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

[Tin Can]

Some of us tried Ziplock bags when somebody else suggested it. It works, one at a time.

Randy if you already have deep tanks and hangers gas burst can be DIY.

I do use stuff made by somebody else.

But I will be trying some other ideas. All you need to try Gas Burst is a Poly tube with tiny holes, attach a timing valve and any adjustable 10+ psi air supply. Maybe a full tire...I use my shop air compressor.

It takes a while to tune it, but once it's set, it runs and runs.

I burst for 1 second 10 PSI every 10 seconds for 10 minutes usually. Water rise should be 1/2 to 1". I go low. You don't need N2 for one shot developer or any fixer.

[andrewch59]

Thodoris I'm glad you have managed to get the tubes to work, I tried with the old cibachrome tubes but with little success, the film is too flexible to stay in place and I would always find the two negs stuck together. Tray developing of 4x5 would produce mottled skies. I had success with the mod54, but at first had the same problem, the xray film was too flexible and they would flex out of the holders and I would find them stuck to the side of the tube. I drilled holes in the ends and applied a bit of silicone to form a nipple, that way they could not flex out and escape from the mod 54, works a treat now.
As for 8x10 I have not had probs in tray at all, only downside is you can only do one at a time. with tray I just use a circular motion making sure the film hits against each side of the tray for a couple of laps then flip, but still use the same dilute developer of about 1:150

[Randy]

Andrew, are you using flat bottom trays or glass in the bottom? And are you saying you just rock the tray from each side, then flip the film over?

Randy - I tried the Ziploc bag as well - so long ago I can't remember my results. I am guessing I did not like it.

[andrewch59]

Randy I use the old flat bottom ceramic trays. I rock the film into the end of the tray then the side then the bottom and the other side, circular. Do that a couple of times then flip. You can't really tell which side is which, as one always seems to develop out faster, continual flipping helps discern which side is which.

[HT Finley]

For the little I have developed 2 sided Xray film so far, I used what I had on hand, big Cesco-Lite flat bottom plastic trays left over from a print shop and Beutler's developer. And then made sure I didn't have fingernails that needed clipping. I rocked and agitated and flipped the film continuously (Fuji green sensitive 8x10). Being deft of hand with reasonable gentleness, scratching problems were quite minimal. Certainly nothing to inspire me to try all kinds of other ideas. The best other idea I know of is paying up for the one-sided stuff, which kind of defeats the whole thrill of "cheap". Cheap film I can shoot away with and not try to be an artiste, which I'm not. If I come up with a good picture once in a while, it wasn't because I was so talented and sure that I could buy the expensive pan stuff.. I can't see why any other smooth flat-bottom tray won't work just as well.

[andrewch59]

Quite right! I have some old pyrex dishes that work just as well or some stainless steel warming trays from a bain-marie. I'm sure I read somewhere that if you are getting bad development, get some food dye and put a couple of drops in your dish with water and check the dye to see if the water is agitating enough.
Funny, I cant get the same even development with 4x5 in trays.

This scanned negative is a section of an 8x10 taken on a 3d camera, the positive then has the lenticular plastic screen laminated to it. Havent got a laminator and the adhesive film is quite expensive. The camera works fine since packing, the newspaper used to pack is dated 1988.
177030

Agfa green 8x10 developed by flat bottomed tray rodinol 1:135-ish

[Peter De Smidt]

Anyone pick up a cheap x-ray film developing machine to use for in-camera use of x-ray film?

[DeKlari]

I have try it at work. It make many micro lines and micro scratches. Negative looks fine for science or medicine but not good for photography.. I guess

[Peter De Smidt]

I have try it at work. It make many micro lines and micro scratches. Negative looks fine for science or medicine but not good for photography.. I guess

Good to know. Thanks!

[Thodoris Tzalavras]

It does help - thanks. I will look into the 3" tubes. If you get a chance, perhaps post a picture of your tube assembly some time - or if there is one already posted somewhere, can you direct me to it. Thanks.

Randy (and anyone else who might be interested),

Finally took some pictures of the PVC tubes that I mentioned testing.

Top pic from left to right:
18x24cm/8x10" tube (takes one film).
13x18cm/5x7" tube (takes two films).
End cap assembly, glued to a coupling.
Coupling by itself.
Screw cap with its base.

Bottom pics from left to right, looking through:
18x24cm/8x10" tube
13x18cm/5x7" tube (with the "stopper" of the coupling protruding, which helps the two negs stay away from each other)
Coupling

https://farm1.staticflickr.com/873/26735675077_193623aef9_b.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/GJxjK8)[/url][url=https://www.flickr.com/photos/tzalavras/] (https://flic.kr/p/GJxjK8)

Now, since my last post I developed 10 more sheets of 18x24cm film.
Half of them single-sided mammography film, and half double sided.
8 came out ok.
1 refused to come out for washing (even though after fixing I place the tubes vertically in the sink and fill them with water to reduce friction), resulting in two massive scratches on the back side.
1 came out with streaks of uneven development (no idea why).

Also, I don't have a motorized roller base (had plans of building one if/when I concluded that this developing method works for me), and I can tell you that manually rotating the tubes for 16min for each sheet gets old real fast.

In conclusion, this method might be worth looking into, only if you have a motorized roller base, *and* you shoot a relatively small amount of film.

[Thodoris Tzalavras]

Scan from a contact print on Ilford MG warmtone paper at grade 1.

More often than not, I make two identical exposures of any scene I deem worthy, so that I get a second chance if processing goes wrong on the first negative.

In this case, the first one came out ok (way back when), so the duplicate was kept aside to be used for testing.

The negative that made this print was developed last week, more than two years after exposure, which speaks volumes for the stability of the latent image on exposed xray films (or at the very least on this particular film, Agfa CPG+).

18x24cm negative (double sided, green sensitive), developed in Ilford MG paper developer (1+50) in a Jobo 2830 drum for 8'min.

https://farm1.staticflickr.com/924/40713226555_0500b07c51_b.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/252FVPZ)[/url][url=https://www.flickr.com/photos/tzalavras/] (https://flic.kr/p/252FVPZ)

[desertrat]

I had a similar experience with Kodak High Speed Green X-ray film. In 2012 I made four exposures of a scene and developed three of them over the next few days. The fourth sheet stayed in my paper safe for two years before being processed in 2014. The image looked identical the best of the three processed two years earlier. This is significant, because X-ray film is almost always processed immediately after exposure in a professional setting, so the manufacturers don't have any reason to strive for long term latent image quality. I'm guessing latent image preservation goes along with other desirable characteristics that good X-ray film needs to have.

[andrewch59]

Thodoris, thankyou for sharing your experiences with your tubes, much the same experiences I had with tubes, but you had much better results. Speaking of the electric rollers, I had one, using a mod54 in a Paterson dev tank (3 spool version). The only problem with the electric roller I found was that as the developer is only turning one way I was still getting uneven development, so I got out my spare electric roller to use in the opposite direction. I changed rollers every minute or so and got really good results

[Thodoris Tzalavras]

Well, sharing our experiences and inspiring each other is what it's all about, right?

Here is a scan from a contact print on Hahnemühle Platinum Rag coated with Mike Ware's Cyanotype formula.

Using the same in-camera negative from which I printed the silver gelatin contact print in my previous post.

https://farm1.staticflickr.com/828/40975918334_aa005220d3_b.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/25qUhWA)[/url][url=https://www.flickr.com/photos/tzalavras/] (https://flic.kr/p/25qUhWA)

[Tin Can]

Thanks for posting both prints.

I am wavering on Cyanotype

Which do you prefer?

[Thodoris Tzalavras]

Randy,

Even though I do like how the cyanotype turned out (also did a darker version, but I like this one better), I'm not the biggest fan of this process in general.

Despite all my experience in silver printing, my only previous experience in "alternative processes" are a handful of prints I did some 20 years ago in a workshop. Still a total newbie, taking my first steps in climbing the proverbial learning curve.

(Having a working knowledge of sensitometry helps immensely though.)

So, before trying out something more challenging, like palladium or carbon transfer, I thought it would be best to try a simpler (and cheaper) process first.

[Miguel Coquis]

30x40cm negative (double sided, green sensitive), hand development on plastic trays.
D76
1/1
8 min, 20°C
continus agitation
film rated 9 ASA
Base rabbit cages trays are useful, cheap and available in large format dimension.

[jon.oman]

30x40cm negative (double sided, green sensitive), hand development on plastic trays.
D76
1/1
8 min, 20°C
continus agitation
film rated 9 ASA
Base rabbit cages trays are useful, cheap and available in large format dimension.

Nice!

[Tin Can]

Randy,

Even though I do like how the cyanotype turned out (also did a darker version, but I like this one better), I'm not the biggest fan of this process in general.

Despite all my experience in silver printing, my only previous experience in "alternative processes" are a handful of prints I did some 20 years ago in a workshop. Still a total newbie, taking my first steps in climbing the proverbial learning curve.

(Having a working knowledge of sensitometry helps immensely though.)

So, before trying out something more challenging, like palladium or carbon transfer, I thought it would be best to try a simpler (and cheaper) process first.

Very good idea that I should follow!

[Corran]

Maybe try Van Dyke! I made some from x-ray film years ago. I personally am not a fan of the color of cyanotypes generally. I've seen some toned cyanotypes that were okay though, but never experimented with that myself.

[Tin Can]

Anybody using Pyrocat HD with X-Ray film?


I have read Sandy King (http://sandykingphotography.com/resources/technical-writing/pyro-staining-developers) many times. I will try Pyrocat HD Liguid glycol from Photograghers Formulary (http://stores.photoformulary.com/pyrocat-hd-in-glycol/).

I deduce from Sandy King's testing that Pyrocat HD may be good for Azo and Ilford Multigrade paper. The stain may work differently on each and perhaps in X-Rays favor.

I ordered some today.

[Miguel Coquis]

Nice!

:)

[Jim Fitzgerald]

30x40cm negative (double sided, green sensitive), hand development on plastic trays.
D76
1/1
8 min, 20°C
continus agitation
film rated 9 ASA
Base rabbit cages trays are useful, cheap and available in large format dimension.

Miguel, beautiful! I see the x-ray film is working very well for you.

[seezee]

Anybody using Pyrocat HD with X-Ray film?


I have read Sandy King (http://sandykingphotography.com/resources/technical-writing/pyro-staining-developers) many times. I will try Pyrocat HD Liguid glycol from Photograghers Formulary (http://stores.photoformulary.com/pyrocat-hd-in-glycol/).

I deduce from Sandy King's testing that Pyrocat HD may be good for Azo and Ilford Multigrade paper. The stain may work differently on each and perhaps in X-Rays favor.

I ordered some today.
It's the only devloper I've used, apart from a failed experiment with Rodinal. See Mercury Photo Bureau (https://mercury.photo/okie-x/) for examples.

[Tin Can]

It's the only devloper I've used, apart from a failed experiment with Rodinal. See Mercury Photo Bureau (https://mercury.photo/okie-x/) for examples.



Rodinal is all I have used on any film for 7 years. I am anxious to try Pyrocat HD.

Very interesting X-Ray project and website, I put it on a slow scroll and love the flutist placement. Saw a couple a couple times. I think...

Do you print the musician portraits?

[koraks]

Anybody using Pyrocat HD with X-Ray film?

Yes, usually 1+150. Works like a charm.

[seezee]

All I have seen are round corners. Buy larger and cut it down. I cut to all smaller sizes, even down to Hasselblad.

One advantage to RC is no sharp edges scratching other negs if shuffling.

Save scraps for fixer checking.

The other advantage is that you can use the corner to remind you which way was facing the lens if you're using film with emulsion on both sides. I always load mine with the rounded corner placed where the notch codes would normally go.

