Use of X-ray film: technical discussion with example images [Archive] - Page 3

Jim Fitzgerald

3-Dec-2011, 08:33

I have a box of 14x36 x-ray film that believe it or not I bought to use for carbon transfer tissue! For some reason I went brain dead in exposing and developing my last few batches of 14x17 film. I set up a still life yesterday and made some development changes and got things sorted out. I find that with the 14x17 one needs to be very careful with exposure. Especially when it comes to reciprocity. I frequently work with very long exposures in the dark forest and long exposures are tough to nail down.

Tri Tran

4-Dec-2011, 01:18

11x14 Platinum/Xray film/ Eidoscope No 2.

http://img694.imageshack.us/img694/2451/bonsaid.jpg (http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/694/bonsaid.jpg/)

Tom J McDonald

4-Dec-2011, 01:43

Tri Tran, an amazing glow you've created here.

Tri Tran

4-Dec-2011, 08:32

Thanks Tom, the lens created .My first though to post this one in abstract :)

Jim Fitzgerald

4-Dec-2011, 08:56

Tri, very nice. This shows what the film can do in the hands of a wonderful photographer. Love the look!

Brian C. Miller

4-Dec-2011, 20:15

Has anybody tried MRI film?

BioFlex MRI Film 8x10" 100/bx (http://www.interscience.com/index.php?page=shop.product_details&flypage=flypage_adam.tpl&product_id=1038&category_id=62&option=com_virtuemart&Itemid=60) for $215. "One Sided for radioisotope and chemiluminescent imaging where bands are tightly packed."

Tri Tran

5-Dec-2011, 23:45

Here's my new print.
11x14 / Xray film

http://img37.imageshack.us/img37/6448/birdsparadise.jpg (http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/37/birdsparadise.jpg/)

jon.oman

7-Dec-2011, 10:38

I find that with the 14x17 one needs to be very careful with exposure. Especially when it comes to reciprocity. I frequently work with very long exposures in the dark forest and long exposures are tough to nail down.

Jim,

Do you have some information on reciprocity? A starting point for green laditude? Is it simular to a conventional film?

Thanks,

Jon

Tim k

7-Dec-2011, 15:31

Jim,

Do you have some information on reciprocity? A starting point for green laditude? Is it simular to a conventional film?

Thanks,

Jon

Andrew O'neill put up a chart over on APUG
http://www.apug.org/forums/forum37/76797-x-ray-film-reciprocity-effect.html

jon.oman

8-Dec-2011, 07:52

Andrew O'neill put up a chart over on APUG
http://www.apug.org/forums/forum37/76797-x-ray-film-reciprocity-effect.html

Thanks for the link Tim! That answers my question.

Andrew O'Neill

8-Dec-2011, 10:39

I've used that data in the field and it has worked well for me. At 10s and beyond, I cut back development by about N-1/2

jon.oman

8-Dec-2011, 14:50

I've used that data in the field and it has worked well for me. At 10s and beyond, I cut back development by about N-1/2

Thanks Andrew!

domaz

9-Dec-2011, 11:24

I noticed that several sites also have 8x10 x-ray film. This could be an attractive way for me to test my new 8x10 setup. Does the film load straight into standard 8x10 holders without any trimming?

jon.oman

9-Dec-2011, 12:41

I noticed that several sites also have 8x10 x-ray film. This could be an attractive way for me to test my new 8x10 setup. Does the film load straight into standard 8x10 holders without any trimming?

I don't have to trim the film to load it. You can't beat the price!

You can also work under a red safelight, which is nice......

GeorgesGiralt

12-Dec-2011, 08:44

Hello Guys,
I plan to go the X-Ray film route.
In the last couple of days, I've read the whole of this thread. Now, I'm confused.
May I ask if you can put up a digest for me, done by the Master of the process ?
I think this will be beneficial to everyone as a "state of the art".
My questions are :
1) What kind of film is best for portraiture and landscape and available in 2011, now with the near complete digital X-Ray conversion.
2) Developing in a Ziploc bag : Detailed instructions needed, I did not get it right, sorry
3) cutting film : as one can process with safe light on, will it be possible to cut all the stack at once using a guillotine, this way risking to scratch only the upper and lower sheets ? (I've found 24x30 cm X-Ray film for cheap which, obviouly, will need to be cut in smaller sizes)
4) Outdated film : Will it go bad rapidly or will it be usable if past one or 2 years ? (If I buy a 100 sheet box, once cut, it will represent years of consumption and my freezer is already full... so film will be in the fridge)

Many Many thanks in advance for your help !

EdWorkman

12-Dec-2011, 14:07

1. Your taste, and milage, may vary- it's cheap enough to try blue AND green.
2. Decide if you will put the developer in the bag first, or pour it in. I can't remember what I tried. But I did mess with a sheet of film and a bag in full light, to see how it fit, how to hangle it etc. Once you get the bag sealed it's very straightforward- you can lay it flat, then flip it over for agitation etc.
3. Do you cut regular film in a stack now? I find my guillotine makes the film drift- most folks who have reported film cutting use a rotating slide thingy, from the stationers'.
4. at the price, so what ?? AFAIK we haven't been doing this long enough to know, but perhaps folks have tried outdated film and can report.
Dump your angst and jump in :>)

Dcohio

14-Dec-2011, 07:47

I've only used the green sensitive in 5x7 so I can't comment on the blue or cutting down sheets to other sizes. I do develop in 1 gal freezer bags. A few things I've noticed developing with are since there is an emulsion on both sides the bags have to be perfectly dry if you will be putting the negs in 1st prior to developer. I have noticed some uneven development and strange lines in negs only when the bags were damp. I believe this to be from the emulsion swelling at different rates. I also read that that in the 1st part of development that the Negs become slightly sensitive to red and I have to agree. I have rearranged my darkroom since my addition of a new enlarger ( I haven't even had a chance to use it at all since getting it) and my wet side is closer to my safe light and on the last batch of negs I have gotten some additional exposures on a couple negs. The only reason I know this is because 2 bags I accidentally left with the little white spot for writing on up and I could see it in the neg. I will be moving my safe light to help eliminate this. I've also read that a presoak is needed with X-ray film. I really havent had any issues yet but Im planning on trying it once I have some time off from work. I've been on 7 12hr shifts for awhile. I'm drained and dreaming of fishing and shooting some pics. Not sure how much of either I will be able to do with the holidays coming up.

Andrew O'Neill

15-Dec-2011, 15:03

I used to develop xray film in a large ziplock bag (and I believe I gave instructions on this thread) but now prefer flat-bottomed trays. I have never gotten scratches or scuff marks (intermittent agitation), using pyrocat-hd.

Tri Tran

18-Dec-2011, 23:56

This 14x17 was taken with the 21in RR Toronto lens that I bought from CCharisson . Again thanks to Dan, the opportunity for me to own this wonderful lens.

http://img844.imageshack.us/img844/2937/milesquarepark.jpg (http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/844/milesquarepark.jpg/)

gbogatko

19-Dec-2011, 15:57

Two from today. It's cold out, so I'm doing table top in a little warm room.
The (large) bottle with CXS regular green (stripped on one side)
The other with CXS 'latitude' green. This one was a fight to get anything. I'm gonna try it on regular green and see if it looks different.

George

imagedowser

19-Dec-2011, 16:05

Tri, I have never seen an image posted with as strong a 3d response as this... so much separation from front to back... stunning. Thank you for posting ... Bill

Tri Tran

19-Dec-2011, 18:12

Tri, I have never seen an image posted with as strong a 3d response as this... so much separation from front to back... stunning. Thank you for posting ... Bill

Thanks Bill, the lens did it and I'm very please for it's performance. Here's another shot for the print behind the scene.

http://img210.imageshack.us/img210/424/parkx.png (http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/210/parkx.png/)

Jim Fitzgerald

19-Dec-2011, 18:26

Tri, this is a nice composition and great use of the lens. Beautiful print and I can't wait to see it.

Tri Tran

19-Dec-2011, 18:35

Tri, this is a nice composition and great use of the lens. Beautiful print and I can't wait to see it.

Thanks Jim, sure you will see it . Did you receive the film yet?

Jim Fitzgerald

19-Dec-2011, 18:37

I just got the film. Thanks!

Allen in Montreal

19-Dec-2011, 21:25

Beautiful!

This 14x17 was taken with the 21in RR Toronto lens that I bought from CCharisson . Again thanks to Dan, the opportunity for me to own this wonderful lens.

http://img844.imageshack.us/img844/2937/milesquarepark.jpg (http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/844/milesquarepark.jpg/)

CCHarrison

21-Dec-2011, 16:17

Tri Tran,

I have posted a little blurb on my blog with the above image: http://antiquecameras.net/blog.html

Please send more images made with this lens, soon !

Best,
Dan

http://antiquecameras.net/images/605_potter67.jpg

Jim Fitzgerald

21-Dec-2011, 17:59

Dan, nice to see this on your wonderful site. We do love using lenses like these on the big cameras.

Jim

Tri Tran

21-Dec-2011, 19:49

Tri Tran,

I have posted a little blurb on my blog with the above image: http://antiquecameras.net/blog.html

Please send more images made with this lens, soon !

Best,
Dan

Hi Dan,
It's my pleasure to use such a remarkable lens.Thank you for an opportunity.
Best Regards,
Tri Tran

http://antiquecameras.net/images/605_potter67.jpg

GeorgesGiralt

28-Dec-2011, 16:34

Hello !
I've got 100 sheets of Agfa CP-BU New and a 100 more of Ortho CP-G Plus both in 18x24 cm size.
As I was printing in my darkroom, I souped one sheet of Ortho in the tray of Bromophen developer I use for prints. Film came out unscratched but fogged.
So my questions are :
--As I use Kodak 8x10 safe-lights (actually fitted with an orange Ilford 902 filter for their range of Multigrade papers) I would like to know the Kodak number of the red filter to use (Agfa Healtcare has no info on this).
--Will I be able to use safe-light for the CP-BU which is a blue sensitive film ?
--What kind of developer would be best (pick from HC110, D76, Ilford PQ, Agfa Rodinal or a do-it-yourself one) ?
Now I've to cut the sheets to fit my 5x7 and 9x12/4x5 film holders and go testing !
Thanks for your help.

