Ektascan BR/A

[daniel malva]

Hi everyone!
I'd like to know if somebody has had in the development of x-ray film Ektascan BR/A.
The "white" points in the emulsion.

http://www.danielmalva.com.br/wp-content/uploads/2012/08/dv700_BRA_Junina_004_det.jpg

Tks!!

[angusparker]

Just developed my first two sheets of this film in XTOL - and I got one white point on one sheet. What has been your experience using this film? Any good?

[ScottPhotoCo]

Is it in the emulsion or is it dried fixer? The challenge with x-Ray film is how delicate the emulsion is.

[Carl J]

Yes, I've seen that same mottling, or whatever to call it, about mid-way through my pack of 100 sheets or thereabouts. I'd have to look for examples but I can find them. I don't know if the emulsion gets brittle with age or not. My film is stored at room temperature which may have something to do with it. It can be annoying and I was pretty alarmed at first but then it seemed to go away but I still see some sheets with this problem from time-to-time. If I remember I'll try to shoot two sheets if (I think) something is an important shot. ;)

Sorry not much help other than I've seen it, too.

[angusparker]

How do you rate the film speed? Do you use any filters? How do you vary your development times and which developer do you use? What I produced was very high contrast and seemed to have limited range but it may be what I was shooting. I do think this film has promise in ULF applications as it seems more scratch resistant and sharper than regular X-ray film because of the single side of emulsion. Any info would be a great help. Best Angus

[Carl J]

Hi Angus, I generally rate it at 50iso (after comments on the big x-ray thread). To me, 50-80 seems about right but one could easily vary that according to development time. I just liked something simple I could remember and I was underexposing when I rated it much higher (but my testing methods were hardly systematic). I like to use a yellow #12 filter, adding one stop, but for low-contrast situations I don't think it needs a filter. I haven't figured out reciprocity because I've rarely shot it low-light conditions where reciprocity was a factor. When I wasn't sure, I've doubled my exposure for for anything over 10-15 seconds, but that's just a guess. Jim Fitzgerald wrote somewhere he didn't have any problems up until about 30 seconds or so, I believe. Andrew O'Neill posted some graphs but I could never quite figure out what they meant for my particular applications.

The Ektascan BR/A is only available in 8x10. There have been several queries about larger single-sided x-ray film but so far no has come across any, AFAIK. As for the mottling, someone just mentioned this on the x-ray thread and it may also have something to do with development method. I've only used rotary drums so I can't say if it would be as big of an issue if using trays or hangers.

For 11x14, which I'm just starting out with (waiting for Richard Ritter to finish some alterations to my Century before I can continue), I use double-sided just like everyone else. I've only done a few sheets, again in drums, which I don't think is very satisfactory unless you want to strip, so I'm looking at trays. Besides, to my eye, I think some of the best x-ray images are more often than not from negatives developed by inspection under a safelight.

Will you be shooting 14x17 X-ray with your new camera (the monorail)? I know there are guys (e.g. Tri, Tav W. planned to do so) out there cutting down the larger sizes (18x36?) to use for 12x20. I think it works well for some subjects but not all. Sometimes it sings other times it feels pretty clunky, but I haven't been at it for that long. If you don't mind the tonal range and the sometimes frustrations of experimenting with it, I think it has a lot to offer.

Maybe that was a little bit helpful. Hopefully other, more experienced hands, will chime in. :)

[Carl J]

Angus, btw, re. reciprocity, those were just general guidelines gleaned from the others since they were not shooting Ektascan.

[angusparker]

Thanks Carl. Btw I think I have a line on this film in 14x17 - at least in a 500 sheet package and possibly 100.

[StoneNYC]

Do those using these packs freeze the film mid way? If it seems mid way through the pack you suddenly have emulsion issues, perhaps there is moisture and you freeze the pack and the moisture crystallized and that caused the emulsion issues?

[angusparker]

Do those using these packs freeze the film mid way? If it seems mid way through the pack you suddenly have emulsion issues, perhaps there is moisture and you freeze the pack and the moisture crystallized and that caused the emulsion issues?

I have kept mine which arrived a few days ago at room temperature. The packs come with 100 sheets so it's not very convenient to freeze piecemeal. I believe the 500 sheet pack for 14x17 is in units of 100 - so if I went that route I would certainly freeze a bunch.