[seezee]

Rodinal is all I have used on any film for 7 years. I am anxious to try Pyrocat HD.

Very interesting X-Ray project and website, I put it on a slow scroll and love the flutist placement. Saw a couple a couple times. I think...

Do you print the musician portraits?

Thank you. I am still setting up my darkroom so I haven't made any prints yet. Depending on whether I get any good at it is going to make a big difference when I start grant writing to finance the show — paying someone else to print increases the cost by an order of magnitude!

[seezee]

Yes, usually 1+150. Works like a charm.

I dilute 1:200, but that's for semi-stand development in a daylight tank (HP Combi+). YMMV.

[SergeiR]

Anybody using Pyrocat HD.

Been there , had horrible results , went back to r09.

I honestly think there is no magic developer, magic processing temp or time .

[Tin Can]

ro9 is all I have used for 7 years.

The PHD just arrived. Now I have to try it!





Been there , had horrible results , went back to r09.

I honestly think there is no magic developer, magic processing temp or time .

[Thodoris Tzalavras]

For this year's Pinhole Day, I converted my Kodak Master View 8x10 to a pinhole!

---
Kodak Master 8x10 camera, fitted with a 0.46mm pinhole, at 120mm focal length.
30"sec exposure on 18x24 Agfa HDR xray film.
Developed in Ilford MG 1+50 for 8'min in a glass plated tray.
Scan from negative, finished in PS.

https://farm1.staticflickr.com/909/41114504024_fcc7dce86d_b.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/25D9zD3)[/url][url=https://www.flickr.com/photos/tzalavras/] (https://flic.kr/p/25D9zD3)

[jon.oman]

For this year's Pinhole Day, I converted my Kodak Master View 8x10 to a pinhole!

---
Kodak Master 8x10 camera, fitted with a 0.46mm pinhole, at 120mm focal length.
30"sec exposure on 18x24 Agfa HDR xray film.
Developed in Ilford MG 1+50 for 8'min in a glass plated tray.
Scan from negative, finished in PS.

https://farm1.staticflickr.com/909/41114504024_fcc7dce86d_b.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/25D9zD3)[/url][url=https://www.flickr.com/photos/tzalavras/] (https://flic.kr/p/25D9zD3)

Great pinhole image!

I've participated in Pinhole Day in the past. No time this year!

[Andrew O'Neill]

Anybody using Pyrocat HD with X-Ray film?


I have read Sandy King (http://sandykingphotography.com/resources/technical-writing/pyro-staining-developers) many times. I will try Pyrocat HD Liguid glycol from Photograghers Formulary (http://stores.photoformulary.com/pyrocat-hd-in-glycol/).

I deduce from Sandy King's testing that Pyrocat HD may be good for Azo and Ilford Multigrade paper. The stain may work differently on each and perhaps in X-Rays favor.

I ordered some today.


I use Pyrocat-HD with x-ray. 10ml each A and B into 1 litre of water. Flat-bottomed tray, agitated NSEW once every minute. Been doing it this way for 10 years. The same negative prints nicely on silver papers, as well as kallitype, and carbon transfer.

[Tin Can]

I use Pyrocat-HD with x-ray. 10ml each A and B into 1 litre of water. Flat-bottomed tray, agitated NSEW once every minute. Been doing it this way for 10 years. The same negative prints nicely on silver papers, as well as kallitype, and carbon transfer.

Thanks, Andrew, that is my interest.

And a stack of Azo 8X10.

[Jim Fitzgerald]

I use Pyrocat-HD with x-ray. 10ml each A and B into 1 litre of water. Flat-bottomed tray, agitated NSEW once every minute. Been doing it this way for 10 years. The same negative prints nicely on silver papers, as well as kallitype, and carbon transfer.

Andrew, interesting. 10ml of A&B. How long is your developing time for a carbon negative?

[SergeiR]

8x10 Kodak CSG, 1:100 R09, rotary development for 15 minutes

https://farm1.staticflickr.com/950/27979649098_f418e6df1e_c.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/JCt1T5)Wine barrels (https://flic.kr/p/JCt1T5) by Sergei Rodionov (https://www.flickr.com/photos/sergeistudio/), on Flickr

[jon.oman]

8x10 Kodak CSG, 1:100 R09, rotary development for 15 minutes

https://farm1.staticflickr.com/950/27979649098_f418e6df1e_c.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/JCt1T5)Wine barrels (https://flic.kr/p/JCt1T5) by Sergei Rodionov (https://www.flickr.com/photos/sergeistudio/), on Flickr

Nice!

[Tin Can]

Sergei, it seems you have extended your R09 times?

Looks very good.

[SergeiR]

Sergei, it seems you have extended your R09 times?

Looks very good.

Just been lazy and 15 was ready on display of watch :)

[seezee]

8x10 Kodak CSG, 1:100 R09, rotary development for 15 minutes

https://farm1.staticflickr.com/950/27979649098_f418e6df1e_c.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/JCt1T5)Wine barrels (https://flic.kr/p/JCt1T5) by Sergei Rodionov (https://www.flickr.com/photos/sergeistudio/), on Flickr

Wowzer!

[Nukatpiat]

Seezee, that's one of the best I've seen on x-ray. I'm going back to give it a try again.
What rating did you shoot it at?

[Thodoris Tzalavras]

Kodak Master View 8x10 with a Fujinon W 250mm on a rather windy day by the beach.
Agfa CPG+ xray film, developed in Ilford MG paper developer (1+50) for 8'min.
Scan from a contact print on Ilford MGWT paper at grade 3.

https://farm1.staticflickr.com/865/41827889142_59e3975727_b.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/26JbSbs)[/url][url=https://www.flickr.com/photos/tzalavras/] (https://flic.kr/p/26JbSbs)

[seezee]

Seezee, that's one of the best I've seen on x-ray. I'm going back to give it a try again.
What rating did you shoot it at?
Are you speaking of the OKIE-X project that I linked to? Those were shot with 2 lights and a reflector. I used the same settings listed for these 2 portraits (https://mercury.photo/paige-s-wilson-photographer/). The key light is set to -5.2f & the background light is set to -4.2f. Pneumatic shutter only fires at ~1⁄25 second. I rate the film at about ISO 25 under the 5600K lights.

Glad to see you're going to try again!

[williaty]

Could the experienced folk here chime in on my attempt to misuse an x-ray film processor to allow me to use x-ray http://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/showthread.php?146181-Can-anyone-help-me-misuse-a-Kodak-X-omat-2000A-Processor

[seezee]

ZZ Medical (https://www.zzmedical.com/x-ray-accessories/analog-x-ray-supplies/x-ray-film.html) has a 5% discount on everything (including x-ray film) thru 29 May. The code is


MEMORIAL

Cheers!

[andrewch59]

ro9 is all I have used for 7 years.

The PHD just arrived. Now I have to try it!

Have you tried the PHD?? Whats your opinion on it??

[Tin Can]

Have you tried the PHD?? Whats your opinion on it??

Not yet.

Life keeps getting in the way of photography.

Right now my excuse is unbalanced vision from ongoing surgery.

Soon. I hope.

[andrewch59]

Speedy recovery to you.

[Thodoris Tzalavras]

1"sec exposure at f16 on 18x24 Agfa HDR xray film.
Developed in 1+50 Ilford MG paper developer for 8.5'min in a glass plated 10x12" tray.
Scan from negative, finished in PS.

https://farm1.staticflickr.com/901/27476773617_9234735d80_b.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/HS2Dwa)[/url][url=https://www.flickr.com/photos/tzalavras/] (https://flic.kr/p/HS2Dwa)

[GDPClarke]

Has anyone had any experience with this x-ray film? It looks like it has been repackaged for sale by this distributer.https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20180528/e3fc77ceb11664a6525d217ce63a6b2f.jpghttps://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20180528/2991fd5f6afea8d61d665e42618e0b22.jpg


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[Tin Can]

Agfa https://www.amazon.com/5941863-EK8FL-Radiomat-Agfa-Corporation/dp/B005781IO2

Just use it.

Next time buy this https://www.zzmedical.com/x-ray-accessories/analog-x-ray-supplies/x-ray-film/8x10-in-carestream-kodak-x-ray-film.html

[GDPClarke]

Thank you.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[seezee]

Agfa https://www.amazon.com/5941863-EK8FL-Radiomat-Agfa-Corporation/dp/B005781IO2

Just use it.

Next time buy this https://www.zzmedical.com/x-ray-accessories/analog-x-ray-supplies/x-ray-film/8x10-in-carestream-kodak-x-ray-film.html

It's still on sale thru midnight tonight. Coupon code MEMORIAL.

[Degroto]

Amazing deal. To bad shipping is so expensive to the Netherlands. In the end the costs will be more then when I buy a pack of 18x24cm film in the Netherlands. Even when buying three packs of film.

[alefrei]

Hello. This is my first successful experience with x-ray film.
Fotokor 1 + Carestream MXBE + Rodinal 1:40 for 7 min in a plastic tray.
There was table lamp as a light source and I exposed it about 3 seconds at 4.5 aperture.
I've been trying to shoot outdoors without any luck, the negatives turn out to be heavily underexposed. All this time I rate the film as 100 ISO + 3-4 EV with an external light meter. But after reading the last pages of this thread I see that you rate it as 9-25 ISO, so maybe I should just take a lot more time to expose correctly.
UPD. I have read a bit more and it looks like I screw up with developer dilution and time but not with film ISO.
178891178892

[seezee]

Outdoors the speed will vary by time of day. Depending on latitude & time of year, before 10 AM or after 2 PM you will lose speed. This is due the the change in color temperature as well as to the total amount of light.

Your meter reads all of the visible light, but the film only sees blue or blue + green. Too early or too late in the day, not enough blue light.

[alefrei]

Thanks, seezee! I will definetely take this in attention in upcoming shots.
And I finally found a clue to constantly destroying negatives. My "safelight" turned out to be way too bright, I put in 25 watt bulb and now everything works perfect.
Fotokor at 4.5, ~80 ISO, Rodinal 1:100 for 7 min, DSLR scan
179083

[seezee]

Thanks, seezee! I will definetely take this in attention in upcoming shots.
And I finally found a clue to constantly destroying negatives. My "safelight" turned out to be way too bright, I put in 25 watt bulb and now everything works perfect.
Fotokor at 4.5, ~80 ISO, Rodinal 1:100 for 7 min, DSLR scan
179083

Di nada. Since you probably haven't read all 506 pages of this thread, have a look at this (https://www.superbrightleds.com/moreinfo/led-household-bulbs/g11-led-bulb-5-watt-equivalent-led-globe-bulb-27-lumens/440/1477/#/attributes/13) and this (https://www.superbrightleds.com/moreinfo/household-bulb-sockets-adapters/dual-e27-base-to-e27-base-socket-adapter/2327/5670/). Use them with a standard clamp light, such as this (https://smile.amazon.com/8-5-Inch-Reflector-150-Watt-Dawson-Bros/dp/B071WJPWL2/ref=sr_1_4?ie=UTF8&qid=1528507475&sr=8-4&keywords=clamp+light).

Cheers,

— CZ

[andrewch59]

Agfa https://www.amazon.com/5941863-EK8FL-Radiomat-Agfa-Corporation/dp/B005781IO2

Just use it.

Next time buy this https://www.zzmedical.com/x-ray-accessories/analog-x-ray-supplies/x-ray-film/8x10-in-carestream-kodak-x-ray-film.html

zzmedical previously did not ship internationally, now they do, I have just bought my usual 3 boxes and cut the price plus shipping in half.
Thanks for the tip!

[Tin Can]

I’m glad Australia finally gets a deal on something film related!



zzmedical previously did not ship internationally, now they do, I have just bought my usual 3 boxes and cut the price plus shipping in half.
Thanks for the tip!