EdWorkman

29-Dec-2011, 12:23

If you go back far enough here, and on APUG you will find lots of experience reports.
Like
Some folks have experienced a little fogging. i use a thomas, fairly closed , with printing on VC and my body blocks direct illumination- i haven't seen any fog, plus i loaded the film in safelite- boy is that a pleasure.
A good developer is the one you have- if you don't have one, start with D-76.
Jim Fitzgerald likes pyrocat- he does carbon transfer. YMMV
Congratulations on no scratches. Try blocking off half the safelite before you spend money on a new filter

gbogatko

31-Dec-2011, 23:26

Two from Friday. Two more to follow.
8x10 Blue sensitive Xray, 14" Verito lens.
One side stripped.
ISO 50, Tray developed, Dektol 1:10 for 2.5 minutes.

gbogatko

31-Dec-2011, 23:27

Next two.

Tri Tran

3-Jan-2012, 20:57

Here's mine and a behind the scenes shot from a recent trip. The neg came out flawless after 8 times TSA scan.I'm very pleased with the result although I have 37 people onboard for this excursion.

http://img687.imageshack.us/img687/1825/yucatan.jpg (http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/687/yucatan.jpg/)

http://img811.imageshack.us/img811/1825/yucatan.jpg (http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/811/yucatan.jpg/)

Jim Fitzgerald

3-Jan-2012, 22:21

I can see what this will look like in carbon. A huge undertaking Tri. Congratulations!

Tri Tran

3-Jan-2012, 22:29

Thanks Jim, only the fisherman can spot another fisherman from the distance. The 8gr tissue was prepared for this one already.

Tri Tran

4-Jan-2012, 22:45

Here's my favorite orchid called Dendrobium.

http://img810.imageshack.us/img810/914/dendrobium.jpg (http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/810/dendrobium.jpg/)

http://img546.imageshack.us/img546/7682/dendrobium2u.jpg (http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/546/dendrobium2u.jpg/)

Jim Fitzgerald

5-Jan-2012, 06:47

Tri, these are beautiful! I'd always thought that you have a wealth of subject matter in your backyard.

ajbirdboy

5-Jan-2012, 13:44

I can see why its a favorite - I like both prints, but the second one really grabs me - Beautiful!
Al

Jan Pedersen

5-Jan-2012, 18:13

TT Fabulous prints. The Orchid is very interesting and certainly could be a favorite of mine too if i could find one.

Tri Tran

5-Jan-2012, 22:30

TT Fabulous prints. The Orchid is very interesting and certainly could be a favorite of mine too if i could find one.

Thanks Jan. These orchids are favorable to most people and they are highly collectible. Good luck with the search.

Tri Tran

6-Jan-2012, 09:16

Hi Jan, FYI here's the picture of her, this species came from Australia . At this size it will cost you as much as the lens that was taken with .Let me know if you want me to locate you one. The upside is she blooms 2-3 time a year.Enjoy.

http://img849.imageshack.us/img849/4258/den.jpg (http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/849/den.jpg/)

Jan Pedersen

6-Jan-2012, 11:05

TT, Thanks for posting this photo of a very interesting Orchid.

SMBooth

7-Jan-2012, 16:27

Nothing as special as carbon or Pt/Pd just a straight scan of an old boat waiting to rot. 8x10 Kodak MXG @ ISO25 developed in Rodinal 1:100 for 6min with rotary processor.
http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7174/6604881813_143ebd57a9.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/isisford/6604881813/)
Ready to set sail (http://www.flickr.com/photos/isisford/6604881813/)

Jim Fitzgerald

7-Jan-2012, 16:32

Really nice! I love the detail in this shot. May have to get some of this film.

SMBooth

7-Jan-2012, 23:15

Really nice! I love the detail in this shot. May have to get some of this film.

Thanks Jim, It nice film for Xray.

yzfreedom

9-Jan-2012, 10:13

Bavi, Vietnam

http://farm4.staticflickr.com/3009/5852771085_30566f7114_b.jpg

8x10 Afga, Berthiot Paris 300mm 3s f/32 scaned from Drimax x-ray film

Tri Tran

11-Jan-2012, 21:10

8x10 Platinum print taken with 12 in B&L Portrait Plastigmat lens from CCharrison. Again thanks Dan for the wonderful lens.

http://img818.imageshack.us/img818/204/winteraudubon.jpg (http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/818/winteraudubon.jpg/)

Jim Fitzgerald

11-Jan-2012, 21:28

Tri, I really love the abstract quality of this image.

Jim Fitzgerald

11-Jan-2012, 21:29

I need to go to Vietnam! Very nice!

yzfreedom

12-Jan-2012, 09:12

I need to go to Vietnam! Very nice!

Thanks Jim, Wellcome to Vietnam!

http://farm3.staticflickr.com/2786/5849188903_2be61127e3_z.jpg
One more from Berthiot Paris 300mm

Jim Fitzgerald

12-Jan-2012, 10:10

Thanks Jim, Wellcome to Vietnam!

http://farm3.staticflickr.com/2786/5849188903_2be61127e3_z.jpg
One more from Berthiot Paris 300mm

Very interesting. How are you printing these?

yzfreedom

12-Jan-2012, 11:35

Mr Jim.
I just make a contact print on a cheap photographic paper to test. Exactly in Vietnam have not much of choice to do now. I going to do with another process next time-maybe-with better condition.

yzfreedom

16-Jan-2012, 04:33

Time

http://farm3.staticflickr.com/2474/5832033750_7182c3b379_z.jpg

Krauss 500mm

Corran

22-Jan-2012, 17:41

Hi guys. Great thread! I just purchased an 8x10 to toy with and the first thing I thought was to get some x-ray film to save some money.

Anyway, I had two questions:

1. I know the cheaper film with emulsions on both sides technically shouldn't work with BTZS tubes. However, would it work if I get some mesh or something to line the inside of the tube to lift up the film? I don't have a ton of space to do tray development.

2. I was interested in the "tri-color" process discussed in another thread where you use R, G and B filters on 3 separate b&w film shots and combine them in PS to make a color picture. Apparently you can take just 2 and a plain one and take the "difference" of those from the plain sheet. So...if you shot a green x-ray sheet, a blue one, and a normal shot of like Delta 100, could you make a color shot from those?

Tim k

22-Jan-2012, 17:59

#1. I dont see how, this stuff is soft. If you figure out how let us know.

Andrew O'Neill

22-Jan-2012, 18:24

Both sides of xray film need to be developed. By placing mesh inside the tube will only screw up that side of the film. But you could always strip that side of the film with ammonia. If you are planning on alternative printing, I wouldn't recommend it as there would not be enough density range. Sorry but I have no experience with tri-colour printing. I do know that yellow, green, and blue filters work fine with xray film (I use cxsonline green latitude stuff). I feel confident though that what you propose would most likely work. It certainly would be cheaper than using three conventional sheets of film.

Corran

22-Jan-2012, 18:28

Thanks for the responses. So I didn't catch this earlier in the thread (well, it's 45 pages!) - I can just screw up the second emulsion all I want if I'm stripping it off anyway?? That makes things easier. I'm used to stripping Polaroids so I already have the process down.

Andrew, what effects do you get with those filters on that film?

Andrew O'Neill

22-Jan-2012, 18:30

I take it you will be scanning the film in to make your colour prints? If so, then strip away!

Corran

22-Jan-2012, 18:32

I'm planning on scanning but also contact printing (silver). I want to try alt processes sometime but I'll figure that out later.

Andrew O'Neill

22-Jan-2012, 18:35

Stripping the negative is fine for scanning and contact printing on silver papers. Did you have an alt process in mine?

Corran

22-Jan-2012, 18:39

I want to try everything :D
But pt/pd and carbon intrigues me. But I know nothing about them so I'm not worried about it right now.

Jay DeFehr

22-Jan-2012, 18:40

#1. I dont see how, this stuff is soft. If you figure out how let us know.

Agreed. The emulsion is very soft when wet. I think a screen would leave marks. What might work, is the following:

Make a tube out of bubble wrap that will fit inside your BTZS tube. If you can put the film inside the bubble wrap tube, and put the bubble wrap tube inside the BTZS tube, you might be able to avoid scratches, which mostly occur on removing the film from the tube. If the BW is too thick, there won't be room for the film, so you need small bubbles, but I think you do need bubbles, as they will keep the sleeve from collapsing during development, like a sock falling down, and they'll allow (theoretically) developer to get to both sides of the film. On the other hand, it might leave a bubble pattern on your film. No guarantees.

I've had best luck with a pane of glass in the bottom of a tray. I suppose a glass/ceramic cake/casserole pan would work, too.

If you're feeling very experimental, try the ziploc method. Put your film in a ziploc bag, pour in your developer, zip, and turn the bag over, end for end a few times every few minutes until your film is done. Pur out eh developer, rinse, fix, wash, all in the bag. This is tedious because the handling a bag full of liquid is awkward, and zipping/unzipping is kind of a pain, but it definitely works and won't scratch your film if you're careful removing it from the bag. Development has to be done in the dark, or under safe light. I've developed a lot of film this way, but it's always messy. What's needed is a lightproof, mylar zip-lock bag with a lightproof valve for pouring chems in and out. That would be a useful item.

UberSquid

23-Jan-2012, 08:44

I've been playing around with Kodak Latitude x-ray film for a few weeks now and I'm finally getting some results that I like. I've been shooting it at asa 100 utilizing a spot meter an the zone system. Development has been in small trays Rodinal 1:200 for six minutes then stripping the back side with bleach. (Developing info received from this site)

The high contrast has actually been a life saver a few times! The other day I was out shooting when it was really overcast and my subject was comparably flat. The Foma that I shot came out unprintable but the x-ray film had decent contrast and I got, almost, the exact image I was looking for! The only problems I'm having seem to be with the extreme ends of the range. I'm using a number 1 filter to print but I'm still having issues with shadows and highlights.

