? Just in case there is any information I ought to know...
I don't know who the maker is for certain either.

[barnacle]

"Only works on elephants." :p

Neil

[Neil Purling]

If it were elephant size sheets the box would provide a thousand sheets of 4x5.
Seriously: Does anyone know Cantonese, or whatever the script is?
If the packet colours do not follow international standards to denote the speed band I have to look at the packaging.

[Neil Purling]

I sacrificed one piece. The packet (& film) are impressed with a pimple mark in one corner, which shows which side should face the tube.
You wouldn't know which side the emulsion was from the surface appearance.

[Neil Purling]

Is dental X-ray film normally double-sided? That is what it looks like. The pocket had no lead foil inside. The film was enclosed in a fold of black paper.
The emulsion/s, if there are coatings either side are thin enough to see through. You can see light through the film.

[Martin Dake]

I can't read Chinese although I work with a team in China who could probably translate it.
In the mean time I cheated and used my phone to translate from the picture.
The first lines basically says something about medical use X-ray standard dental film and the bottom line is the name of the manufacturer which is...
Tianjin Kang Chinese Health Materials Ltd

Good luck

[Kevin Harding]

I can't read Chinese although I work with a team in China who could probably translate it.
In the mean time I cheated and used my phone to translate from the picture.
The first lines basically says something about medical use X-ray standard dental film and the bottom line is the name of the manufacturer which is...
Tianjin Kang Chinese Health Materials Ltd

Good luck

I was going to reply and say exactly this. Top line just says Dental X-Ray Film and the bottom line is the company of manufacture. No indication of ISO or processing instructions in Chinese.

[seezee]

I was going to reply and say exactly this. Top line just says Dental X-Ray Film and the bottom line is the company of manufacture. No indication of ISO or processing instructions in Chinese.

Don't expect to see ISO information. It's not photographic film; why would it have a speed rating using a standard applicable only to photography?

As to the packaging, the Carestream products available in the US & Europe come in a pasteboard box with a thick, opaque, plastic inner bag. Certainly no lead.

[Kevin Harding]

Don't expect to see ISO information. It's not photographic film; why would it have a speed rating using a standard applicable only to photography?

I used incorrect terminology but was merely attempting to respond to the original question of "If the packet colours do not follow international standards to denote the speed band I have to look at the packaging." Should have stated speed band, I suppose.

[Neil Purling]

For medical purposes I believe the correct exposure is given thus: Anode voltage & current flow in the X ray tube + time.
Where sensitivity to X radiation is concerned the difference between bands D and F is that F is only 60% faster. For my purposes the differences are probably meaningless.
I have put films in two 35mm cameras and I will expose one at 50 ASA and the other at 25, developing in Rodinal 1:100 for 7 min and look at the highlights & mids before making a change.
That is unless anyone here believes I ought to try a different dilution/time combination.

[premortho]

I would expose two extra frames, and develop by inspection. Under a red lamp. That way you will learn if your developer concentration is useful to you. When I try a new to me film, I adjust the concentration of Rodinal to water until I get good results at around 10 minutes. Any time will work, but going for longer times means you will have better control over contrast.
For medical purposes I believe the correct exposure is given thus: Anode voltage & current flow in the X ray tube + time.
Where sensitivity to X radiation is concerned the difference between bands D and F is that F is only 60% faster. For my purposes the differences are probably meaningless.
I have put films in two 35mm cameras and I will expose one at 50 ASA and the other at 25, developing in Rodinal 1:100 for 7 min and look at the highlights & mids before making a change.
That is unless anyone here believes I ought to try a different dilution/time combination.

[mdarnton]

I second the develop by inspection idea. I fought through a lot of trial and error initially that would have been rapidly resolved if I'd had the red light in there helping. When I switched developers recently, the whole problem of development got solved in one batch. A red LED bulb only costs about three dollars, and is well worth the expenditure on several different levels.