[alefrei]

Hello everyone. If you experience difficulties with buying xray film I think I could help you and ship it worldwide. There is a company in my city that suggests a big variety of medical film: AGFA, Carestream, Ektascan. I have bought Carestream MXBE 13x18cm from them for < $35. This is an example of picture taken on it.
179598

[koraks]

That kind of help is always a good thing @alefrei! It may help others to know where you are located. If e.g. you are in the US and buyers want you to ship to Europe, duties and import taxes will have to be paid in addition to shipping costs. I just placed an order with ZZMedical for shipment to Europe and the final costs as delivered to my doorstep are ca. 65% higher than the combined price of the products I ordered. Note that ZZMedical also ships worldwide through a 3PL provider.

[alefrei]

Well, I live in european part of Russia and I have sent several items abroad via ebay. I could mark the parcel as gift or reduce the declared value to avoid pricey import taxes. So if anyone is interested, feel free to PM me. I have some free time untill the end of summer.

[Thalmees]

here are a couple of tests I shot 8x10, (cropped to remove distracting elements) One is Tmax100 and one is X-ray.
https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4563/37699761005_7cc7e6f534_k.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/Zrp8vp)SCAN_1_1-crop-Tmax100 (https://flic.kr/p/Zrp8vp) by Todd Harris (https://www.flickr.com/photos/todd10/), on Flickr
https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4554/38530876696_746e28ab2c_k.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/21GQPfh)SCAN_2_1-crop-Xrayfilm (https://flic.kr/p/21GQPfh) by Todd Harris (https://www.flickr.com/photos/todd10/), on Flickr

That's definitely great Todd.
If possible, please let me know extra info, X-ray film type, development and if there is any software manipulation.
Thanks.

[Thalmees]

Anybody who has experience with double sided X-ray film,
Being with no anti-halation layer, is X-ray film better than the expensive Ortho films for masking? to print difficult negatives?
Regards.

[richydicky]

Finally got my Intrepid 8x10 and have been testing some films. I was going to post some taken on Carestream EB/RA where I was quite pleased with the tonality and range at first try, but when I scanned and looked at the negatives at high magnification they are peppered with tiny black dots; not consistently over the surface. I omitted stop bath and used water stop with the last one but get the same. They have been developed in Pyro HD. Any ideas?

[dsphotog]

The shadow of dust on the film when it was exposed.
Usually during loading, or in the film holder.

[Randy]

If it's dust from loading in the film holder, that's a lot of dust.
I often wonder if X-ray film is not manufactured with the same critical standards as photography film. A couple years ago I had a batch that had tiny circular dots all over it.
I can only suggest trying a sheet from the middle and / or other end of the stack and see if you get the same defect.

[andrewch59]

Doesn't dust normally show up as white specks?

[Fr. Mark]

I had similar issues with a batch of Ektascan I bought 3-5 years ago. I think it’s a quality control issue. It’s still a great film to learn with. As a former chemist, Pyrocat HD, uses sodium or potassium carbonate to get pH high enough for development. Acid stop bath would be more likely than plain water stop bath to create issues in terms of converting the carbonate to carbon dioxide gas and little bubbles. But, I really doubt that’s a real issue. And I really doubt that’s at the root of the issue.

Please post a review of the camera, I saw that and really wanted one! I’m wondering if it’s as nice as the ads.

[neilt3]

Doesn't dust normally show up as white specks?

On a negative they would do , as no light got past the bits to leave an exposure .

The sample posted is a scan of the negative then inverted to a positive .
So the white dots on the negative are now black dots on the scan/print .

There's a lot of it to be dust though , so possibly a fault in the emulsion .

[richydicky]

I was wondering if it was from the development. I am using a Paterson Orbital unit but Agfa double-sided processed the same, which I thought would be more problematical came out fine and so too sheets of FP4. Here is magnified clip from a different sheet, not just little spots but also broader marks. It does seem to be emulsion related and is not like handling scratches.

180514

[Nukatpiat]

Maybe try pulling a piece and scan it without any processing at all. If there are visible marks, then try washing it and rescan and see if they go away.
That would help eliminate processing sources. If it's black in scanning, it's got to be there before exposure. If it's black in scan, it's got to be clear on the negative, and the only things I know of that can cause that are either dust and dirt pre-exposure that is then washed away in processing, or missing or scratched emulsion.

[richydicky]

The marks are are not from scanning, I placed a negative on a light table and you can these pin holes with a loupe.

I took a piece of unexposed film and inspected that on the light table and that was fine, and after washing to remove the anti-halation layer. Then I processed piece of that as before and then cut that into two further pieces, one stopped with water and the other with an additional stop bath. No holes or marks. I then fixed same pieces and no difference. It is a bit of a mystery as other film processed using the same holders and chemicals have come out fine. I shall just have to try another sheet.

[richydicky]

OK, what I have learned is that this film is extremely sensitive to agitation in development. I have been using a Paterson orbital and noticed that there was a circular area in the middle of the negative that was affected most with these black dots (in the positive image). So I observed the movement of the fluid in the processor with the lid off and noticed that there was an area in the middle that was did not experience as much fluid change with the orbital movement.

So, I change the processing technique to a tilt one which you would do with standard tray development. I must add that I have no dark facilities. Well, this just confirmed the agitation variation theory; I was quite aggressive in the agitation frequency as it seems and now I got those marks in a cross pattern corresponding to the opposite corner tilt technique. How, was I to get more consistent agitation? I then remembered that when I got my Jobo CPE2 it came with a print tank extension 2800 so I dug this out of the garage.

I have just developed a test sheet rolling the film into the tank and things are starting to look better. I now have streaks, in the rolling plane, so will have to figure out volume of liquids and make sure it is level (I am hand rolling). The sky area is still the most affected but I noticed that some marks were due to handling; I only have a Harrison Pup tent and it's a bit of a squeeze and although I used gloves it is no possible with these to locate the film edge under the holding slides so had to use bare hands. Another observation is that somewhat similar marks, that is to the finger prints, occur where is seems some tiny particle remains stuck on the emulsion and you get kind of micro trail of dark area from that mark, although I did rotate alternately in both directions.

The other thing that comes to mind is that we are experiencing a heatwave here in the UK and using a changing tent it gets very humid in that enclosed space within the tent so maybe that is factor and development temperatures are up too.

I've got the best results from the Jobo drum in terms of the black dots, agitation problem, but now have to sort out streaking and the other handing type marks. The tonal results from the film are great but with all the issues maybe I should bear the cost of FP4. The Agfa double sided CPG works nicely so I might try and get the mammography version of that film.

Richard

[andrewch59]

180859
This was taken two days ago, agfa green, lc29 1:100 35mins stand, picture vignetted to isolate subject matter and artistic effect. color tinge is a by product of file reduction I think

[DeBone75]

Ok this is going to be a little long so please excuse. First this is the first Ive posted in several years. Being the frugal type. Meaning I don't have much money to play with. I try to use what I have on hand. I have an abundance of Dektol. I shoot Full blue film. I've spent the last several hours figuring Iso, dev. time and dilutions to use the Dektol as the film developer. I've read that it can be contrasty and grainy. Again trying to be frugal I mixed the 1 gallon bag of Dektol with 1/2 gallon of water to make a concentrate. After the experimenting I came up with an ISO of 150 with a dilution of about 1:17 or 30ml to 500ml of water for 10min. To my feeble eyes the negatives look very good. These where shot in hazy sun down a wooded path. Plenty of shadow detail and high lights very printable. Contrast and grain are not that bad. I have no way of showing these as I do not scan. Not saying this is the definitive for all but this worked for me. Now I have a question. Hypothetical. If you have an ISO of say 200 and you strip the emulsion is that the same as dividing the ISO to 100. For the people that say they get ISOs below 20 are they stripping the emulsion and are they shooting strictly in doors or under very low light. I've tryed using a low ISO and I can't even see thru the negative let alone print thru it. Just some thoughts.

[koraks]

Concerning stripping: I find it's not the same as halving the iso. The side of the film facing the lens during exposure gets more light than the other side. Hence, you loose less than a stop when stripping the backside.

As to your iso of 150: that's pretty high, but if it works for you, that's great. I got something like iso 50-80 with double sided green sensitive film. Note that testing with a shaded scene may throw your calibration off, particularly if it's a low contrast scene.

[DeBone75]

I have been shooting at 80 or 100 all along but the negs always looked a little to dense for my taste. They printed ok but just never quite liked the look. My developer of choice was always Beutler High Definition but currently I don't have the bulk chemical to make it. Most of what I shoot is either wooded or full sun land scape. Full blue is faster film than green.

[andrewch59]

If you read the first page of this thread,the recommended speed of full speed blue is iso200 or there abouts, so you would be close

[alefrei]

Rodinal 1:100, ISO 100, 8 min tray development.
This recipe works perfectly constant to me, maybe next time I should reduce development time to 7:20-7:30 and it would be the best I can get from the film.
The only drawback is that diluted developer is disposable, but anyway the process is still very cheap and satisfying.

181130 181131

[Thodoris Tzalavras]

Perseid Meteor Shower 2018

This picture was shot with a Kodak Master 8x10" view camera and the legendary Super Angulon 165mm lens on Fuji AD-M xray film. The exposure lasted 140 minutes at f/8.

The camera was facing NE towards the rising constellation of Perseus.

It was developed for 30'min in an 11x14 flat bottom tray in 60ml RO9 and 75ml FX37II in a liter of distilled water at 24°C.

The negative is rather thin, but with scanning and post processing, this image emerges.

https://farm2.staticflickr.com/1800/44060193791_e56a30159e_b.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/2a8s1zD)[/url][url=https://www.flickr.com/photos/tzalavras/] (https://flic.kr/p/2a8s1zD)

[Tin Can]

Very interesting!

What is FX37II?

I like it, are the straight lines aircraft?

I want to try this one day, er, night...




Perseid Meteor Shower 2018

This picture was shot with a Kodak Master 8x10" view camera and the legendary Super Angulon 165mm lens on Fuji AD-M xray film. The exposure lasted 140 minutes at f/8.

The camera was facing NE towards the rising constellation of Perseus.

It was developed for 30'min in an 11x14 flat bottom tray in 60ml RO9 and 75ml FX37II in a liter of distilled water at 24°C.













The negative is rather thin, but with scanning and post processing, this image emerges.

https://farm2.staticflickr.com/1800/44060193791_e56a30159e_b.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/2a8s1zD)[/url][url=https://www.flickr.com/photos/tzalavras/] (https://flic.kr/p/2a8s1zD)

[Fr. Mark]

Thodoris, That's really neat. We had clouds all during that Meteor shower, rain actually, much needed. It looks like you caught several flashes plus star trails and airplanes.

[Thodoris Tzalavras]

Tanks guys!

My setup on Sunday night included a Kodak Master 8x10" with a Super Angulon 165mm and a Rittreck View 5x7" with a Super Angulon 90mm, both set to f/8.

Made 3 exposures with each camera on Fuji AD-M xray film 18x24cm and 13x18cm.
First 2 exposures were for 80'min and the last one was for 140'minutes.

I developed all films by inspection in sequence, and I was adding developers and developing time based on how the first films responded.

I started with RO9 at 1+50 (20ml in 1lt of distilled water), instead of the 1+100 (10mml in 1lt) that is my normal at the moment (with developing times between 8 and 16min depending on the SBR and the way that I exposed the neg).

The first neg (80min exp) came out almost blank after 20min dev time, so I added another 20ml to the used soup for the next, and so on…

The FX39II (not 37 as per my original post, sorry for that) is a compensating developer based on the original Rodinal.

And yes, those are airplanes. We're a bit south of the incoming route for planes approaching Larnaca airport. 7 planes in 140min is low traffic for this time of year.