Any suggestions? More diluted developer? Longer or shorter development times? I extended the development by 20% and really didn't see much difference in the negative which leads me to believe that I need to drop my development time. I'm still fairly new to the dark room and really new to x-ray in general so any advice is appreciated. I've never gone off the map like this and with no hard documentation for this film I'm not sure where to go with my experimentation next.

Thanks!

Jeremiah

Jay DeFehr

23-Jan-2012, 09:55

UberSquid

23-Jan-2012, 10:48

Jeremiah,

I've not worried about controlling contrast because my printing process likes a lot of contrast, but if I was, I'd try my low contrast developer. I formulated it for use with Lith film, but it should work with X-ray film, too. The developer is still a work in progress, but the following should work for X-Ray film:

TEA (triethanolamine) 75ml
Ascorbic acid 1g
Phenidone 7g
TEA to 100ml

Dilute 1:100

Develop test negative by inspection to determine development time.

If you're interested in trying this, PM me and I'll give you the basic instructions for mixing, etc. This stuff works really well with Lith film, and since it's so simple, it's easy to tune for any specific use, either by dilution, or by altering the ratio of phenidone to ascorbic acid. Keeping properties are generally very good, but depend somewhat on the way the concentrate is mixed and stored (it should be as dry as possible). The concentrate will last at least a year, under almost any conditions, and considerably longer if some basic precautions are taken. Good luck with your experimentation!

I'll admit a bit of trepidation when it comes to mixing my own developers. Not because I'm worried about messing it up but because I'm afraid of what it would lead to. You see, if I get involved in the chemistry of photography that deep, the next thing you know, I'll have maxed out my credit card at the chemical supply house, I'll have a spare bedroom full of chemicals and be taking courses at the university in chemistry. It will spiral out of control, my wife will leave me and take the cats.

So you can see, the only good that can come out of this is me getting rid of the cats!

Jay DeFehr

23-Jan-2012, 10:59

I'll admit a bit of trepidation when it comes to mixing my own developers. Not because I'm worried about messing it up but because I'm afraid of what it would lead to. You see, if I get involved in the chemistry of photography that deep, the next thing you know, I'll have maxed out my credit card at the chemical supply house, I'll have a spare bedroom full of chemicals and be taking courses at the university in chemistry. It will spiral out of control, my wife will leave me and take the cats.

So you can see, the only good that can come out of this is me getting rid of the cats!

Understood! We should always err on the side of caution where impulsive/obsessive behavior is a risk. And you're probably in deep enough with LF X-Ray film!

UberSquid

23-Jan-2012, 13:24

Out of curiosity though, where does one find such chemicals? I'm sure that they could be ordered online but I'm wondering about local supply. If I could find a local supply of raw chemicals then it would make sense to start mixing instead of ordering my packaged chemicals from the internet.

I've found the local co-op to be a great source for other projects but they assure me that they don't have Phenidone.

Jay DeFehr

23-Jan-2012, 13:46

UberSquid

23-Jan-2012, 13:56

Hello slippery slope!;) I don't know where local is for you, but if you were in Seattle you could pick up some phenidone at Glazer's, and ascorbic acid at Madison Market, among many other places, I imagine. The TEA is the difficult one. I get mine from The Chemistry Store (http://www.chemistrystore.com/Chemicals_S-Z-Triethanolamine.html), by the gallon. You can get ascorbic acid there, too. I get most of my other chemicals from Artcraft Chemicals (http://www.artcraftchemicals.com/products/). Even with shipping, compounding your own chemicals can be far less expensive than buying commercial products, and you gain access to a world of formulas not commercially available, like the one posted above. Ok, enough preaching. Let me know if I can enable you...er.....help.

I live in Bloomington Indiana. It's a college town but for all intents and purposes it's a small rural town that likes to think it's not so no chemical supply depot here. Indianapolis is an hour away so I can drive up there to procure materials I just need a direction to go in. Since chemical photography isn't really mainstream anymore it's not like there are photo warehouses in major cities like there used to be. With other projects I've found the similar industries that use the components that I need such as getting Argon from a welding supply shop. I didn't know if there was anything similar in photo chemical supply.

Jay DeFehr

23-Jan-2012, 14:12

Poke around the Chemistry Store a little and you'll see it's not really a photo chemical supply-- more like a soap and cosmetics supply-- but you can still get 2 of the three ingredients for my developer there, along with many others useful in compounding photo processing chemicals. If there's something similar in Indianapolis, you might give them a try, but you're not likely to find the phenidone. But 100g of phenidone will last a very long time, and costs little to ship.

Jay DeFehr

23-Jan-2012, 16:33

The question now is when will someone put this together with images, film supplier links, recommendations and user info and put it in the articles section of the Home Page?

Volunteering?

Tri Tran

23-Jan-2012, 21:49

This shot taken at Soka University with Jim F.
Xray 14x17 E print :)

http://img12.imageshack.us/img12/5707/sokaq.jpg (http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/12/sokaq.jpg/)

Jim Fitzgerald

23-Jan-2012, 21:58

Tri, that came out sweet! We need to go back to that place!

Tri Tran

23-Jan-2012, 22:06

Yes we have to go back to this place , in the mean time I have to make an E print for a friend because the neg is a little weak for Carbon.It was fun that day though.

Jim Fitzgerald

27-Jan-2012, 11:33

Since this was shot on green sensitive x-ray film I thought I'd post it here. I bought jim Galli's half an Edioscop a while ago knowing that I could produce something like this with it. I printed this in carbon and the print in real life glows very nicely. For me this is a wonderful match.

Corran

30-Jan-2012, 21:24

Actually, having just done my first developing, stripping, scanning, and soon contact printing of x-ray film, I'm considering doing a write-up and possibly a video to describe the process. The results so far: pretty stunning. I'm using 8x10 Fuji green-sensitive x-ray film and tried some different dilutions and times for Rodinal and finally got a really great, full-scale negative.

Corran

30-Jan-2012, 21:39

And here's a sneak-peek:
(Taken with Fuji Super HR-T with Nikon 300mm f/9 @ f/45 for 2 seconds and developed in Rodinal 1:100 for 6 minutes)

http://www.oceanstarproductions.com/photosharing/0005 (Custom).jpg

Corran

30-Jan-2012, 21:42

Taken with Fuji Super HR-T with Nikon 300mm f/9 @ f/45 for 2 seconds and developed in Rodinal 1:100 for 6 minutes:

http://www.oceanstarproductions.com/photosharing/0005 (Custom).jpg

gchu1970

31-Jan-2012, 06:24

Jim Fitzgerald

31-Jan-2012, 07:55

I'm going to start using X-ray. I found you all need to strip one side of the emulsion after exposure. How to do it? Any one can help to detail explain the exact process of development of X-Ray film(green sensitive)?

I don't know, but there have been several post about it here on LFF. Use the search function. The image I posted has not been stripped. I don't see the need? I try to KISS!

Corran

31-Jan-2012, 08:26

The image I posted though was stripped.

There are posts about it but the quick and dirty is, lay the sheet on a piece of glass, with whatever side you want to keep down touching the glass. Use painters tape to tape it securely with no gaps (I use extra on the rounded corners). Then brush bleach on lightly. I use a foam brush I bought for $1 at Lowes. I also use bleach watered down 1:1. Carefully wash. And you're done!

Randy

31-Jan-2012, 08:39

You might take a look at this thread (http://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/showthread.php?t=48099). Someone probably discusses it there. I read it months ago but can't remember for sure. I know some do not bother striping one side, they just leave it. I purchased a box of the green sensitive a while back but have not done any experimenting myself. One of these days...?

jon.oman

31-Jan-2012, 09:09

gchu1970

31-Jan-2012, 09:19

Thanks for all information here. I'm going to strat my test soon.

Corran

31-Jan-2012, 09:21

Thank you! I did do a contact print last night and I am quite happy with the finished product.

Andrew O'Neill

31-Jan-2012, 09:30

Click on Randy's link, then go to page 11.

gbogatko

31-Jan-2012, 17:03

How to strip - at least it works for me!!
One note, I'm now shooting at ISO 50 -- and then stripping.
"Smush" using a cheap 2 inch brush.

Stripping reduces the contrast. Imagine exposing two pin registered negs and then trying to print with both of them against the paper. That's what the double coated x-ray is like. And if you're shooting at 80, then you're definitely getting density on both sides. The stuff does NOT have an anti-halation coating and for all I know is just a single coating on either sides. Just like the first films.

I shoot the green stuff at iso 200. "green" acts like blue/green sensitive (orthochromatic), and blue means only blue sensitive. Blue looks VERY old school, zero sky detail. Both give results that look like stuff from the silent film days. Both work very well with soft focus lenses -- much closer to the film for which the lenses were designed.

If you've gotten used to developing the stuff by inspection, you'll be disappointed the first time you strip off one side and see almost 1/2 your density disappear leaving a grainy mess. I just arrived at this point. Develop by inspection is wierd because one thinks they're overdoing it. I'll have to get a feel for the 'right look' if I'm going to strip off one side.

"Stripping" consists of pasting the film to a piece of glass (larger than the neg) using blue painter's tape, spritzing clorox all over it, then smushing around the clorox until all the emulsion is gone. Wash it off and take a look. If you're lucky, it's all gone, but most times there'll be stuff left behind (it looks like really bad mottle). A 2nd spritz and smush gets the rest. The painter's tape is what keeps the clorox away from the 'good' side, so pay attention to how you paste the the neg down.

Stripping is an artistic decision. X-ray has a really unique look. Sometimes it's appropriate, and sometimes it isn't. I stripped a shot taken with a soft lens that looked right out of a pictorial book. Then I stripped off one side and it looked awful. Practice, practice, practice.

I'll put up some of my stuff later tonight when I get back home.

George

EdWorkman

31-Jan-2012, 17:44

AND if you happen to be ham-fisted like me, and
IF you can scratch the emulsion ONLY on one side, the scratches go away with the stripping, I asked and it was confirmed

dsphotog

2-Feb-2012, 15:11

Which Xray film (blue or green) for the most pleasing & natural skintones in portraits?