[Neil Purling]

I received some 4"x4" X-ray film: Crontex MRF 21 Plus & loaded it into some holders. I never heard of the film, so i assume it is double-sided unless a Forum member knows for sure

The person also sent me some Kodak Ultra Speed (D). The stuff is in the same coloured plastic pockets as the Tianjin made stuff I got.
When I referred to lead foil I meant within each individual film pocket. It is behind the film if facing the proper way. The foil bears impressions of zig-zag lines that will be impressed upon the radiograph if the film is exposed the wrong way around.

I haven't trays to develope the film under safelight, yet. I believe that I need trays with a totally smooth bottom or to use an insert.
I am used to my Fink-Roselieve Yanke type tank to develope the 4x4 inch Crontek.
I wonder if food service trays would do for the dental film? As long as the bottom is flat & smooth.

[Jim Noel]

I received some 4"x4" X-ray film: Crontex MRF 21 Plus & loaded it into some holders. I never heard of the film, so i assume it is double-sided unless a Forum member knows for sure

The person also sent me some Kodak Ultra Speed (D). The stuff is in the same coloured plastic pockets as the Tianjin made stuff I got.
When I referred to lead foil I meant within each individual film pocket. It is behind the film if facing the proper way. The foil bears impressions of zig-zag lines that will be impressed upon the radiograph if the film is exposed the wrong way around.

I haven't trays to develope the film under safelight, yet. I believe that I need trays with a totally smooth bottom or to use an insert.
I am used to my Fink-Roselieve Yanke type tank to develope the 4x4 inch Crontek.
I wonder if food service trays would do for the dental film? As long as the bottom is flat & smooth.

The food service trays will wok if they are plastic, or a high grade stainless steel.

[Neil Purling]

I got two 8x4.2" trays from an electronics emporium.They are meant to be used when etching printed circuit boards and are flat bottomed.
I can tape a bin bag over the window at night and Bob's yer uncle. I have a clockwork timer with a ringing bell in the event my red LED lights aren't as safe as hoped. I will test by developing a blank film I left out for 5 min. That should include loading & unloading a holder and the time in the processing cycle making inspections.
If you are tray developing do you only have the light on to inspect progress & switch off again? I am looking at a time between 7 and 10 min in Rodinal, adjusting dilution as the results suggest. I was going to start at 1:100 and dilute further if needed.

Has anyone heard of that Crontex MRF 21 Plus? The provider mentioned 80 ASA for 3 min in ID11 at 22C in a tray, but I prefer Rodinal.

[Fr. Mark]

I've only handled 2 kinds of XRay film a double sided and a single sided. Cxs green a Ektascan B/RA which has an anti halation backing. The developer soluble backing is blackish and the emulsion is pink/light colored. Double sided is pink/light both sides.

Rodinal 1:100 might be a place to start with film exposed mid day as if ASA100. There are dozens of developing schemes in this thread though.

[Peter Volkmar]

I'm searching here and with google, but I can't find X-ray film in 12x15" in Europe.
Can anyone help me?

[Neil Purling]

Rodinal 1:100 might be a place to start with film exposed mid day as if ASA100. There are dozens of developing schemes in this thread though.

It would take a very long time to read through four thousand posts to find those that involve Rodinal and X-ray film.
Those posts I have read mention a 1:200 dilution for 6 minutes or 1:100 for 4 min. At 1:200 it would be easier to judge the right moment if developing by inspection. It remains to be seen how the Crontex film & the dental stuff reacts to that developer.

If I wish to develope by inspection, then I need to leave a blank sheet of film out under the red light for ten minutes (half covered). Any fogging warns me I must restrict any lighting. Is that a reasonable practice when wanting to tray develope X-ray film?

[Alan9940]

I try to read each new post in this thread, as posted, but I can't remember what film we're talking about, but... FWIW, I process Ektascan B/RA in Rodinal 1:100 at 20C for 6 mins in an Expert Drum on my Jobo (slowest speed.) I hope this helps someone extrapolate a useful time for themselves. Though I've never used the Kodak Green sensitive film or any of the double-sided films, it seems development times for these products are quite a bit different vs Ektascan.