[Thodoris Tzalavras]

Tanks = Thanks (obviously...)

[DeBone75]

For those of you old enough to have senior moments. I was out shooting a waterfall here in Georgia with my 4x5 and blue x-ray. I traveled about 120 mile to this location. Not many people around and a perfect day. The light was overhead and sunny so I thought, I need to bump up the contrast a little so I'll use a yellow filter. Four shots at the falls an later and later four shots at an old barn. All but two with the yellow filter. Now for those of you that think a yellow filter will not work on x-ray film it dose. On the falls I got nice white water and very black everything else. Same with barn. Very white roof everything else black 100 o/o contrast. As I was developing the film and trying to figure out where the image was it hit me. Senior moment

[seezee]

As I was developing the film and trying to figure out where the image was it hit me. Senior moment

Yep. You cut most of the blue light. I think an orange filter would have been even worse.

[Andrew O'Neill]

I always shoot with either a #11 light green or #15 yellow filter, on green latitude. They both work very well, especially the #11 on foliage.

[DeBone75]

I even knew better than to use a filter. Was not thinking.

[peter schrager]

Anyone here using Xray film for alternate process??
just curious
thanks, Peter

[koraks]

That's what I use it virtually exclusively for. Mostly salt printing and I need to pick up carbon transfer again. I don't think x-ray is superior for the purpose though. Far from it in fact.

[Fr. Mark]

I've had good prints from Ektascan BR/A, Pyrocat HD, and Dr. Mike Ware's New Cyanotype chemistry. You have to like the look of Ortho films. I find it a cost savings I need. Plus, I can work with the lights on, if I don't badly over do it.

[andrewch59]

I even knew better than to use a filter. Was not thinking.
I have found it works fine with filters, orange, yellow, I have just bought a red, but haven't used it yet.

[j.e.simmons]

Anyone here using Xray film for alternate process??
just curious
thanks, Peter
I use it for albumen.

[Thodoris Tzalavras]

Scan of a contact print on Ilford MGWT from an 18x24cm negative.

Fujifilm AD-M film developed in 11x14" trays in Adox RO9 (10+1000) @ 24C for 8'min with intermittent agitation.

Shot with an 8x10" viewcamera and a Fujinon W 180 @ f/22 and t1/4"s

https://farm2.staticflickr.com/1859/44468555491_efc16cf376_b.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/2aKwYhB)[/url] (https://flic.kr/p/2aKwYhB)

https://farm2.staticflickr.com/1892/44468560911_cd087c7177_b.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/2aKwZU4)[url=https://www.flickr.com/photos/tzalavras/] (https://flic.kr/p/2aKwZU4)

[Randy]

I have used it for traditional cyanotype formulas - works fine.

Shot on 8X10 green sensitive.

https://www.dropbox.com/s/bzz56aer0i3qskl/img622.jpg?dl=1

[Thodoris Tzalavras]

Late afternoon light.
Captured on Fuji AD-M xray film, with a Kodak Master View 8x10" camera and a Fujinon 180 lens.
Developed in Adox RO9 (10+1000) at 24C, in 11x14" trays, for 8'min with intermittent agitation.
Scan from negative, finished in PS.

https://farm2.staticflickr.com/1895/44547849952_b69014c922_b.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/2aSxnLu)[/url][url=https://www.flickr.com/photos/tzalavras/] (https://flic.kr/p/2aSxnLu)

[bob carnie]

I am really late to this thread, and do not want to go over 500 posts , not yet anyways but I have a question

Could someone describe the resulting tonal qualitys on print between x ray negative and lets say ortho neg or pan neg?

[koraks]

Bob, in my experience so far: rather poor in general, but with great care it's not too bad. The main issue of xray film is its limited latitude which makes tonality quite harsh if both exposure and development are not controlled very carefully. The thin and soft emulsions also make for development issues (uneveness) to manifest themselves where they would not be an issue with regular film. With great care, very decent results can be had as eg Thodoris illustrates very well above, but personally, I am still struggling (after 3 years) to consistently get usable results. If everything goes well, a good print from a single-sided xray neg is almost indistinguishable from a regular film print. Scanning and digital editing offer more flexibility in adjusting the results, but of course, the darkroom is less forgiving.

[bob carnie]

Thank you , I have no experience with this film.

[Tin Can]

Thodoris is using Fuji AD-M xray film which is high-end Mammography film and more expensive than any other X-Ray film. It might be the best Xray film.

I have not used it. It's metric. But ZZ can get it. https://www.zzmedical.com/fuji-ad-m-mammography-x-ray-film.html

Compare to Ektascan https://www.zzmedical.com/x-ray-accessories/analog-x-ray-supplies/x-ray-film/kodak-x-ray-film/8x10-in-carestream-kodak-ektascan-b-ra-single-emulsion-video-film.html

14X17 Ektascan seems gone. It was $1K for 500 sheets...

Many here use 2 sided Xray Film as it's the cheapest. Note this 14X36" film. https://www.zzmedical.com/x-ray-accessories/analog-x-ray-supplies/x-ray-film/kodak-x-ray-film/14x36-in-full-length-agfa-x-ray-film.html

[koraks]

I currently use Ektascan B/RA; I haven't tried the AD-M film but I suspect it's comparable to the EB/RA. While EB/RA is a quite capable film, it does suffer from very limited latitude - even more so than double sided film due to the lack of an additional layer that seems to help preserve highlight contrast in high-contrast scenes. But double sided film (I have used it, I'd say some 150 8x10 sheets and many of them cut into 4x5) is a royal PITA and not worth the trouble IMO.

[meditant]

Hello,

A portrait with my 8x10 camera : 18x24cm (European size) Fuji ADM MAMO at ISO100, dev HC110 Dil. H 6 mins 20°C.
In shadows under the trees at 11AM

https://www.franck-rondot.com/images/Images%20locale/Divers/post_forums/Portrait%20chambre%208x10%20N%26B%20X-Ray%20-%20Franck%20Rondot%20Photographe.jpg

[Tin Can]

Like!


Hello,

A portrait with my 8x10 camera : 18x24cm (European size) Fuji ADM MAMO at ISO100, dev HC110 Dil. H 6 mins 20°C.
In shadows under the trees at 11AM

https://www.franck-rondot.com/images/Images%20locale/Divers/post_forums/Portrait%20chambre%208x10%20N%26B%20X-Ray%20-%20Franck%20Rondot%20Photographe.jpg

[Andrea Gazzoni]

Hello,

A portrait with my 8x10 camera : 18x24cm (European size) Fuji ADM MAMO at ISO100, dev HC110 Dil. H 6 mins 20°C.
In shadows under the trees at 11AM

https://www.franck-rondot.com/images/Images%20locale/Divers/post_forums/Portrait%20chambre%208x10%20N%26B%20X-Ray%20-%20Franck%20Rondot%20Photographe.jpg

Man this is wonderful

[Thodoris Tzalavras]

Could someone describe the resulting tonal qualitys on print between x ray negative and lets say ortho neg or pan neg?

Bob,
I conducted the tests below for my own purposes, but I thought that they might provide a better answer your question than my words.

4 pieces of Fuji AD-M mammography film received identical exposures from an xray sensitometer's green light.
They were processed together in 11x14" flat bottomed trays, with intermittent agitation.
They received a 2'min prewash, developed in Adox RO9 20+1000ml at 24C (which happens to be my room temperature, and I have stopped trying to fight it in open trays), with each film pulled from the developer at 4', 5.5', 8', and 11' minutes.
There was a 30"sec rinse, a 5'min fix, and a 10'min wash.
They were then contact printed on Ilford MGWT RC paper, including a Stouffer scale for comparison, at grades 00, 2, and 5.
The exposures were made with a Durst L-1200 and an Ilford 500 head (the one with Green/Blue lights), controlled by an Analyser 500. I exposed for a little more than minimum exposure for maximum black.
The densities were also measured with a black-and-white densitometer and the readings were plotted with the (free to download) FilmTestEvaluation.xls file.

As a side-note/disclaimer, almost all of my equipment is second hand (to say the least), and my digitizing/post-processing equipment are not exactly "calibrated".
But if you were to compare what you see on your screen to actual contact prints of your own of a Stouffer scale on the corresponding grades, it should give you a pretty good idea of what the actual prints look like.

https://farm2.staticflickr.com/1897/30747027188_126e4ab209_k.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/NR1xYq)[/url][url=https://www.flickr.com/photos/tzalavras/] (https://flic.kr/p/NR1xYq)

[Fr. Mark]

Thodoris, you do beautiful work!

[Fr. Mark]

I have to say I was disappointed when they combined the pictures and technical threads on Xray, there was a lot of overlap, but it made it slightly easier to find the tech data you need the old way. Don't forget that all Xray is Blue or Blue and Green sensitive. It's not very red sensitive at all, kind of like printing paper in that regard. Consequently, the reds you photograph are rendered v. dark in prints. And, it is also time of day/color of light dependent on its response. Photos from early or late in the day need a lot more exposure, typically, and likewise under incandescent lights. Your light meter will likely tell you to under expose your Xray film under incandescent/early/late light unless you make corrections. Some recommend as much as a stop per hour outside of 10 a.m.-3p.m. I've also seen some quality issues with Ektascan B/RA. The 14x17 is gone? That's sad, that was one of my justifications in planning to make 14x17 camera! I'd not do double sided Xray again without film hangers and dip/dunk approach to developing. YMMV. Double sided is a lot more common/lower cost.

[bob carnie]

I am considering using a different film than what I use right now Ortho 25 Ilford, I get it in rolls and run it on my Lambda (cannot run sheet film).

This film is stupid expensive and I am trying to find a suitable replacement .. I only make black and white separation negatives and the conversion to black and white is done well in advance to the spectral response is not important, having a film I can work in red safelight is actually a benefit. Lately with phone conference with Durst Lambda Techs I have concluded that as long as the film can see the lasers the techs have a way of walking me through the calibration steps and adjusting the laser power to the film sensitivity itself. These techs are way beyond my skill set and a blessing for long term ..

I am looking at con tone film solutions with graphic arts backgrounds so if any suggestions I am all ears. These films are 1/10th the price of same roll size Ilford films. Not saying they are gouging me but since what I am doing is such an obscure, niche application I need to work with vendors supplying a larger market which allows for a better buy .

[Jim Noel]

Bob, in my experience so far: rather poor in general, but with great care it's not too bad. The main issue of xray film is its limited latitude which makes tonality quite harsh if both exposure and development are not controlled very carefully. The thin and soft emulsions also make for development issues (uneveness) to manifest themselves where they would not be an issue with regular film. With great care, very decent results can be had as eg Thodoris illustrates very well above, but personally, I am still struggling (after 3 years) to consistently get usable results. If everything goes well, a good print from a single-sided xray neg is almost indistinguishable from a regular film print. Scanning and digital editing offer more flexibility in adjusting the results, but of course, the darkroom is less forgiving.

The only real issue with x-ray film is if double sided utmost care must be used in handling. I have use both single and double sided for more than 10 years. I began when my supply of Tri-X Ortho ran out. I use the same processing procedure with it as I have with Tri-X and Ilford Ortho films. It does have some small limitations in latitude, but not in scale. With proper handling the scale is as long as most panchromatic emulsions, but being orthochromatic it has a different scale. Since it does not "See" red the resultant print is different from one made with panchromatic film. I prefer the scale perhaps because I originally learned with orthochromatic films in the '30's. The only real difference between today's X-ray emulsions and those of general use ortho ones of the past is the softness of the surface.

[bob carnie]

Bob,
I conducted the tests below for my own purposes, but I thought that they might provide a better answer your question than my words.