Jim Fitzgerald

3-Feb-2012, 08:48

I've used green and I like the look.

gchu1970

3-Feb-2012, 08:57

Thanks to all your explanation. One more question, there are blue and green sensitive X-Ray films. Which is better in film photo, scenary and portrait?

Andrew O'Neill

3-Feb-2012, 11:11

Neither. They are both good. Same goes for architecture.

imagedowser

3-Feb-2012, 11:14

fsphotography

3-Feb-2012, 13:59

Does anyone know if Dupont Cronex mrf-33 xray film is still available,and where i can get it? Also, who is a supplier Fuji Super hr-t xray film?
Frank.

gchu1970

3-Feb-2012, 19:39

Do yourself a favor, Click on randy's link and read the whole thing. Start to finish.... "Preparation precedes confidence".... X-ray isn't "regular" film, the $$ you save will be spent in your time, skill and equipment needed (tanks, holders, etc)to use it effectively especially in larger formats.... unless you like it, or make use of it's unique charactaristics for carbon printing or gum or some other alternative process, you may find it all a waste of time & energy. It's no economic silver bullet and for most of us, will not replace a standard film like Ilford, etc... I'm in the middle of it now and having a blast... the fun part for me is worth it alone. Good luck.

Surely. I don't believe it will replace normal film. But maybe enjoying the process to get special effects. I've prepared for spending extra efforts now.

yzfreedom

4-Feb-2012, 02:45

http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7166/6725717859_018eac8afa_b.jpg

Corran

4-Feb-2012, 03:42

csxsonline provides the Fuji HR-T film.

Here is an example of a portrait on HR-T green-sensitive film. Excuse the light leak. I'm also NOT a portrait photographer, this was done on a whim.

http://www.oceanstarproductions.com/photosharing/0007s.jpg

Jim Fitzgerald

4-Feb-2012, 07:52

Here are some portraits of my son's. All shot on Green sensitive x-ray film and printed in carbon transfer. One is natural light and the other is lit with my 2,000 watt Fresnel. Both of these were shot with my 14" Darlot.

UberSquid

4-Feb-2012, 11:54

Do yourself a favor, Click on randy's link and read the whole thing. Start to finish.... "Preparation precedes confidence".... X-ray isn't "regular" film, the $$ you save will be spent in your time, skill and equipment needed (tanks, holders, etc)to use it effectively especially in larger formats.... unless you like it, or make use of it's unique charactaristics for carbon printing or gum or some other alternative process, you may find it all a waste of time & energy. It's no economic silver bullet and for most of us, will not replace a standard film like Ilford, etc... I'm in the middle of it now and having a blast... the fun part for me is worth it alone. Good luck.

Exactly, it's not a replacement, it's just another tool in the kit. Personally x-ray film has been a revelation for me. X-ray film allows me to take the photos that I want to take it certain situations. I still use regular film but I know now that when my visualization requires it I now have a new film at my disposal.

eink

9-Feb-2012, 11:10

I love all of your images and tips. I am new to this kind of photography but wanting to give it a go. However, there seem to be some problems in finding a supplier of x-ray films in the UK. Has anyone got any experiences of this? It seems like the US suppliers only ship to the US.. Would really appreciate any help.
Thank you,
Elin

SMBooth

10-Feb-2012, 01:15

Tri Tran

11-Feb-2012, 23:59

Here's my 11x14 proofing Xray .

http://img826.imageshack.us/img826/285/scan1202110003.jpg (http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/826/scan1202110003.jpg/)

Jay DeFehr

12-Feb-2012, 02:40

Tri, that's beautiful.

Jim Fitzgerald

12-Feb-2012, 08:18

I agree Tri, lovely.

dlin

12-Feb-2012, 08:22

Nicely done, Tri.

Tri Tran

12-Feb-2012, 08:38

Thanks everyone. I 'm glad you enjoyed it.
Jim, Daniel check on Fb for more details. Thanks.

Hugo Zhang

13-Feb-2012, 19:56

She is a beautiful girl now, Tri!

Holdenrichards

15-Feb-2012, 20:41

http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7180/6884273813_ba18c72bac_z.jpg

This is Kodak Ektascan X-Ray Film Developed in Caffenol-CM
1902 Eastman View No. 1
Konica Hexanon 201mm GRII

Corran

15-Feb-2012, 21:16

Interesting result. Mind sharing your recipe and development time/temp? I'm getting fairly good negs with Fuji HR-T in Rodinal but you've piqued my curiosity in caffenol.

Holdenrichards

15-Feb-2012, 21:51

Interesting result. Mind sharing your recipe and development time/temp? I'm getting fairly good negs with Fuji HR-T in Rodinal but you've piqued my curiosity in caffenol.

Film shot at 25 ASA developed in caffenol

Caffenol cm
2tablespoons + 1 teaspoon washing soda
2teaspoons crystal vitamin c
4 teaspoons instant coffee
1/2 teaspoon salt
750 ml water
Room temp water
3:30 constant gentle agitation

Corran

15-Feb-2012, 22:49

Awesome, thanks. I'll definitely try it.

Bill Kumpf

16-Feb-2012, 13:13

My first attempt at both 8x10 and X-ray Film
Green Dental in PMK. Print scanned on Office copier

SMBooth

16-Feb-2012, 13:51

Film shot at 25 ASA developed in caffenol

Caffenol cm
2tablespoons + 1 teaspoon washing soda
2teaspoons crystal vitamin c
4 teaspoons instant coffee
1/2 teaspoon salt
750 ml water
Room temp water
3:30 constant gentle agitation

Salt! Why, Ive never seen that in a Caffenol formula before.
Edit - never mind salt acts as a restrainer

Holdenrichards

16-Feb-2012, 19:54

My first attempt at both 8x10 and X-ray Film
Green Dental in PMK. Print scanned on Office copier

Really great for a first go!

Tony Karnezis

16-Feb-2012, 20:09

http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7166/6725717859_018eac8afa_b.jpg

That's beautiful.

yzfreedom

16-Feb-2012, 23:06

Thanks Tony Karnezis!

Milosz Wozaczynski

19-Feb-2012, 10:21

Fuji SuperRX blue in rodinal 1:50, not stripped

http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7199/6886630313_731b9794b3_o.jpg

jumanji

19-Feb-2012, 10:32

I tried Afga, Konica and Cimax. All are green X ray film, but they are so different.

http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7068/6897004651_e9fe8ef892_z.jpg

jumanji

19-Feb-2012, 10:33

Fuji SuperRX blue in rodinal 1:50, not stripped

http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7199/6886630313_731b9794b3_o.jpg

I like this!

Jim Fitzgerald

19-Feb-2012, 12:21

This is a lovely portrait. Love the look and feel of this one.

Tri Tran

20-Feb-2012, 10:45

Good job using Xray everyone.
How about 11x14 Palladium contact print with Dick Arentz Ratio Methode for Wet Plate look, and a 4:1 rembrandt lighting guided by Portrait Master Phillip Stewart Charis.
A 15 in Darlot Puyo Anachromatique for Artist was used for this shot.

http://img819.imageshack.us/img819/3855/dylanprint.jpg (http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/819/dylanprint.jpg/)

RPippin

20-Feb-2012, 11:45

jumanji, this is one of the best portraits I've seen in a long time. Something about the imagery with the loose backdrop really works for me. Keep at it.

jon.oman

20-Feb-2012, 13:09

A still life image from today. This is only my second attempt at this. I found out that my Novatron power pack is toast on its high setting!

http://www.gophotog.org/allphotos/film/medium_photos/LunaDiLuna300ppi.jpg

8x10 Cambo Legend : 300mm Caltar II-N
80 ISO : f11 : 1/125 sec (flash) : Green Latitude x-ray film
D-76, 6-1/4 minutes @ 67 degrees F.

gbogatko

20-Feb-2012, 14:27

Fuji SuperRX blue in rodinal 1:50, not stripped

http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7199/6886630313_731b9794b3_o.jpg

That's what Blue stuff will do -- It's the closest thing you can get to turn of the century film. Almost a wet-plate look.
Bravo -- really nice.

daniel malva

20-Feb-2012, 16:28

http://farm7.staticflickr.com/6169/6204119295_e773cb52ff.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/malvafw/6204119295/)
Samurai (http://www.flickr.com/photos/malvafw/6204119295/) por daniel_malva (http://www.flickr.com/people/malvafw/), no Flickr

MXG Kodak
12 iso
5 min 1:20 Ilford multigrade at 20ºC
Toyo Field 45a
165mm 2.2 (homemade lens (http://www.flickr.com/photos/malvafw/5738269312/))

Jim Fitzgerald

20-Feb-2012, 19:13

Tri, that is beautiful all the way around. I hope the images that are being posted are prints? Please let us know as I think that is important.... at least to me.

Tri Tran

20-Feb-2012, 20:48

Tri, that is beautiful all the way around. I hope the images that are being posted are prints? Please let us know as I think that is important.... at least to me.

it's a print Jim, Palladium ratio methode with very high temp potassium oxalate as developer. Weston Parchment paper as always.

Jim Fitzgerald

20-Feb-2012, 21:10

Tri, thanks. I knew that but I appreciate the information. I feel it is important to show the end result and say what it is so people get an idea of how this film looks when printed.

jumanji

20-Feb-2012, 22:31

jumanji, this is one of the best portraits I've seen in a long time. Something about the imagery with the loose backdrop really works for me. Keep at it.

Thank you :).

Tri Tran

20-Feb-2012, 23:50

Tri, thanks. I knew that but I appreciate the information. I feel it is important to show the end result and say what it is so people get an idea of how this film looks when printed.