[Neil Purling]

I have never done tray developing. If you knew a film took 6 minutes in whatever juice in a tank, then it would be the same or pretty close for a tray? I am assuming that the different agitation regimen will make some difference.

Does there have to be a certain amount of chemistry present to develope a 4x5 sheet. I would have thought this is especially relevant if we were using Rodinal 1:100.

[Alan9940]

I have never done tray developing. If you knew a film took 6 minutes in whatever juice in a tank, then it would be the same or pretty close for a tray? I am assuming that the different agitation regimen will make some difference.

Does there have to be a certain amount of chemistry present to develope a 4x5 sheet. I would have thought this is especially relevant if we were using Rodinal 1:100.

Proper timing for tray development might or might not be the same as continuous agitation such as in a Jobo drum, depending on how you agitate in the tray. If you use continuous agitation in a tray, I'd think the development times between this and something like a Jobo drum would be about the same. If your tray agitation is 10 secs out of each minute, then I'd suspect this will require slightly longer development times. Generally, the difference in development times between intermittent agitation and continuous is usually about 10 - 15%. However, this can vary depending on if you pre-rinse or not.

I seen quite conflicting information regarding the minimal amount of stock Rodinal required to properly develop a sheet of film. For example, with 8x10 (what I shoot) I've seen everything from 3ml to 6ml, minimum, required. In my Jobo drum, I typically use 500 - 1000ml of diluted solution--so, 5 - 10ml stock Rodinal--to develop a couple of sheets to a full drum (5 sheets.)

[barnacle]

I'm searching here and with google, but I can't find X-ray film in 12x15" in Europe.
Can anyone help me?

12x15" = 30x40cm (approximately) - http://www.bema-kg.de/Typon-DV-G-30x40-cm-100-Bl any use? Probably others in there too.

Don't know what the film is like though I am waiting for some to play with.

Neil

[Peter De Smidt]

X-ray film is orthochromatic and can be handled under red light. Why then does it not render skin tones darker like the ortho film of old? Skin with x-ray film looks closer to pan film than ortho. Mind you, I'm fine with that. I'd just like to understand what's going on. Is it that the ortho of old was less sensitive to a wider range of wavelengths?

[Alan9940]

X-ray film is orthochromatic and can be handled under red light. Why then does it not render skin tones darker like the ortho film of old? Skin with x-ray film looks closer to pan film than ortho. Mind you, I'm fine with that. I'd just like to understand what's going on. Is it that the ortho of old was less sensitive to a wider range of wavelengths?

I suspect it mainly due to the emulsion's differing reaction to light. I know...duh. :) Orthochromatic emulsion has a relatively high sensitivity to blue, generally correct sensitivity to green and bright yellow, but has relatively low sensitivity to orange and is nearly insensitive to red. This film doesn't register wavelengths longer than about 560-600 nm. It also has decreased sensitivity in the 500 nm area.

Xray film is generally either green or blue sensitive. I couldn't find any data referencing its wavelength sensitivity range, but I'd guess it differs in key ranges when compared to orthochromatic film. Of course, nothing I've said here answers your question regarding the rendering of skin tones...I'm simply postulating. ;)

[mdarnton]

In printing it's possible to make people look less "swarthy", so you wouldn't notice that part, but it does render skin darker, shows up red skin defects (which turn out to be all over the place, and does strange wonderful things with blue eyes. I have to do quite a bit of retouching of my portraits of women because of these things, and that's one of the reasons I'm experimenting with soft focus lenses. But it does none of this as extremely as collodion, for instance.

The other effect is that under incandescent lights the speed drops, drops, drops.

[Fr. Mark]

How much speed drop under W lighting (that's chemist for Tungsten, sorry).? I tried 3 stops correction and thought it was verging on too much. Ektascan BRA in Pyrocat HD 2:2:100 for UV processes. Printable, but dense for that. Longish exposure times (upto 20 minutes) for the cyanotype prints with a printer that with thin negatives gives me 45 sec. to 6 minutes.