4 pieces of Fuji AD-M mammography film received identical exposures from an xray sensitometer's green light.
They were processed together in 11x14" flat bottomed trays, with intermittent agitation.
They received a 2'min prewash, developed in Adox RO9 20+1000ml at 24C (which happens to be my room temperature, and I have stopped trying to fight it in open trays), with each film pulled from the developer at 4', 5.5', 8', and 11' minutes.
There was a 30"sec rinse, a 5'min fix, and a 10'min wash.
They were then contact printed on Ilford MGWT RC paper, including a Stouffer scale for comparison, at grades 00, 2, and 5.
The exposures were made with a Durst L-1200 and an Ilford 500 head (the one with Green/Blue lights), controlled by an Analyser 500. I exposed for a little more than minimum exposure for maximum black.
The densities were also measured with a black-and-white densitometer and the readings were plotted with the (free to download) FilmTestEvaluation.xls file.

As a side-note/disclaimer, almost all of my equipment is second hand (to say the least), and my digitizing/post-processing equipment are not exactly "calibrated".
But if you were to compare what you see on your screen to actual contact prints of your own of a Stouffer scale on the corresponding grades, it should give you a pretty good idea of what the actual prints look like.

https://farm2.staticflickr.com/1897/30747027188_126e4ab209_k.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/NR1xYq)[/url][url=https://www.flickr.com/photos/tzalavras/] (https://flic.kr/p/NR1xYq)

Though helpful to the more serious workers in sensitometry could you walk me through what you see with these results, I am not seeing anywhere a real linear 21 step printout that I require and get with my current film. I need to be able to record exact L readings from monitor to film, or within a few points from L 4 to L 96 or in greyscale %4 - % 96 - I do not work with RGB numbers.

[bob carnie]

The only real issue with x-ray film is if double sided utmost care must be used in handling. I have use both single and double sided for more than 10 years. I began when my supply of Tri-X Ortho ran out. I use the same processing procedure with it as I have with Tri-X and Ilford Ortho films. It does have some small limitations in latitude, but not in scale. With proper handling the scale is as long as most panchromatic emulsions, but being orthochromatic it has a different scale. Since it does not "See" red the resultant print is different from one made with panchromatic film. I prefer the scale perhaps because I originally learned with orthochromatic films in the '30's. The only real difference between today's X-ray emulsions and those of general use ortho ones of the past is the softness of the surface.

Thats interesting and helpful Jim, do you have a name or product code for the film itself so I can see if I can get my hands on this, as well which developer do you use.. For the Ortho ILford 25 I am using a concoction of HC110 that seems to work for me.

[Jim Noel]

Thodoris,
Thank you for your very well done development experiment. It provides a lot of sound basic information for knowledgeable and experienced workers. I am wondering what differences would be evident if working with film exposed through a lens in a camera.

[Jim Noel]

Bob,
Currently I am using single sided Carestream EB/RA in 8x10, and Double sided Carestream T-MAT G/RA in 5x12 and 7x17.
I vary developers too often but my base to which I always seem to return is Pyrocat which I mix from chemicals. I sometimes use HC110H, but have to account for the loss of film speed.

[bob carnie]

Bob,
Currently I am using single sided Carestream EB/RA in 8x10, and Double sided Carestream T-MAT G/RA in 5x12 and 7x17.
I vary developers too often but my base to which I always seem to return is Pyrocat which I mix from chemicals. I sometimes use HC110H, but have to account for the loss of film speed.

thanks Jim - in a typical day I run about 40 ft of film so I need a developer that can be replenished , I love Pyro but it would not be practical for this application.

[Andrew O'Neill]

Bob, will you be running it through your Lamda? I've only seen XRAY in small rolls, like 14 inch wide (forgot length...maybe 200ft?). Not sure if it's single or double-sided. Single sided would be more desirable, as the double-sided is slightly softer, due to two exposed emulsions. I love it though, for alt printing. I have also made copy negatives with it from 35mm negatives blown up to 14x17.

[Thodoris Tzalavras]

Bob,
Xray films were developed to produce high contrast images as shown below by the published data from the manufacturer – in this case, Fuji AD-M mammography film.

But, they are very responsive in changes to their development.

The family of curves in my previous post resulted from processing the films in 1000ml of distilled water containing 20ml of Adox RO9 concentrate (1+50).

The family of curves on the bottom here shows the densities produced when the same test was conducted, using 10ml of Adox RO9 concentrate (1+100).

I'm fairly sure that on a technical level this film could produce the results you're after, but it would require A LOT of testing on your part.

What I'm not sure that you'll be able to overcome is the fragility of this film, since you want to use it in a roller transport system.

Even after several hundred negatives processed, and developing one sheet at a time in flat bottomed trays, I still get the occasional mini scratch.

Maybe the addition of a hardener in the developer could help with this, but I have no experience with it.

https://farm2.staticflickr.com/1864/42823129040_0f23543fea_b.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/28f8Jk3)[/url][url=https://www.flickr.com/photos/tzalavras/] (https://flic.kr/p/28f8Jk3)

[ari velazco]

Bit the bullet and got my 8x10 camera coming from a 4x5. Getting 8x10 film is nearly impossible here in the Philippines. But XRay film are plenty. This particular one is about $50. Anyone tried this and how the film behaves under normal developing times? I use D76. Thank you. https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20180913/e00c37860d69a3083db3f720cb8224b0.png


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Jim Noel]

I haven't used D-76 in years but here are some suggestions.
1..Get a red bulb or a red filter for your safelight.
2. Check that it is pure red by bouncing the light off a CD. This acts as a prism and reflects all of the spectrum available from the light source.
3. Dilute the developer 1+2 or 1+3 or maybe more.
4. develop with the red light 4+ feet from the tray.
5. Develop until the film looks severely overexposed
6. Complete the processing as usual.
7. this negative will NOT be the way you want it, BUT you can add or subtract development time to get a negative to print to your liking.
8. Remember that the negative is not the goal, but the print is. Don't worry if it takes several sheets of film to get a print to your liking.
Don't get discouraged if early experiments aren't to your liking.

[Corran]

If there is any way to get Rodinal to the Philippines, that would be much better. 1:100, 6-7 minutes, 68F, have fun.

[Andrew O'Neill]

Is that single, or double-sided?

[Andrew O'Neill]

Corran's suggestion to try to get Rodinal is a good one. All the XRAY films I've tried over the past 11 years have given me very nice negatives... and it's way more economical than D76. Up here in Canada it's called Blazinal.

[bob carnie]

Bob, will you be running it through your Lamda? I've only seen XRAY in small rolls, like 14 inch wide (forgot length...maybe 200ft?). Not sure if it's single or double-sided. Single sided would be more desirable, as the double-sided is slightly softer, due to two exposed emulsions. I love it though, for alt printing. I have also made copy negatives with it from 35mm negatives blown up to 14x17.

Yes I will try this and I think single sided may be more desiralbe.. 14 inch would be good for a lot of the work I do.

[ari velazco]

Thank you very much for the tips. Yes, I can get Rodinal here. Finding out about xray film made the prospect of going larger than 4x5 possible. Hope to be sharing my first attemps soon.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[aaronnate]

This thread is insanely huge and I read quite a bit but did not find an answer to what I am looking for.

This a curiosity question not technical.

There is a much larger portion of people using green sensitive film, than there is blue. I'm wondering why?

[Andrew O'Neill]

For me, lighter looking foliage. I often shoot with a #11 (green) Wratten filter and get lighter greens.

[Andrew O'Neill]

...and with a yellow filter, I can darken blue skies...and cloud separation.

[Jody_S]

There is a much larger portion of people using green sensitive film, than there is blue. I'm wondering why?

Green responds to a much wider spectrum of light. Blue responds to blue and UV (there is a toe that does respond somewhat to lower wavelengths). Green starts at orange through yellow, blue and UV, and is reasonably close to old-timey orthochromatic films and plates.

[seezee]

I started using Ektascan (1-sided, green sensitive) but switched to half-speed double-sided blue. I got into x-ray film because I wanted something with the spectral sensitivity of collodion w/o the chemical & explosive hazards. Blue is the closest.

I expect most folks favor green because the speed is more consistent throughout the day & it is closer to orthochromatic.

[j.e.simmons]

My 8x10 setup uses a 100-year old Rapid Rectilinear lens, and I contact print on albumen to get prints that look like they could be a hundred years old. Green comes closest to the film available at the time.

[aaronnate]

I expect most folks favor green because the speed is more consistent throughout the day & it is closer to orthochromatic.

Can you explain about the speed consistency?

[seezee]

Can you explain about the speed consistency?

I haven't tested it, but as it is sensitive to a much broader range of light frequencies, it stands to reason that it would not lose speed as much in the early hours of morning or later in the afternoon, since those colors are more present in natural light then.

It's well-documented (in this thread) that x-ray film loses speed in natural light when the colors it is sensitive to are not present (duh). Most of us rate it slower in before 10 AM and after 2 PM and faster between those hours when shooting in natural light. Cloud and shade have similar effect so you may need to apply some mental reciprocity failure calculations when shooting in those conditions.

If you dig into this thread deeply enough you will run across examples like "ISO 80 at noon, but ISO 25 at 9:30 AM."

[aaronnate]

"ISO 80 at noon, but ISO 25 at 9:30 AM."

Is this for green or blue sensitivity?

This thread got so long and disjointed when they merged the two that it is cumbersome to read. I'm picking my way through though, and have not seen any references to this.

[seezee]

Is this for green or blue sensitivity?

This thread got so long and disjointed when they merged the two that it is cumbersome to read. I'm picking my way through though, and have not seen any references to this.

I wish I could remember. I've only used x-ray film (blue or green) in the studio. If I get a chance I'll do some exposure tests with half-speed blue & let you know what I find out.

[Thodoris Tzalavras]

Scan of a darkroom print on Ilford MGWT RC paper.

This is a composite picture, with two negatives printed simultaneously on the same paper.

The picture of the Moon is on a 9x12cm sheet of film, which is projected on the baseboard of a 4x5" enlarger (at a 4.5 magnification), and onto an 18x24cm sheet of film containing the clouds (which is contact printed).

With the same exposure (and some minimal dodging and burning) the two negatives are combined into one print.

Both negatives are Fuji AD-M xray film.
They were both shot with the same camera, a Kodak Master 8x10" view camera, but on different dates.
The Moon was shot with a Symmar 360mm lens on May 29, 2018.
The clouds were shot with a Fujinon W 180mm lens on June 14, 2018.

Both negatives were developed in Rodinal (RO9) at 1+100 dilution (1lt solution in a 10x12" tray), at 24C, with intermittent agitation.
The Moon for 10'min.
The clouds for 12'min.

https://farm2.staticflickr.com/1980/44312061985_c69b6ac07c_b.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/2avGUdH)[/url][url=https://www.flickr.com/photos/tzalavras/] (https://flic.kr/p/2avGUdH)

[koraks]

Thodoris, that is phenomenal. Absolutely perfect, well done. A joy to look at.

[cp_photo]

I went ahead and bought a 100 sheet box of green sensitive double sided 8x10 from zzmedical, mainly because it was the least costly option they offer. I cut some into 4x5 and shot it and developed it in Rodinal and liked it. I also enlarged some 35mm negatives on to it to create B&W positive transparencies, which came out way better than I expected. Strangely the second batch I processed came out great with the exception of having a noticeable blue tint. What is causing the blue tint, and does it mean I didn't rinse it well enough? Thanks.

[Tin Can]

Scan of a darkroom print on Ilford MGWT RC paper.

This is a composite picture, with two negatives printed simultaneously on the same paper.

The picture of the Moon is on a 9x12cm sheet of film, which is projected on the baseboard of a 4x5" enlarger (at a 4.5 magnification), and onto an 18x24cm sheet of film containing the clouds (which is contact printed).

With the same exposure (and some minimal dodging and burning) the two negatives are combined into one print.