As you know everyone workflow is difference and the Xray has its own characteristic . Ages developer, film type , neg density, paper and process method are all come to play. I know it's quite challenging , all I can say is LESS posting , KEEP practicing :)

SMBooth

22-Feb-2012, 15:55

Stack of old firewood waiting for winter at a friends house
8x10 B&J 270mm KodakMXG @ ISO25 in Rodinal 1:100

http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7187/6775438256_c8b9ee81f9.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/isisford/6775438256/)
Firewood (http://www.flickr.com/photos/isisford/6775438256/)

SMBooth

22-Feb-2012, 15:59

MXG Kodak
12 iso
5 min 1:20 Ilford multigrade at 20ºC
Toyo Field 45a
165mm 2.2 (homemade lens (http://www.flickr.com/photos/malvafw/5738269312/))

Daniel your using the same film as myself I notice your down to ISO12, is that to keep the density because your stripping the back layer?

Tom J McDonald

22-Feb-2012, 16:42

SMBooth

23-Feb-2012, 00:31

Thanks Tom

daniel malva

23-Feb-2012, 01:45

Daniel your using the same film as myself I notice your down to ISO12, is that to keep the density because your stripping the back layer?

http://farm7.staticflickr.com/6169/6204119295_e773cb52ff.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/malvafw/6204119295/)
Samurai (http://www.flickr.com/photos/malvafw/6204119295/) por daniel_malva (http://www.flickr.com/people/malvafw/), no Flickr

Hi! (my English is not good! but I'll try to explain as best as possible)
I'm sorry. I posted the wrong movie, seeing the notes on the work, I used this image to the Kodak T-Mat G / RA.

When I did this picture had not used X-ray film. I worried about the high contrast that could have appeared in the images.
So I thought to expose a little more and create less.
The result was negative and smooth with moderate density.
I'm currently using MXG sensitive film and another just to have both blue and results in higher speeds, ISO 100 and revelation with ilford Multgrade 1:50.
This week I want to do some photos with the T-Mat G / RA at high speeds.
Thank you!

SMBooth

23-Feb-2012, 03:35

Thanks Daniel, I understand what your saying fine. I also have some T-MatGRA in 5in x12in which make nice pinhole panos when I use it.
Be interested in seeing how your MXG goes at ISO100

daniel malva

23-Feb-2012, 06:28

Thanks Daniel, I understand what your saying fine. I also have some T-MatGRA in 5in x12in which make nice pinhole panos when I use it.
Be interested in seeing how your MXG goes at ISO100

What great news you're understanding me!
I have a T-MatGRA 5x12, and I cut the plates in 5x7 and 4x5!
Try MGX iso 100 with development in Ilford Multgrade 1:50 in 22 º C.

SMBooth

23-Feb-2012, 17:16

What great news you're understanding me!
I have a T-MatGRA 5x12, and I cut the plates in 5x7 and 4x5!
Try MGX iso 100 with development in Ilford Multgrade 1:50 in 22 º C.

Will do.

daniel malva

23-Feb-2012, 18:05

Will do.

Here a test to show the spectral sensitivities of each film:
Kodak MXG
http://www.malva.fot.br/giz/v700_teste_green.jpg
IBF RXA
http://www.malva.fot.br/giz/v700_teste_Blue.jpg

premortho

25-Feb-2012, 19:15

Thank you! I did do a contact print last night and I am quite happy with the finished product.

You hit the exposure right on the button----look at those luminous shadows! The old school rule for Regular (blue sensitive) and Orthchromatic (green sensitve) was, expose for the shadows, develope for the highlights.:cool:

Holdenrichards

27-Feb-2012, 10:46

Here a test to show the spectral sensitivities of each film:
Kodak MXG
IBF RXA

Wow Blue film is MUCH better, thanks for posting.

Holdenrichards

27-Feb-2012, 10:49

Fuji SuperRX blue in rodinal 1:50, not stripped

Bravo! great image

gbogatko

27-Feb-2012, 17:11

Green Xray
shot iso 80 -- stripped.
Nikkor 240.

Cheers,
George

http://www.inluxeditions.com/hidden/Flowers-grnxray.jpg

John Conway

27-Feb-2012, 17:33

Again, I am in unfamiliar territory here, but I will say this, these images on Xray film are exceptional.

Holdenrichards

27-Feb-2012, 19:36

Green Xray
shot iso 80 -- stripped.
Nikkor 240.

Cheers,
George

Beautiful clarity.

Holdenrichards

27-Feb-2012, 19:38

http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7046/6790838650_5d08438b59_z.jpg

Eastman View No. 1 8x10 Camera
Kodak X-Ray Film
Konica Hexanon GRII 210mm
Caffenol/CM

John Conway

27-Feb-2012, 19:41

Fuji SuperRX blue in rodinal 1:50, not stripped

http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7199/6886630313_731b9794b3_o.jpg

Great image

SMBooth

27-Feb-2012, 21:43

http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7046/6790838650_5d08438b59_z.jpg

Eastman View No. 1 8x10 Camera
Kodak X-Ray Film
Konica Hexanon GRII 210mm
Caffenol/CM

Man that's nice Holden.

Holdenrichards

28-Feb-2012, 06:01

Man that's nice Holden.

Thanks Shane!

gbogatko

28-Feb-2012, 18:50

Eastman View No. 1 8x10 Camera
Kodak X-Ray Film
Konica Hexanon GRII 210mm
Caffenol/CM

Very nice!! -- btw, what is 'caffenol?'

Holdenrichards

29-Feb-2012, 08:15

Very nice!! -- btw, what is 'caffenol?'

Thanks, you can read all about caffenol here http://caffenol.blogspot.com/

mat4226

1-Mar-2012, 11:47

Finally starting to get the hang of this Agfa Green Latitude X-ray film:

69327

Eastman Commercial 8x10 + Goerz 14" Red Dot Artar
Shot @ ASA 125 (not stripped) in Pyrocat HD 1:1:100

Vaughn

1-Mar-2012, 12:27

Finally starting to get the hang of this Agfa Green Latitude X-ray film:

Yes you are!!!

Tim k

1-Mar-2012, 15:26

Finally starting to get the hang of this Agfa Green Latitude X-ray film:

69327

Eastman Commercial 8x10 + Goerz 14" Red Dot Artar
Shot @ ASA 125 (not stripped) in Pyrocat HD 1:1:100

I like this. Very nice mood.

Jim Cole

1-Mar-2012, 17:54

Finally starting to get the hang of this Agfa Green Latitude X-ray film:

69327

Eastman Commercial 8x10 + Goerz 14" Red Dot Artar
Shot @ ASA 125 (not stripped) in Pyrocat HD 1:1:100

Ooh, really like this one. Well done!

Holdenrichards

2-Mar-2012, 09:24

Finally starting to get the hang of this Agfa Green Latitude X-ray film:

Eastman Commercial 8x10 + Goerz 14" Red Dot Artar
Shot @ ASA 125 (not stripped) in Pyrocat HD 1:1:100

Great image Matt!

Holdenrichards

2-Mar-2012, 09:27

More Caffenol and X-Ray Film Exposures

http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7056/6945789887_cd3135dd37_z.jpg

Eastman View No 1. 8x10 Camera
Konica Hexanon GRII 210mm
Kodak B/RA X-Ray Film
Caffenol C/M

Kirk Gittings

2-Mar-2012, 09:58

Nice.

Holdenrichards

2-Mar-2012, 10:07

Nice.

Thanks!

gbogatko

3-Mar-2012, 08:37

More Caffenol and X-Ray Film Exposures

http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7056/6945789887_cd3135dd37_z.jpg

Eastman View No 1. 8x10 Camera
Konica Hexanon GRII 210mm
Kodak B/RA X-Ray Film
Caffenol C/M

Ooooh. Inspiring!
2 questions: How long in the soup, and is it stripped (I think not, but have to ask).
I"m collecting all the requisite chems now.

Gerald Figal

3-Mar-2012, 19:56

For all those who were wondering if double-sided x-ray film could be processed in a drum (and for those who warned against it), I'm pleased to report that I actually tried two 8x10 Agfa Green X-ray film sheets just now is my 11x14 Unicolor Print Processing Drum and I had--judging by the negs that are drying now--even development. No mottling, no streaks.This kind of drum has ridges on the wall that keeps the film suspended for flow on both sides. I figured that especially since the x-ray film is thin and lighter than normal film, it would float fine. It did. The results look identical to the tray processing I've done.

Holdenrichards

3-Mar-2012, 20:44

Ooooh. Inspiring!
2 questions: How long in the soup, and is it stripped (I think not, but have to ask).
I"m collecting all the requisite chems now.

6 minutes for 50ASA exposure this is single emulsion X-ray so no stripping needed, good luck theres all kinds of good advice on 2 sided X-ray in this thread

Jay DeFehr

3-Mar-2012, 20:58

More Caffenol and X-Ray Film Exposures

Eastman View No 1. 8x10 Camera
Konica Hexanon GRII 210mm
Kodak B/RA X-Ray Film
Caffenol C/M

I'm not a big fan of landscape photography, for the most part, and so I've not done much of it. When I do, I tend to choose places as subjects, rather than views, or vistas. This is just the kind of place I might be inspired to photograph, and I would be happy to do it half as well as you've done. Yours is a beautiful image, whatever material you used to make it, and all the more impressive given your re-purposing.

SMBooth

4-Mar-2012, 02:26

Finally starting to get the hang of this Agfa Green Latitude X-ray film:

Eastman Commercial 8x10 + Goerz 14" Red Dot Artar
Shot @ ASA 125 (not stripped) in Pyrocat HD 1:1:100

Beautiful stark image. It made for Xray film.

SMBooth

4-Mar-2012, 02:28

Well done (again) Holden. Whats your development time in Caffenol? If you don't mind.

Holdenrichards

4-Mar-2012, 09:01

Well done (again) Holden. Whats your development time in Caffenol? If you don't mind.

@25 Asa it's about 3 mins constant agitation in caffenol c/m

WayneStevenson

4-Mar-2012, 10:50

I've tried the drums. I get even development but those ribs scratch the hell out of the emulsion.