Both negatives are Fuji AD-M xray film.
They were both shot with the same camera, a Kodak Master 8x10" view camera, but on different dates.
The Moon was shot with a Symmar 360mm lens on May 29, 2018.
The clouds were shot with a Fujinon W 180mm lens on June 14, 2018.

Both negatives were developed in Rodinal (RO9) at 1+100 dilution (1lt solution in a 10x12" tray), at 24C, with intermittent agitation.
The Moon for 10'min.
The clouds for 12'min.

https://farm2.staticflickr.com/1980/44312061985_c69b6ac07c_b.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/2avGUdH)[/url][url=https://www.flickr.com/photos/tzalavras/] (https://flic.kr/p/2avGUdH)

Great job. I hope Steven R sees this.

[Tin Can]

The blue will not wash out. It's base fog.


I went ahead and bought a 100 sheet box of green sensitive double sided 8x10 from zzmedical, mainly because it was the least costly option they offer. I cut some into 4x5 and shot it and developed it in Rodinal and liked it. I also enlarged some 35mm negatives on to it to create B&W positive transparencies, which came out way better than I expected. Strangely the second batch I processed came out great with the exception of having a noticeable blue tint. What is causing the blue tint, and does it mean I didn't rinse it well enough? Thanks.

[cp_photo]

What is the function of the base fog, and is there a way to minimize its effect?
The blue will not wash out. It's base fog.

[Corran]

I think it's just the color of the base material, isn't it?

If so, I don't quite understand how you had two different results between batches.

[cp_photo]

The first batch seems lighter. In any case I should clarify that I am speaking of the positive transparencies I created. My main objective in posting was to say that I am very happy with the new experience of trying X-ray film.
I think it's just the color of the base material, isn't it?

If so, I don't quite understand how you had two different results between batches.

[scheinfluger_77]

Thodoris that is an excellent montage, you can’t really tell it is two different negatives.

[seezee]

Scan of a darkroom print on Ilford MGWT RC paper.

This is a composite picture, with two negatives printed simultaneously on the same paper.

Wow. Just wow.

[seezee]

What is the function of the base fog, and is there a way to minimize its effect?

It's actually the color of the blue polyester base. All x-ray film uses this substrate. It makes it easier for the radiologist to read.

[Thodoris Tzalavras]

Thanks for the love guys, I really appreciate it!

[Thodoris Tzalavras]

Kodak Master 8x10" view camera
Symmar 360 at f11 t1/5"s
Agfa HDR x-ray film @ 50asa
RO9 (10+1000) for 8'm in 11x14" flat tray
Scan from contact print on Ilford MGWT paper

https://farm2.staticflickr.com/1921/45135701754_3483528bd3_b.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/2bLugCo)[/url][url=https://www.flickr.com/photos/tzalavras/] (https://flic.kr/p/2bLugCo)

[Tin Can]

Nice!


Kodak Master 8x10" view camera
Symmar 360 at f11 t1/5"s
Agfa HDR x-ray film @ 50asa
RO9 (10+1000) for 8'm in 11x14" flat tray
Scan from contact print on Ilford MGWT paper

https://farm2.staticflickr.com/1921/45135701754_3483528bd3_b.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/2bLugCo)[/url][url=https://www.flickr.com/photos/tzalavras/] (https://flic.kr/p/2bLugCo)

[jon.oman]

Kodak Master 8x10" view camera
Symmar 360 at f11 t1/5"s
Agfa HDR x-ray film @ 50asa
RO9 (10+1000) for 8'm in 11x14" flat tray
Scan from contact print on Ilford MGWT paper

https://farm2.staticflickr.com/1921/45135701754_3483528bd3_b.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/2bLugCo)[/url][url=https://www.flickr.com/photos/tzalavras/] (https://flic.kr/p/2bLugCo)

Very nice!

[andrewch59]

WOW! The clarity is awesome! I can almost touch him!

[Peter De Smidt]

Thodoris, that's awesome!

[cp_photo]

Great image. What do you use to write the date/info on the rebate area?

[Thodoris Tzalavras]

Thanks guys!

Andrew, get your hands off my face man!)

cp_photo, I'm using a 0.1 black drawing pen.
The brand is called Simbalion and is supposedly "archival quality, acid free, waterproof, pigment ink". That's what it says on it anyway.
It's just the brand that my local office supply store carries which has the thinnest tip and dries quickly on film. Have been using it for years and I'm happy with it.

[seezee]

Kodak Master 8x10" view camera
Symmar 360 at f11 t1/5"s
Agfa HDR x-ray film @ 50asa
RO9 (10+1000) for 8'm in 11x14" flat tray
Scan from contact print on Ilford MGWT paper

https://farm2.staticflickr.com/1921/45135701754_3483528bd3_b.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/2bLugCo)[/url][url=https://www.flickr.com/photos/tzalavras/] (https://flic.kr/p/2bLugCo)

Nice. Have you considered putting a reflector or a fill light on the shadow side?

[andrewch59]

Now there's a trick, how do you take a selfie with an 8x10 without acquiring a hernia?

[Thodoris Tzalavras]

Seezee, most of my work has been with natural/existing light. I'm only starting to explore the world of artificial lighting.
(I was taught studio lighting back in school some 20 years ago, but learning something for a class and *actually knowing* something are not the same thing!)

Andrew, hm, use a tripod? (actually two, because of the bellows extension required).
The tricky part is focusing, when the dof for a shot like this is so very narrow.
For this picture I used a single 30w LED flood light placed right outside the frame on the left of the camera, and almost too close to my face—and still only got f11.
A stronger light and f16 (or better yet f22) would make it much easier—though it might blind me…
Will find out soon enough…

[Peter De Smidt]

If you raise the overall level of light in the room, that'll close down your pupils and make it easier to bear the intense light of the key light.

[andrewch59]

By chance I have just purchased a godox sl60w led continuous light, just to help achieve decent light for portraits, just waiting on the parabolic softbox to arrive. I have been using a very low wattage light with no shade to try and achieve the soft shadow effect, but the light is still a little harsh. Surprisingly the godox produces a good daylight balance, its perfect for my small area.

[Thodoris Tzalavras]

Peter, reading your suggestion I had one of those Homer Simpson *doh* moments.
Self-evident in hindsight (like so many things in life).
I was so concerned with preserving the directional "feel" of my light setup, that I forgot that the room lights would have practically no effect on the exposure, since the LED is so much brighter.
Thank you for this!
And my eyes thank you too:)

Andrew, your light looks very nice.
Mine is rather ghetto. It's one of those LED flood lights for outdoors.
Very harsh by itself, but quite usable with a simple paper towel attached to its front, and a small piece of cardboard attached to its side facing the camera—to eliminate lens flare.
(I tried a few options for diffuser material, but the plain paper towel worked best while cutting the least amount of light output—plus these lights don't get all that hot, so there is no fire hazard).
Making what I have at hand do what I wish I had, in terms of equipment, is one of those things I take pride in.
If I had the money, as they say… but then again I like Buckley's approach to the subject in his "Satisfied Mind".

[andrewch59]

Frugality is natural for me, hence the use of x-ray film, the godox was a plunge into cheaper powered led lighting (60w) after watching a few you tube vids, the parabolic was a "christmas present to self".
Anyways, your result looks pretty damn good.

[seezee]

Making what I have at hand do what I wish I had, in terms of equipment, is one of those things I take pride in.
If I had the money, as they say… but then again I like Buckley's approach to the subject in his "Satisfied Mind".

That's where covering some cardboard with aluminum / aluminium foil to use as a reflector on the shadow side comes in. ;-b

[andrewch59]

184630
Green x ray film, iso 80, 8 sec, wollensak velostigmat, tray developed in rodinal

[andrewch59]

184702

Ross 16 inch Portrait Petzval, green xray iso 80, 16 sec exp, developed in rodinal

[du1jec]

If there is any way to get Rodinal to the Philippines, that would be much better. 1:100, 6-7 minutes, 68F, have fun.

Film-folk.com sometimes has rodinal. Fotofabrik sells their own version of Rodinal which they call Parodinal. YMMV.

[blue4130]

DIY 10x12 camera, fuji super HR-U-C in HC110 1:70
Still fighting with light leaks on the camera.

https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4878/44118433670_7b6b5df6ca_c.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/2adAvgu)hammer (https://flic.kr/p/2adAvgu) by Vance (https://www.flickr.com/photos/vancelester/), on Flickr

[andrewch59]

I like it Vance, gives it that 1800's collodion look

[andrewch59]

185499
my new 60w light with softbox, green xray, wolly velostigmat, developed in adonal

[Tin Can]

Great!

Good light.

I almost missed the file name of the image.

:)

[Roger Cole]

60w light? How long as the exposure and at what aperture?

EDIT: Never mind, I saw the name of the light above. It's actually 60 watts of LED which would be as bright as something incandescent with much, much more power. :)

[andrewch59]

I would say it is as bright as my 600w mole richardson, minus the heat and constant supply of globes needed. I was sceptical about using LED lighting, this one was cheap enough to experiment with, and so far it has been great. A bonus is the bowens mount

[Bazz8]

Now that's very nice Andrew meaning post 5164��

[andrewch59]

Thanks Bazz, they all look a little different when shrunk so much. Welcome I havent seen you on here before, look forward to seeing some of your masterpieces. Really enjoyed the landscapes you did.

[Wayne]

I am really late to this thread, and do not want to go over 500 posts , not yet anyways

Sorry Bob, its required for membership...:cool:

[NHE]

This thread has given me the courage to try my hand at 8x10. The weath if information is a little overwhelming(I’m barely part way through it), but hopefully Ill be able to contribute soon. I just love the look the film gives and I think it should make really nice platinum and cyanotype prints.

[Sergei]

Hello, I'm trying Kodak's x-ray film. the developer of collagen in the cuvette, after the development in the center remains a spot, as if there does not get the developer. Please tell me how can I fix it ? sorry about my English.
185979

[Alan9940]

Hello, I'm trying Kodak's x-ray film. the developer of collagen in the cuvette, after the development in the center remains a spot, as if there does not get the developer. Please tell me how can I fix it ? sorry about my English.
185979

Looks like uneven development to me. Can you provide more details as to how it was processed?

[Tin Can]

What language do you know well?

que lingua?


Looks like agitation or sloshing problems


Hello, I'm trying Kodak's x-ray film. the developer of collagen in the cuvette, after the development in the center remains a spot, as if there does not get the developer. Please tell me how can I fix it ? sorry about my English.
185979

[Sergei]

Looks like uneven development to me. Can you provide more details as to how it was processed?

Yes. I take a ditch at the bottom of which lies the glass, so as not to disrupt the emulsion. I'm showing signs of ditching. at the time of developer sheet begins to blacken at the edges in the center ostaptsi like mist not proyavlyaetsya to the end.

[Sergei]

Russian

[Sergei]

What language do you know well?

que lingua?


Looks like agitation or sloshing problems

Russian

[Tin Can]

We have Russian members, one is very good at X-Ray.

Look for http://sergeirodionov.com/large-format-photography/


Russian

[Sergei]

Thanks,

[R.K]

Сергей, я не специалист в рентгене, я только перевожу. Все склоняются к мнению ,что у вас неравномерное проявление. Во первых я бы убрал стекло из кюветы. Фильм достаточно прочная вещь и он не повpeдится если у кюветы дно не имеет каких нибудь крупных повреждений или царапин. Во вторых фильм в кювете должен всегда лежать фотослоем наверх. Покачивайте кювету за края из стороны в сторону чтобы фильм двигался в проявителе и следите чтобы фильм был погружен в проявитель и не всплывал на поверхность. Вполне возможно ,что в вашем случае фильм либо приклеился к стеклу или лежал на его поверхности и в этом месте доступ проявителя к поверхности фильма был весьма ограничен и как результат недопроявление. Опять же, я не специалист в этом фильме, Сергей Родионов может быть подскажет вам лучше. Свяжитесь с ним.

[Tin Can]

I google translated the Russian.

I don't believe in processing film emulsion down. Scratches. I slide the film in and down in the middle the solution. Usually no pushing down needed. Then gently lift each tray corner making waves.

Here's a youtube. https://youtu.be/l8XqGBURUUM

[R.K]

That's what I wright Randy. Film in the tray with emulsion up. Unfortunately the Google translated it in absolutely opposite way.

[Tin Can]

Good! Glad google is not perfect.

I had a lot of questions when I started. Normal.

Sergei Rodionov was a big help to me. We met in person a few times.




That's what I wright Randy. Film in the tray with emulsion up. Unfortunately the Google translated it in absolutely opposite way.

[Sergei]

I google translated the Russian.

I don't believe in processing film emulsion down. Scratches. I slide the film in and down in the middle the solution. Usually no pushing down needed. Then gently lift each tray corner making waves.

Here's a youtube. https://youtu.be/l8XqGBURUUM

I use kodak green, emulsion on both sides and very soft, so glass on the bottom of the tray is necessary.

[Sergei]

Many thanks to all for the advice. The problem was solved - more active agitation.186218 This is an image I received today. kodak green 18*24

[Tin Can]

Very cool!


Many thanks to all for the advice. The problem was solved - more active agitation.186218 This is an image I received today. kodak green 18*24

[Sergei]

Very cool!

Thanks

[Neil Purling]

Has anyone here used Foma Indux R4? It is intended for NDT use in industry & I know nothing beyond what is on the Foma site.
I have no idea of the sensitivity or the speed when developed to give pictorial contrast. From the comparison chart I guess the speed to be somewhere between 50 and 125 ASA. As for the colour sensitivity........... It could be blue sensitive only. From the Foma information they suggest use of a yellow safelight.
I am waiting on some Rodinal to arrive as well as a sample of the film.
I don't mind if the effective speed turned out very low in order to get pictorial contrast. I have used Eastman copy film and print stock that were 12 and 3 ASA respectively.

[Neil Purling]

OK. So I have received the film. It is in vacuum-sealed daylight packets sandwiched between two sheets of lead foil.
I am assuming that the film is coated on both sides, because I can't tell any difference between the two sides, except there is an impressed 'FOMA R4' on one side.
I have put four sheets in holders. No idea when I will get a good enough day to shoot them.

I will do them with Rodinal for 6 min diluted 1:100, like my other X-ray film.

[Tin Can]

I looked it up and only found what you found.

I'm sure it will work.

[Neil Purling]

In the scene I was using as a test it was a garden on a cloudy day with the corner of a brick building with a white door frame. I don't think either film has any red sensitivity, so that brick is going to be lacking in detail.Well.....

First test of the Indux R4 was rated 50ASA. I developed in Rodinal 1:100 for 9 min. Barely anything in the shadows.
Some Crontek 4x4 single-sided is OK at that timing, but not exactly snappy.
The Crontek is 25 ASA if developed for 9 min in Rodinal 1:100.
I next gave a mixed tank 6 min with Rodinal diluted 1:50. The Crontek looks better.
The Foma R4 was my main focus of interest, but at least I know what speed it isn't

I have loads of the Foma R4. My next test will be 6 min in Rodinal dil 1:50 with sheets rated at 12 and 25 ASA.
Just for interest i'll do a shot on the Crontek at 50 & 25ASA.
This I will achieve by drawing the slide half way, tripping the shutter. Then I pull it right out and fire the shutter again.
It will waste less film that way, which I really ought to have done today.

[Tin Can]

Neil,

I don't think any X-Ray film is red sensitive. All my variations are marked..... oddly now that I look.

This is 2016 expiry Kodak which has confusing symbols.

https://farm8.staticflickr.com/7907/47030230752_0ae87b568a_z.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/2eDUe6s)Carestream aka KODAK Ektascan 8X10 2016 (https://flic.kr/p/2eDUe6s) by TIN CAN COLLEGE (https://www.flickr.com/photos/tincancollege/), on Flickr

[andrewch59]

187755
Hot Rod show was on again last weekend, this is one of four taken.
4x5 green agfa, adonal 1:100 rotary 10mins, prinzedorff 4x5

[Tin Can]

Really like!

Love fall off on the left.


Too bad the other Tin Can on the right is there.

A problem at show off events for photography

[andrewch59]

Thanks Randy, some deliberate vignetting to highlight the subject. Hopefully some commissions may come my way next year

[bob carnie]

I know I probably asked this before, but where is the most logical place to source out xray film ... I am not looking for cut sheet but rather rolls so I would be interested in a distributer or someone who handles larger film sales.
This thread is over 520 posts so I hope I am forgiven not going backwards on this

thanks

Bob

[Tin Can]

Trade show ends today In Orlando

This reseller is active https://equipment.merryxray.com/

Call them.

[bob carnie]

Trade show ends today In Orlando

This reseller is active https://equipment.merryxray.com/

Call them.

thanks Randy

[bob carnie]

I called them , really not helpful ,she had no clue if they sell any of the products in rolls, I was interested in a couple of them but only cut sheet from what I could squeeze from the CUSTOMER CARE person.

[Tin Can]

I didn't say it would be easy.

Huge rolls of X-Ray are somewhere in USA or Mexico.

Looking at their website hints there are still industrial uses for X-Ray film doing non destructive testing and scanning. I was just looking at this scanner http://www.vidar.com/ndt/index.htm There may be no other way for some specialities. IDK

Also it seems there is still a market for historic mammogram X-Ray digitalation. Compare and contrast.

Try Kodak, Ilford and the rest, maybe X-Ray film will live on...


I called them , really not helpful ,she had no clue if they sell any of the products in rolls, I was interested in a couple of them but only cut sheet from what I could squeeze from the CUSTOMER CARE person.

[Mark Crabtree]

Bob, Just to clarify. Are you looking for uncut rolls of the sheet stock, or coated onto roll film stock?

[bob carnie]

Bob, Just to clarify. Are you looking for uncut rolls of the sheet stock, or coated onto roll film stock?

I am looking for rolls to put on a Lambda, 30 inch roll x 200ft preferrably.
I understand this material is very fragile.

Bob

[Tin Can]

Found another lead...

This NDT supplier sells 14" X 200 ft rolls.

https://www.mpmproducts.com/structurix-d4.html

Ask them about 30" wide rolls and what is the spectral range

[bob carnie]

Found another lead...

This NDT supplier sells 14" X 200 ft rolls.

https://www.mpmproducts.com/structurix-d4.html

Ask them about 30" wide rolls and what is the spectral range

thanks Randy

[GoldMark]

187755
Hot Rod show was on again last weekend, this is one of four taken.
4x5 green agfa, adonal 1:100 rotary 10mins, prinzedorff 4x5

Very good result, like that style

[andrewch59]

Thanks Bernhard, much appreciated

[Neil Purling]

What was the effective speed of the film used to take the shot of the Ford flathead V8?
I usually use Rodinal myself, but I have run out at the moment. So I have had to use Fomadon LQN dil 1+10. Some say that is a clone of Ilfosol, but I don't know for sure.
The film I have been using is Foma Indux R4, which seems to be around 3 ASA in the Fomadon when developed for 10 min at 20C.
The Indux is double-sided, so no worry over whether I got the sheet emulsion side up in the holder.
I wonder whether one should meter from a grey card when using a film that is green or blue sensitive in case it is leading to under-exposure.
I started my experiments with Rodinal dil 1:100 for 10 min as it worked for some Crontex MRF-21.

[Tin Can]

Green and Blue sensitivity means nothing to us, that's for actual X-Ray conversion holders.

AFAIK all X-Ray we have used here is Red insensitive, meaning under safelight.

I think any photo film developer will work. I use Ilford PQ and Rodinol.

[Neil Purling]

One thing I noticed about using X-ray film was that the speed, such as it was went off as the sun got lower. I assume it is because there is less blue light present.
In this shot of the hawthorn trees I had the lens wide-open at f5.8. You can see how the image is well soft at the edges, but it isn't as noticeable as I thought it'd be. Only one of my lenses is actually an anastigmat.
I don't have a duplicate shot taken on panchromatic film for comparison purposes i'm afraid. The dead white sky is typical of x-ray film, blue sky being rendered as white.

[andrewch59]

I shoot normally at iso 80, but some go as low as iso 25, it depends on individual work flow. skies can be tamed by using filters, I always use a yellow or orange filter which gives you a better cloud definition, if they are present. I used a yellow filter on the ford, I find unless I am shooting indoors it is always on my lens.

[Neil Purling]

andrew: The x-ray films are not sensitive to the warm end of the spectrum. Just about as far as green, but no further. It means the usual filters for B&W film do not apply.

[andrewch59]

I have been using yellow and orange filters on xray for quite a while and they work fine, try for yourself. If you were to try red you would get a blank canvas. Yellows allows for nice cloud formations in your pics and more contrast, and orange gives you nastier dark clouds.

[Tin Can]

+1.

[HoodedOne]

Used the ONDU 8x10 pinhole camera again, after a long time.

https://farm8.staticflickr.com/7903/47138887031_3e4ca19bcc_z.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/2ePv7Pz)LF006 by -HoodedOne- (https://flic.kr/p/2ePv7Pz)

Fuji HRT x-ray film with Y/G filter. Developed in R09 1+50 for 6 minutes.

[andrewch59]

Great result, nice balance from whispy couds, highlights and shadow detail.

[scheinfluger_77]

Really good shadow detail too. Nice example

[Neil Purling]

I didn't think THAT was possible. Looks like a orange filter on normal film.

Who made Crontex MRF 21 Plus?
Back in 2016 I obtained some from a member of this Forum, and it wasn't the Member I had believed it to be.
I don't have any Private Message traffic to help me. I figure that I owe them some thanks.
It got me into using X-ray film & it means I am using my Graflex a lot more than I was.

[Mark Crabtree]

Used the ONDU 8x10 pinhole camera again, after a long time.

https://farm8.staticflickr.com/7903/47138887031_3e4ca19bcc_z.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/2ePv7Pz)LF006 by -HoodedOne- (https://flic.kr/p/2ePv7Pz)

Fuji HRT x-ray film with Y/G filter. Developed in R09 1+50 for 6 minutes.

Nice results. I've been using that film in 11x14 for close portraits. I'm a little surprised at your developing time since it took me a while to find something that would give a workable time without being too contrasty (overdeveloped). I settled on my replenished Xtol at 4 1/2 to 5 minutes. Then recently I tried Caffenol since I thought that would be fun for some coffee related portraits I want to do. Those results were so promising that I'm continuing to experiment with that.

I may give the R09 a try since I have some around. What sort of exposure are you getting with your setup.

[HoodedOne]

Thnx Mark

When I started using x-ray film, I read every piece of info I could find about developing x-ray film. The 6 minutes was a good starting point, also for the way In develop my film. For 4x5 and 8x10 I use a Patterson Orbital. And not only do I use very little developer (120 ml), with constant agitation. But also there is very little R09 in it (2.5 - 3 ml). The 6 minutes developing time in combination with the developer and constant agitation turned out pretty good, and I’ve been using it ever since (also for ‘normal’ film).
You can see the result above. I do some digital post-processing, but nothing crazy. And sometimes I use these negatives for cyanotypes. And those also turn out nice (https://flic.kr/p/UZiujA).
The image above was shot as e.i. 100 @ f/230. Measured exposure was 21 seconds, the corrected exposure was 39 seconds.