I've stuck with glass in a tray, stand develop in Dektol. 1 minute. Only problem is when the negative suctions to the glass. I've been planning to nip the corners from the glass to give me somewhere to grasp. But the only time I remember I want to do it, is when I'm cursing as the clock keeps ticking on me. 20 extra seconds (still have to be gentle to not scratch the emulsion) is a long time when you have a 1 minute development time. Heh. Contrast ramps up big time on me.

Eventually you have to panick. Heh. And then you scratch as you can see in the top corner on that CXS Half-Speed Blue.

69516

gbogatko

4-Mar-2012, 11:09

Green 8x10 xray, shot at ISO 80, d76 6 min, stripped.
Cooke 300mm lens with tons of flare, wide open.

http://www.inluxeditions.com/hidden/Cooke-bowl.jpg

Holdenrichards

4-Mar-2012, 16:38

I'm not a big fan of landscape photography, for the most part, and so I've not done much of it. When I do, I tend to choose places as subjects, rather than views, or vistas. This is just the kind of place I might be inspired to photograph, and I would be happy to do it half as well as you've done. Yours is a beautiful image, whatever material you used to make it, and all the more impressive given your re-purposing.

Thank you so very much!

mat4226

5-Mar-2012, 07:39

Thanks everyone for all the kind words about the previous work on x-ray film. Here's another, this time with a little more controlled light:

69575

Eastman Commercial B 8x10 + Fujinon W 210mm f/5.6
Agfa Green Latitiude @ ASA 125 + Pyrocat HD 1:1:100 (semi-stand in hangers)

Special thanks to @JimFitzgerald for continuously suggesting hangers and tanks, they're wonderful with x-ray film!

Tri Tran

5-Mar-2012, 20:06

http://img837.imageshack.us/img837/5913/64492282.jpg (http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/837/64492282.jpg/)

A shoot out with Digital NAG group in Fountain valley, California. Except this one with an 8x10 Eidoscope.

Jim Fitzgerald

5-Mar-2012, 22:47

Tri, nice! I think portraits of lovely women helps x-ray film in a big way.

Yes 8x10 on hangers is the way to go! KISS is my thing!

Milosz Wozaczynski

8-Mar-2012, 12:50

More Caffenol and X-Ray Film Exposures

http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7056/6945789887_cd3135dd37_z.jpg

Eastman View No 1. 8x10 Camera
Konica Hexanon GRII 210mm
Kodak B/RA X-Ray Film
Caffenol C/M

Good work. Did you buy this kodak in 8x10" format or it was just larger and you cut the sheets?

Holdenrichards

8-Mar-2012, 13:21

Good work. Did you buy this kodak in 8x10" format or it was just larger and you cut the sheets?

Nope it comes in 8x10!

Milosz Wozaczynski

8-Mar-2012, 13:35

Can you tell me where you bought it? Here in Poland we have only 13x18cm (almost 5x7) and 24x30cm(bit larger than 8x10) sheets. [8x10= 19,5x24,5cm]

Is this it?
http://www.zzmedical.com/zencart/8x10-kodak-ektascan-bra-single-emulsion-video-film-p-1408.html

Holdenrichards

8-Mar-2012, 17:17

That's the one.

gbogatko

8-Mar-2012, 18:39

How many sheets per box?

Barry Kirsten

8-Mar-2012, 19:57

I don't know how many sheets per box, but suspect 100. A data sheet for Kodak B/RA is here: www.carestream.es/ektascanBRAfilm4153_techInfo_ti1789.pdf

gbogatko

9-Mar-2012, 07:09

$70 at 100/box is a LOT lower than EFKE 100 (ca. $330 ) or ILFORD FP4 ($440).
This makes 8x10 more doable for those of us on budgets.
CXS (100 sheets at $25/box) is super affordable if you like the smell of Clorox.

Corran

10-Mar-2012, 22:36

Jay DeFehr

10-Mar-2012, 23:47

Jim Fitzgerald

11-Mar-2012, 09:56

I discovered today that my Fuji Super HR-T green-sensitive x-ray film apparently has pretty good reciprocity characteristics. I shot a couple of 30-second exposures with no extra compensation and they came out perfectly. I don't know if in this huge thread anyone has done any reciprocity tests so I thought I would post this. I will be trying out some longer exposures to see just how good this stuff is. I'm surprised it was even good out to 30 seconds.

I have recently experienced the same thing with my green sensitive x-ray film. I was adding reciprocity from a post that Andrew O'neil (I think) put up about this. I have gone back to not adding any and my negatives are much better. After about 30 seconds I just doubled the exposure and it seemed to work fine. X-ray film is a totally different animal.... at least I think so.

Vaughn

11-Mar-2012, 10:38

Jim, have you used the Adox 25 ASA film? We used a few sheets in the redwoods. Rated it at 25, gave a one minute metered exposure exposures at 2min, 4min, and 8min -- as I had heard it had steep reciprocity failure. The 2 min exposure was printable, the 4 and 8 minutes were not over-dense and should have been usable, but the image fell apart in the highlights. I had also heard that the film did not take well with over-exposure...now I know why! Too much exposure (as with the pure white branches in the sun in the background of this image) causes the film to spread out the exposure. Either the anti-halation coating can't handle it, or there is some sort of bleeding of light (or chemical reaction) in the emulsion from over-exposed areas into the surrounding areas of the emulsion.

But the result was that these highly defined bright branches became visual mush. I certainly learn my lesson with that film! The reciprocity failure was in the "normal" range and the 2min exposure had enough shadow detail (placed on Zone III). It will make exposing high SBR situations such as we had in the redwoods tricky.

Has anyone seen anything like this in X-ray film? It has no anti-halation layer...and even more, sticks another emulsion where the anit-hal layer would be! Has anyone seen a limit to the amount of exposure the types of X-ray films can take before there is some loss of definition in the highlights (best seen when a white and a black are next to each other)?

Another thought -- perhaps a pyro type developer might help with the Adox 25. If the spread of exposure around over-exposed areas in the emulsion is more from a chemical reaction happening during development that bleeds into or contaminates the areas in the emulsion around it, then a tanning developer might harden the emulsion enough to prevent this "bleeding" within the emulsion.

Jim...have you noticed any difference in x-ray negs developed with non-pyro and with pyro developers?

I got to get out of the house!

Vaughn

Andrew O'Neill

11-Mar-2012, 10:53

After about 30 seconds I just doubled the exposure and it seemed to work fine.

So then you are compensating then, Jim?
I still use the reciprocity data that I posted a while back. I prefer my shadows to be full of light, rather than black voids. I give compensation up to 32 seconds. After that, I don't bother, as the film's DR seems to flatten out resulting in negatives that look grossly overexposed. My tests have shown that the green stuff that I use has bad reciprocity characteristics. The curves don't lie... but then it does come down to the image and personal preferences.

Andrew O'Neill

Corran

11-Mar-2012, 11:48

Andrew, exactly what film are you using? From my reading it seems that the various films from Fuji, Kodak, Agfa, and generic brands too all vary to a broad degree, not to mention with what development techniques are used!

I did not know you had done some reciprocity tests on x-ray film. Do you have a link to these?

I can categorically state that with a 30-second exposure on the Fuji Super HR-T there was NO loss of shadow detail, for me, rated @ ISO 50, developed in a BTZS tube w/ Rodinal 1:100 for 6:30 and stripped. Which is great news for me because I'm stopping down a lot and having resultant longer exposures with 21"/28" lenses.

Vaughn

11-Mar-2012, 12:25

I have only used the blue-sensitive (Agfa) and I was surprised at how the differently it reacts in different light situations. Tests at 400 and at 800ASA, taken as portraits in open shade, the 400ASA yielded very dense, over-exposed negs. At 800 the negs were dense, but very printable. These first tests were developed at the hospital. The light on the subject(s) was almost all blue light from the sky.

Under the redwoods, the working ASA seemed to be closer to 100. I used 400 and had under-exposed negs but originally blamed in of poor reciprocity. But it just might be the difference in the color of the light that is lighting the scene. So when I have exposed this type of x-ray film, I take note if there is a lot of blue sky adding light to the scene and adjust accordingly.

Vaughn

Richard Rankin

11-Mar-2012, 12:38

Jim Fitzgerald

11-Mar-2012, 13:16

Vaughn, I have used Efke 25 for years in all my formats except 14x17. The only problem I've had with bleeding of the highlights is when I shoot a heavily backlit scene. I have an image from Yosemite that I will eventually nail that has highlight density that is about 3.30. I over developed the neg a bit so exposure time in the Nuarc is at 1300 units! That is pushing 40 minutes. The detail in the neg is amazing and it is there I just have to print it right. I always use Pyrocat-HD with my Efke and with the x-ray film I use Pyro or D-76 and I have not noticed much difference at least visually. Printing the x-ray negs seems to be the same regardless of developer. I believe that it is true that if you over expose the Adox/ Efke you will build density real fast to a point of where it is just not usable. Some of my best negative shot in the Redwoods when we last worked together were shot on Efke 25 with the 8x20. 10 minute exposures at F-64 and the neg's and carbon prints are some of my best. I love using this film in the Redwoods as the slow exposure allows the light to wrap around the scene and give an added 3-d quality to the light. It was great when there was no wind to boot, remember!!

Andrew, maybe it is the way I meter? I try to keep my shadows open and full of light as well. Zone III and let the blacks fall where I wish them to. Using the Pyro I know I can hold the highlights. Seems like if I give it to much exposure I loose all of my contrast. Could be the lens, ISO rating and the different light that I shoot in. I'm not one for extensive testing and I think it is me as curves do not lie, I agree. I did test a still life set up using my Fresnel and a CFL for light and noticed that the negs were virtually the same. I believe for me I have been overexposing my film as I rate it at 80. Maybe Vaughn is right in that it has different speeds in different lighting situations.

Andrew O'Neill

11-Mar-2012, 14:51

Seems like if I give it to much exposure I loose all of my contrast.

Very true! I found this out as well. Jim, if they way you work works, then keep doing it. I'm not crazy about testing but I do feel that it is necessary to really know your materials.

WayneStevenson

11-Mar-2012, 16:24

Just move the glass with the film, from the developer tray into the stop. It's much easier to handle a plate than a sheet of film.

Heh. Don't know why I didn't think about that. But giving it some though, I am worried about any developer between the bottom emulsion and glass. There is no way for the stop to reach it.

Jay DeFehr

11-Mar-2012, 16:44

Heh. Don't know why I didn't think about that. But giving it some though, I am worried about any developer between the bottom emulsion and glass. There is no way for the stop to reach it.

There's no problem with the stop reaching the back side. Think of it the other way around-- if you didn't want stop on the back side of the film, how effective would putting the negative on a piece of glass be in preventing it? Not very effective, it turns out. The stop gets to the back side the same way the developer does in the developing tray. Give it a whirl!

Vaughn

11-Mar-2012, 18:18

Jim -- thanks. The 2 minute negative was exposed under a 750W self-ballasted reflector Merc Vapor lamp. I hope I don't have to write that again! We went for an hour and the print was a little over-exposed -- some Sodium carbonate was used to reduce the print. The tissue was 6gr lampblack paint to 750lm water and 90 grams of gelatin -- brush sentitized w/ 2% Am Dicho. It might look good at 4%. I do not have the print available to scan. Carbon prints were properly exposed using the 4 minute exposure negative, but the highlights (it was a back-lit scene) were unsharp in what I thought was an unpleasant way. The prints looked almost locally solarized in the highlight areas.

A second image was made the same day using the same film, but more out in the light along the creek and without the large dark areas needing detail as the other image needed. The negative with one extra stop printed nicely. The one with an additional stop exposure I did not bother trying as the neg did not look good due to the over-exposure.

As a rule of thumb, I expose by finding the largest shadow area I want detail in and expose that on Zone III. I figure there will be smaller areas that will fall into lower zones to give the print some snap. Then, hopefully I read my lab notes on processing successful negatives (or failures) with similar SBR and develop at the dilution and time that seems best.

Vaughn

Jim Fitzgerald

11-Mar-2012, 18:28

Vaughn, this is what I do when exposing my Efke-25. I just finished printing a negative from Yosemite. The valley in fog. A great scene. I posted the digital shot on FB. My print was exposed @ 1400 units on the Nuarc 26 1ks. About 40 minutes or 50 I'm not sure. Two 700 unit exposures. I used a 16 gram tissue and 1 1/2% dichromate. Natural lighting was soft and had no real contrast extremes. I managed a great print with this combo. Only problem is a little pigment in the small piece of sky in the image. I can crop that out as it is not much and the image is worth it. I reduced the print as well to give it some pop!

Back-lit scenes are tough to expose and especially print. I feel that you are right on the edge and keeping the highlights tame is not easy even if one is developing by inspection as I do.Love to see the prints. They sound great. I love the challenge of back-lit work. Tests one's skill.

Randy

12-Mar-2012, 16:49

Shot this on 8X10 CSX Green latitude. ISO 50 processed in Coffenol CM for 10 minutes. Neg was increadably thin. Image was almost undectable. How the scanner picked it up, I have no idea. Back to the drawing board.

70074

Before the forum was redone a while back, I could post images that would show up, not as thumbnails that you needed to click on to enlarge, but full size. Now, when I click on the "insert image" icon it gives me the choice of getting the image from my computer or from url. I past in the url but it always posts as a thumbnail image. I can't figure out how to post large images...help!

Corran

12-Mar-2012, 18:57

Out in the country today to get my mind off things.
300mm Gundlach Radar @ f/16, rear tilt and swing. Fuji green-sensitive film. I think I need to up my development, the highlights are not very good and it was pretty low-contrast before some curves.

http://www.oceanstarproductions.com/photosharing/0023s.jpg

Randy

13-Mar-2012, 10:14

CSX Green in coffenol - 150mm Konica Hexanon GRII on 8X10.
I had thrown this under processed neg in the trash after it washed. Dug it out this morning and gave it a scan.

http://dl.dropbox.com/u/52893762/img567.jpg

Tim k

13-Mar-2012, 11:40

I'm really liking some of the things I've been seeing here that have been dipped in some sort of coffee related product.

Does it still smell like a wet roasted cat?

I tried it a while back, but it was a little hard to get past the smell.

Holdenrichards

14-Mar-2012, 12:26

CSX Green in coffenol - 150mm Konica Hexanon GRII on 8X10.
I had thrown this under processed neg in the trash after it washed. Dug it out this morning and gave it a

I like it!

Holdenrichards

14-Mar-2012, 12:28

Out in the country today to get my mind off things.
300mm Gundlach Radar @ f/16, rear tilt and swing. Fuji green-sensitive film. I think I need to up my development, the highlights are not very good and it was pretty low-contrast before some curves.
]

Lovely frame! I would develop for another minute, rocking the tray the whole 7 minutes. 2 sided negs are THICK so don't be surprised if you can't see them.

Corran

14-Mar-2012, 13:07

Yeah I upped my development a minute to 7 minutes with constant agitation (BTZS tube) for this one. After stripping it's still seems thin, but scanned okay (except for dust on the scanning element, argh). I have been meaning to do some zone testing on this stuff but haven't had time so I'm just experimenting.

http://www.oceanstarproductions.com/photosharing/0025cs.jpg

Jim Fitzgerald

14-Mar-2012, 19:10

Thanks to everyone for posting to this thread. I hope that you are all printing these negatives? It would be nice to see prints!

megapickle1

15-Mar-2012, 13:43

Hallo X-ray film shooters!
Is anyone here, I could ask in German language. My English is too poor to express what I want to know about x-ray film and processing.

Thanks
George

Randy

15-Mar-2012, 14:55

George, your English is probably better then mine...and I have been speaking it for about 50 years.

andreios

15-Mar-2012, 23:54

Hello George,
I am not a native speaker and also quite a newcomer to XRay processing, but if you don't find anyone more experienced in both fields, drop me a PM. :)

megapickle1

16-Mar-2012, 10:49

Hi Randy, hallo andrios!

My questions regarding x-ray film and processing it are as follows:
Yesterday I visited my PD because of some pain in my knee. He take several X-ray shots of it. In this process I realised that they use some usual technical x-ray film (blue-ish) with very good rendition. I asked the assisting nurse, what kind of film and how she is processing it. She didn`t know the film brand and she told me, that aften the shot she ist throwing the cartridge in a processing mashine anf after a few minutes the film is developed. My idea was (is) to buy some x-ray film (5x7, which is the smallest format in the doctors lab), the nurse is loading it in my filmholders, I take some shots and bring the film to the doctors lab for processing. Would that work? Whats your opinion?

George

megapickle1

16-Mar-2012, 10:54

Sorry for the typos !

Vaughn

16-Mar-2012, 10:58

...My idea was (is) to buy some x-ray film (5x7, which is the smallest format in the doctors lab), the nurse is loading it in my filmholders, I take some shots and bring the film to the doctors lab for processing. Would that work? Whats your opinion?

George

Is the nurse good-looking? I have done the same with 8x10 film (tho I loaded the holders) -- the lab tech enjoyed the opportunity to see something else besides bones in the images! Of course there is no contrast control thru development, at least as far as I know.

Vaughn

Randy

16-Mar-2012, 13:22

George, I have just started using X-ray film myself. As Vaughn said, I think your images, if processed by your doctors nurse, may be very contrasty. But at least you will know then, that you need to consider different chemical/processing procedures. I believe much of the X-ray films are high contrast orthochromatic, but you will want to strive for continuous tone results, similar to what you get with modern panchromatic films. From my very limited experience, it can be achieved with the correct processing.

Vaughn

16-Mar-2012, 13:41

The negatives I took of my boys in open shade and landscapes under the redwoods were on Blue-sensitive X-ray film (processed at the hospital) were perfect for platinum/palladium printing (with no contrast agent needed). So they would have been a little contrasty for normal silver gelatin printing.

Vaughn

megapickle1

16-Mar-2012, 14:20

@ Randy and @ Vaughn

Hey friends, that are really helpful answers.
I´m thinking to go 5x7 with my Sinar because the difference of the rear frame holder is not to big compared to 4x5. And cheaper too. The format adapter plus the complete back incl. groundglass is not very expensive today in used condition. I have to look for a not very contrasty film too - I think there is some to buy. A 200 ISO type film should be the right one.
I´m glad that someone else let process the x-ray film at the doctors lab too. BTW, the nurse isn´t really good looking but that fact is not very important.
Thank you for helping with X-ray photography.
George

megapickle1

16-Mar-2012, 14:28

Orthochromatic film would be perfect for classical portraits - white faces, black lips - I love that old fashioned look.
George

Vaughn

16-Mar-2012, 18:37

Orthochromatic film would be perfect for classical portraits - white faces, black lips - I love that old fashioned look.
George

Or make freckles come out where you did not realize there were freckles...and his lips do look darker!

(and one learns about red clothes!)

And tossed in a detail of his brother, Bryce. (He has much darker complextion than Calder.

Vaughn

Platinum/palladium prints

Jim Fitzgerald

16-Mar-2012, 19:22

Portraits with x-ray film are great. I've posted this before but seeing as how it has come up again here is my youngest son. We were have some fun with my Fresnel. Boy this new attachment stuff is bizzare.... or is it all the wine I'm drinking???70301

Tri Tran

16-Mar-2012, 19:59

Jim Fitzgerald

17-Mar-2012, 06:40

Still working on the lighting.... I'll get there! Need much more practice!

Randy

22-Mar-2012, 16:35

I have finally gotten around to some testing with X-ray film. My motivations are strictly artistic and economical. I just can't afford panchromatic 8X10 film any more...good gosh! And I still have some HC-110 left so that is my developer of choice...because I still have some left.

My initial test was in coffenal cm. Negs were virtually un-usable. Way to thin.

All below are 8X10 Green latitude CSX exposed at 50 ISO, processed in HC-110 "H" (1:63) in trays with a 1 minute water pre-soak (don't know if I should have done that or not) for 8 minutes @ 68 degrees F, agitating about every 60-90 seconds by taking the bottom sheet and moving it to the top, going through the stack of four sheets that were in the soup.