[Mark Crabtree]

Thnx Mark

When I started using x-ray film, I read every piece of info I could find about developing x-ray film. The 6 minutes was a good starting point, also for the way In develop my film. For 4x5 and 8x10 I use a Patterson Orbital. And not only do I use very little developer (120 ml), with constant agitation. But also there is very little R09 in it (2.5 - 3 ml). The 6 minutes developing time in combination with the developer and constant agitation turned out pretty good, and I’ve been using it ever since (also for ‘normal’ film).
You can see the result above. I do some digital post-processing, but nothing crazy. And sometimes I use these negatives for cyanotypes. And those also turn out nice (https://flic.kr/p/UZiujA).
The image above was shot as e.i. 100 @ f/230. Measured exposure was 21 seconds, the corrected exposure was 39 seconds.

Interesting. Do you think you are getting compensation from exhaustion of the small quantity of developer? Xtol seems to hold the highlights well with decent speed, but Caffenol was even better at that to my surprise. I seem to get noticeably more shadow detail. I'm not saying really more speed since it may just be that I can give more exposure without pushing the highs up too far. The highs seem to go forever, so you could correct the contrast in scanning if you could capture it all, but I'm just contact printing so have to keep it in the ballpark. I'm only shooting x-ray in 11x14, so doing trays and need at least 1 lliter per tray, so your R09 method might not work as well for me, but I will try it at some point. I have some older R09 that has slowed down just a bit that would be dandy for develop by inspection.

I did a few shots on the Fuji HR-T 11x14 yesterday to compare my lens choices for portraits at about life size. I had 3 shots, so setup 3 trays and ran them at the same time. I used Xtol this time since I need to sort out some issues I had when doing this gang processing with Caffenol. These are a contrasty since I didn't want to extend the exposure more and risk loosing one of the comparison. These were about 8 seconds, but Bob can hold pretty still.

https://farm8.staticflickr.com/7802/47105267962_c1f0d79994_c.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/2eLwP3s)11x14 lens comparison. (https://flic.kr/p/2eLwP3s) by Yew Piney (https://www.flickr.com/photos/90951949@N02/), on Flickr

[Neil Purling]

Would any users of 4x5 like to obtain some x-ray film?
It is 10x12cm, so it does not need to be cut down. It is double-sided & apparently somewhat orthochromatic.
The film is in daylight packets, sandwiched between sheets of lead foil. So... No need to cut it down.
This is the Foma Indux R4 I have been using. Apparently the UK importer obtained a large quantity for an industrial user & have been left with quite a lot on their hands. I have had 200 sheets (4 boxes) off them.
They DO NOT want to send the stuff for silver recovery and they have consented to me publicising it on this forum.
I am awaiting whether they would post internationally or not as well as contact details.

[HoodedOne]

Interesting. Do you think you are getting compensation from exhaustion of the small quantity of developer?

Hi Mark,
Your guess is as good as mine.
Most of the time I do these things on intuition, based on things I read. If I blow it, I’ll try something else next time. But as long as I’m happy with the results. I don’t care if people tell me I’m doing something wrong.
The process I use now, works for me. It might not work for you, or anybody else. But it shows that you can still get good results without using the Massive Dev App :)

[andrewch59]

Hi Mark,
Your guess is as good as mine.
Most of the time I do these things on intuition, based on things I read. If I blow it, I’ll try something else next time. But as long as I’m happy with the results. I don’t care if people tell me I’m doing something wrong.
The process I use now, works for me. It might not work for you, or anybody else. But it shows that you can still get good results without using the Massive Dev App :)

If it works, why change. I use the same amount in 375ml of water and either stand develop for 45 mins, or rotary for ten minutes.

[j.e.simmons]

Would any users of 4x5 like to obtain some x-ray film?
It is 10x12cm, so it does not need to be cut down. It is double-sided & apparently somewhat orthochromatic.
I’d be interested if they can ship to the US.

[Neil Purling]

I’d be interested if they can ship to the US.

I regret the seller of the material has indicated UK only.

If anyone from the UK wants any of this film they have indicated a minimum purchase of 2 boxes (100 sheets).
Interested persons ought to contact : info@HexagonLimited.com. State that this is about the the 10x12cm Foma Indux R4 in daylight packets.
They have stated that they have 60 boxes of the stuff. Be advised that this material is expired. It has probably been properly stored, but they just want you to know it isn't fresh material. I don't have a box with the batch code or expiry date.
It is worth having some fun with.

[neilt3]

What sort of price did you pay per 100 sheet's ?
I might look at getting some when I get back off holiday .

[seezee]

Same here, depends on total price.

Never mind, just saw it's UK only.

[Neil Purling]

You should e-mail the seller at the address I gave in order to negotiate the price. Especially if you want several boxes of film.
Then you have to add on shipping of course, which is probably going to be more if you live somewhere especially distant, like the Isle of Skye.

I have been there & the scenery makes Man feel very small & insignificant. I could easily eat up the 150 sheets I ordered documenting that portion of Scotland.
I dare say that the same would apply to the Grand Canyon or Yosemite to our members in the US.

[pepeguitarra]

I got some x-ray 8x10 film. I read that this film has emulsion on both sides.
1) How do you go about placing this film on the film holder? Is there any mark on top to show which side has more emulsion?
2) Doesn't the side that touches the film holder get scratched?
3) Is it really 8x10? Does it fit the film holder, or is there any change that needs to be made ( cut, etc.?)
4) What is the ISO of the film?
5) How can it be developed? time, developer, disposal?
6) Is there lead on it? Where?

[Tin Can]

1 Both sides are the same, so no need of a notch
2 Sometimes
3 Fits just like real film
4 Depends, many start at 80
5 Start by developing exactly like your last real film
6 No lead, that lead issue was about Electron Microscope X-Ray film packaged in lead pouches for longevity. Lead disposal is an issue.


I got some x-ray 8x10 film. I read that this film has emulsion on both sides.
1) How do you go about placing this film on the film holder? Is there any mark on top to show which side has more emulsion?
2) Doesn't the side that touches the film holder get scratched?
3) Is it really 8x10? Does it fit the film holder, or is there any change that needs to be made ( cut, etc.?)
4) What is the ISO of the film?
5) How can it be developed? time, developer, disposal?
6) Is there lead on it? Where?

[lanactoor]

The film's emulsion (present on both sides, in most cases) is relatively fragile while dry but scratching can be minimized with careful handling during loading/unloading. The emulsion becomes EXTREMELY fragile during processing. Any kind of physical contact, from sheet film holders or tray bottoms or your grubby mitts, will surely abrade the emulsion. Extended processing times or powerful solutions can actually cause physical loss and sloughing of the emulsion. Try reversal processing of x-ray film if you're feeling brave :)

ISO is harder to pin down given the orthochromatic nature of the film. With halogen strobes I rate at 80-100 and in full noon sun closer to 200. You can tame contrast by overexposing and pulling development a stop or two (which also helps shorten processing times) but be aware that areas exposed at or near the shoulder of the film's response curve will strongly bleed or 'glow' into adjacent areas due to the lack of an anti-halation layer. This sort of softness is present in all areas, but is particularly pronounced in the shoulder given the quantity of light reflecting back through the emulsion.

The film is nominally designed for 'rapid processing', so solution dilutions or development times can be an order of magnitude away from the standard values. I most commonly develop x-ray in Rodinal 1:100, which for traditional film you would expect a development time of an hour or more, for 6-8 minutes.

[aaronnate]

There is a GIANT thread about X_ray film. I wish they had kept the Image thread separate from the technical thread but it is their sandbox and we have to live with it. There is a LOT of real good info in their you just have to sit down and wade through. COpy and paste the answers to your questions, that way it is one space and you can focus just on those responses.

I have been haveing good exposure luck at 80, but I also spend most of my photo time between 5000 feet and 11 thousand feet. The sun is brighter up here. On the other hand, my developing process and/or handling is not successful and I have gotten lots of scratches. I am currently going through the thread again trying to address this issue. Good thing this stuff is dirt cheap.

[Jim Noel]

There is one single sided x-ray film available that I know of - Carestream EB-RA. It is available in 8x10 only and s notched as are all panchromatic film. Nominal speed in daylight 100. It is a beautiful film and easier to handle because of the single emulsion.
Good luck - I am a devoted x-ray film user.

[Oren Grad]

Threads merged.

[Tin Can]

Jim refers to https://www.zzmedical.com/analog-x-ray-supplies/x-ray-film/carestream-x-ray-film/8x10-in-carestream-kodak-ektascan-b-ra-single-emulsion-video-film.html and only that type as there are a few different types with almost the same name.

It was once also available in 14X17 inch 500 sheet cases only.

The 8X10 as Jim states is great to use.

Easy to cut down to any size under the correct safelight.




There is one single sided x-ray film available that I know of - Carestream EB-RA. It is available in 8x10 only and s notched as are all panchromatic film. Nominal speed in daylight 100. It is a beautiful film and easier to handle because of the single emulsion.
Good luck - I am a devoted x-ray film user.

[pepeguitarra]

Thanks Randy. Very helpful. pepe

[andrewch59]

188509
Nagaoka 8x10, fuji 250mm 6.7, orange filter, green xray film

[pepeguitarra]

Here are my first four attempts at x-ray film. Two actions colluded to create the scratches: 1) Lack of a large tent, so I had to do it inside a changing bag (easier than doing it in the little 4x5 tent), besides, no dark room yet; 2)In order to take the negatives from the holder and put them into the Jobo tank, I had to bend and touch the film everywhere. Regarding the EI, the first two shots were done using an EI:40, the last two at EI:80. I developed the four in the Jobo tank for 6 minutes with Xtol (1+1). Honestly, I am impressed with the potential of X-ray film.


https://farm8.staticflickr.com/7909/46456589085_ab0a4f8a5a_m.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/2dMdapT)jpg-1stXRay-Regadera-Int8x10- (https://flic.kr/p/2dMdapT) by Palenquero Photography (https://www.flickr.com/photos/palenquero/), on Flickr


https://farm8.staticflickr.com/7922/32429838897_a83346ca0a_m.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/RpHpgp)jpg-2ndXRay-Fuente-Int8x10- (https://flic.kr/p/RpHpgp) by Palenquero Photography (https://www.flickr.com/photos/palenquero/), on Flickr


https://farm8.staticflickr.com/7824/33495347278_894cbb4cef_m.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/T2SpMy)jpg-4thXRay-taller-Int8x10-GClaron210-9 (https://flic.kr/p/T2SpMy) by Palenquero Photography (https://www.flickr.com/photos/palenquero/), on Flickr


https://farm8.staticflickr.com/7895/32429841177_b586238cd6_m.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/RpHpWH)jpg-3rdXRay-taller-Int8x10-Fuji250-6.7 (https://flic.kr/p/RpHpWH) by Palenquero Photography (https://www.flickr.com/photos/palenquero/), on Flickr

[andrewch59]

Bravo! Well Done, really like the detail and tonal range of the last one.

[seezee]

I'd say that, for a first attempt, you're about where we all start. Bravo & keep it up!

[Luke79]

Greetings guys
what would be the best color tempereature (kelvin) for (green) xray film to work with LED lights ?

[Corran]

Anything not red / dark orange

[schlicksbier]

My first shot at the use of x-ray film. I've tried 3 different developers on Fuji AD-M film. I was surprised at the heavy clouds on the Kodak developers. Agfa is way smoother. Maybe I have to try Rodinal as many of you seem to use that ...

190166

[koraks]

Agitation is critical when using xray film. Too much and you get uneven development, too little and it's the same story.
I've had good results with instant Mytol in a tray.

[schlicksbier]

Agitation is critical when using xray film. Too much and you get uneven development, too little and it's the same story.
I've had good results with instant Mytol in a tray.

Then I rocked the tray probably too much. Is time also a factor? E.g. watering down the solutions to get longer developing times?