I did have a safe light on (a small 15-20 watt red bulb like you might get in a small armature darkroom kit) and the bulb was covered by a white hanky and about 6 feet away from my processing station, which was in the tub that I was leaning over. No direct light from the bulb fell on the negs, only light reflecting off the ceiling. I did get some fog. I can clearly see a slight outline on one sheet of the sheet that was on top of it. I will greatly dim my safe light in the next process, or eliminate it all together.

The scratching was significant but I did not take particular care to avoid them. I was aware scratching is a problem and some have employed means to avoid that. I used ribbed 8X10 trays, but my scratches were almost entirely near the film edges - very few were more than an inch away from the edge, which leads me to believe they are occurring as I life the bottom sheet to move it to the top of the stack. I may be allowing it to drag on the top lip of the tray. I may just have to process one sheet at a time.

Any way, here some scans:

No-name 13" f/9.5 Petzval
http://dl.dropbox.com/u/52893762/img568a.jpg

300mm Caltar-II S
http://dl.dropbox.com/u/52893762/img569a.jpg

The next two were exsposed on the same sheet using the 1/2 dark slide method to get a 4X10.

Konica Hexanon GRII 150mm @ f/45
http://dl.dropbox.com/u/52893762/img570a.jpg

Konica Hexanon GRII 150mm @ f/9 (wide open)
http://dl.dropbox.com/u/52893762/img571a.jpg

All in all, I like the results. The exposures were very close to what I would like to get with panchromatic films and they are...sharp enough?

Randy

22-Mar-2012, 18:53

8X10 Green latitude CSX exposed at 50 ISO, processed in HC-110 "H" (1:63) in trays with a 1 minute water pre-soak (don't know if I should have done that or not) for 8 minutes @ 68 degrees F, agitating about every 60-90 seconds.

No-name 13" f/9.5 Petzval
http://dl.dropbox.com/u/52893762/img568a.jpg

Konica Hexanon GR II 150mm
http://dl.dropbox.com/u/52893762/img571a.jpg

Holdenrichards

23-Mar-2012, 07:02

8X10 Green latitude CSX exposed at 50 ISO, processed in HC-110 "H" (1:63) in trays with a 1 minute water pre-soak (don't know if I should have done that or not) for 8 minutes @ 68 degrees F, agitating about every 60-90 seconds.

No-name 13" f/9.5 Petzval

Konica Hexanon GR II 150mm

These look really good! nice work.

Holdenrichards

23-Mar-2012, 10:45

http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7113/6996495507_cc01505afb_z.jpg

1903 Eastman View No. 1 8x10 Camera
Konica Hexanon GRII 210mm
Kokak B/RA X-Ray Film
Caffenol C/M

Jim Fitzgerald

24-Mar-2012, 20:55

Some have wanted to know what portraits look like with x-ray film. This is my oldest son shot on green x-ray film and it is not a negative scan but a carbon print.

Holdenrichards

25-Mar-2012, 06:50

Some have wanted to know what portraits look like with x-ray film. This is my oldest son shot on green x-ray film and it is not a negative scan but a carbon print.

Really nice!

Kirk Gittings

25-Mar-2012, 10:57

Very nice!

http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7113/6996495507_cc01505afb_z.jpg

1903 Eastman View No. 1 8x10 Camera
Konica Hexanon GRII 210mm
Kokak B/RA X-Ray Film
Caffenol C/M

Holdenrichards

25-Mar-2012, 15:17

Thanks Kirk!

Richard Rankin

25-Mar-2012, 16:08

Some have wanted to know what portraits look like with x-ray film. This is my oldest son shot on green x-ray film and it is not a negative scan but a carbon print.

That is terrific, Jim.

Jim Fitzgerald

25-Mar-2012, 17:33

Richard, thanks.

Corran

31-Mar-2012, 14:43

Still working. I think I need to rate my film a little higher, maybe 80 or 100. Shadows were too hot before editing.

http://www.oceanstarproductions.com/photosharing/0027s.jpg

danno@cnwl.igs

1-Apr-2012, 18:51

Corran,

WOW ! You've got it nailed !
Great range.

Corran

1-Apr-2012, 19:05

Thanks, though I still have lots of work to do to master this stuff.

Rain Dance

2-Apr-2012, 17:07

Amazing, the portraits are so nice. Is there a place that sells xray film that is precut in 4x5 sizes? I do not have a darkroom (or access to one) so cutting at home will be difficult.

Jim Fitzgerald

2-Apr-2012, 18:48

Amazing, the portraits are so nice. Is there a place that sells xray film that is precut in 4x5 sizes? I do not have a darkroom (or access to one) so cutting at home will be difficult.

No pre cut that I'm aware of. Just find a dark room and put a red safe light and cut it down. You can see what you are doing but you have to be very careful not to scratch the emulsion. I'd probably find the single sided film if I was going to cut it down.

bigguy88

2-Apr-2012, 18:50

http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7113/6996495507_cc01505afb_z.jpghttp://www.edslrvideo.com/line.jpg

1903 Eastman View No. 1 8x10 Camera
Konica Hexanon GRII 210mm
Kokak B/RA X-Ray Film
Caffenol C/M

very nice. i like this too.

dupont07

2-Apr-2012, 19:31

How did you meter and exposure it, Holdenrichards?

1903 Eastman View No. 1 8x10 Camera
Konica Hexanon GRII 210mm
Kokak B/RA X-Ray Film
Caffenol C/M

Kirk Gittings

2-Apr-2012, 19:34

FWIW, I've been following this thread since the beginning. At first I was somewhat unimpressed with what I saw. I thought most of it looked kind of flat and a bit lifeless (not talking about subject matter)-which I pinned on the color response of the film. But of late it seems like there is more and more really rich looking scans and prints. Well done guys-this is really looking great.

Michael Batchelor

3-Apr-2012, 08:08

Randy

4-Apr-2012, 07:31

Well, I am a tad perplexed at the...orthocromatic-ness...of the CSX green latitude film (http://www.cxsonline.com/text/detailpage.tmpl?command=showpage&sn=606130&sku=CXSGL316GF&cart=1333549433613392&location=10011003)that I am using. For one thing, this tracter is red-ish, sort of a rust color. Honestly, the neg and resulting scan look just like I would expect it to look from panchromatic film (though this neg is slightly over exposed and the scene was low contrast).
Also, I processed in trays with a small 10-12 watt red bulb about 2 meters away, covered by a white hanky, and no direct light from the bulb could reach the negs (I was leaning over a bath tub to process). The only light was reflected light from the ceeling. I did get obvious fogging as I could see a faint outline of the curved film corner on several of the images. Probably happening as the film was resting in the water pre-soak for a minute. So, is my film red sensitive?

http://dl.dropbox.com/u/52893762/img571a.jpg

Ralph Weimer

4-Apr-2012, 08:37

The Kodak Wratten 1A will fog ortho x-ray film. You need a GBX filter.

Ralph

Will Frostmill

4-Apr-2012, 09:15

If you'd like to be more confident of your safe light, I'd suggest some red LEDs: they are very cheap (e.g. christmas lights!) an almost all the spec sheets I've seen show that the true red (not amber) have a very narrow frequency response far away from the spectral response of green and blue sensitive film. Maybe someone with more experience would like to comment on whether they've been able to fog green-sensitive film with LEDs?

Will

Holdenrichards

4-Apr-2012, 15:43

How did you meter and exposure it, Holdenrichards?

I expose this film at 25 ASA...

Holdenrichards

4-Apr-2012, 15:46

http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7074/6895728874_1991167566_z.jpg

Some more Kodak X-Ray

Eastman View No. 1 8x10 camera
Konica Hexanon GRII 210mm
Kodak B/RA Single Emulsion X-Ray
Caffenol C/M

Kirk Gittings

4-Apr-2012, 16:33

Beautiful.

Jay DeFehr

4-Apr-2012, 16:59

I think the terms Green Sensitive and Blue Sensitive are slightly misleading, as they refer to the intensifying screens the films are designed to work with rather than the strict spectral sensitivity of the film itself. X-Ray film is not intended for photography, and so the manufacturers don't provide information for that application, and radiography is much different than photography. I think some of this film that isn't explicitly identified as ortho might be closer to panchromatic than orthochromatic, but I'm just guessing based on nothing more than my own limited experience and what I've seen and read here and elsewhere of purely anecdotal nature.

Corran

4-Apr-2012, 17:02

I know the Fuji green-sensitive stuff certainly does not pick up red. I used a simple orange filter once and it was almost clear.

Another nice one Holden. I still need to try caffenol.

Holdenrichards

4-Apr-2012, 17:53

Thanks!

Corran

6-Apr-2012, 20:04

210mm Symmar-S wide-open with some front swing:
http://www.oceanstarproductions.com/photosharing/0035ss.jpg

Randy

6-Apr-2012, 20:28

Very pleasing image Corran. You have inspired me to load up some X-ray film and shoot along the sidewalks, rather than my usual haunts.
BTW - my younger brother was stationed at the AFB in Valdosta for a few years.

Corran

6-Apr-2012, 20:59

Cool! Always nice to know someone has a clue where Valdosta even is.... Also, glad I could inspire you :)

Holdenrichards

8-Apr-2012, 10:32

210mm Symmar-S wide-open with some front swing:

Great tones in this one, still the green film yeah?

Corran

8-Apr-2012, 10:45

Yep, I'm about 1/3 through my box of it. I might order a pack of blue to try it out when I get another box of green. I mean heck, it's only $25 a box!!

Vaughn

8-Apr-2012, 10:52

I have an old box of 14x17 blue-sensitive Agfa that I am using as carbon tissue support.

But something very strange is going on. The emulsion is falling off in the fixer (Kodak Rapid Fixer -- paper strength w/ hardener). I have to scrub it to remove the rest of the emulsion or else it just "pills" when I try to dry it before pouring on the pigmented gelatin. The previous box did not do this -- definitely can not be used for in-camera! I have a couple more boxes in the fridge (this present box has not been refridgerated).