[ScottPhotoCo]

I am slowly learning to come to terms with this film. I have tried tray processing and now tube processing (Jobo). To this point I have gotten the most consistent and repeatable results (for my process of traditional front end and digital back end/print) using the following:

Kodak B/RA Ektascan 8x10 films from ZZ Medical
Adinal mixed at 25mL to 1L distilled water
Process at 68f for 6:30 using the Jobo 3005 constant agitation reversing direction every minute
Tap water stop – 3 1L water changes for 1m each with constant agitation
Kodak Fixer for 7m with constant agitation reversing direction every minute
Tap water rinse – 1L water for 1m each with constant agitation
Hypo clear – 2 minutes reversing direction after 1 minute
Tap water wash – Remove from tube and wash in tray with moving water for 15 minutes shuffling the sheets every 5 minutes
Kodak Photo-Flo – Mixed with distilled water at recommended dilution and tray agitated gently for 30 seconds (remove quickly by one corner for smoothest run-off)
Dry by hanging – no squeegee to avoid any chance of scratches

The emulsion is super delicate so all handling should be done carefully and gently.

http://farm4.staticflickr.com/3813/12126090625_e22bcb4d3e_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/themdidit/12126090625/)
12Dagor_Xray_f6.8_012014_WM (http://www.flickr.com/photos/themdidit/12126090625/) by ScottPhoto.co (http://www.flickr.com/people/themdidit/), on Flickr

[Carl J]

Thanks Carl. Btw I think I have a line on this film in 14x17 - at least in a 500 sheet package and possibly 100.

Can you share the link? I'd be really curious. Never thought to search for a size other than 11x14 when I was looking.....Depending on cost might be interested in splitting up a pack and cutting down (if I ever got my act together to get a rotary cutter, that is). In any case, lots of options given the fact it can be handled under a safelight.

[angusparker]

I am slowly learning to come to terms with this film. I have tried tray processing and now tube processing (Jobo). To this point I have gotten the most consistent and repeatable results (for my process of traditional front end and digital back end/print) using the following:

Kodak B/RA Ektascan 8x10 films from ZZ Medical
Adinal mixed at 25mL to 1L distilled water
Process at 68f for 6:30 using the Jobo 3005 constant agitation reversing direction every minute
Tap water stop – 3 1L water changes for 1m each with constant agitation
Kodak Fixer for 7m with constant agitation reversing direction every minute
Tap water rinse – 1L water for 1m each with constant agitation
Hypo clear – 2 minutes reversing direction after 1 minute
Tap water wash – Remove from tube and wash in tray with moving water for 15 minutes shuffling the sheets every 5 minutes
Kodak Photo-Flo – Mixed with distilled water at recommended dilution and tray agitated gently for 30 seconds (remove quickly by one corner for smoothest run-off)
Dry by hanging – no squeegee to avoid any chance of scratches

The emulsion is super delicate so all handling should be done carefully and gently.

http://farm4.staticflickr.com/3813/12126090625_e22bcb4d3e_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/themdidit/12126090625/)
12Dagor_Xray_f6.8_012014_WM (http://www.flickr.com/photos/themdidit/12126090625/) by ScottPhoto.co (http://www.flickr.com/people/themdidit/), on Flickr

So are you using a Jobo processor or just the expert drum? How do you make it move in one direction?

[angusparker]

Can you share the link? I'd be really curious. Never thought to search for a size other than 11x14 when I was looking.....Depending on cost might be interested in splitting up a pack and cutting down (if I ever got my act together to get a rotary cutter, that is). In any case, lots of options given the fact it can be handled under a safelight.

I'm trying to get granted access to a medical supply website. When I have got in I can give you links and prices for the various formats. ZZ medical is where I got my 8x10, they seem to have the best price but only have that size.

[Carl J]

Thanks, Angus. Got mine from ZZ Medical as well. Did a search for '14x17 Ektascan' (and variations like 'single emulsion 14x17', etc., etc.) but came up empty handed. Good luck! :) :)

[StoneNYC]

Is the ONLY reason you shoot X-ray the price? Would you PREFER to shoot traditional emulsions like FP4+ or TMX instead if you could at the same price?

[angusparker]

Is the ONLY reason you shoot X-ray the price? Would you PREFER to shoot traditional emulsions like FP4+ or TMX instead if you could at the same price?

I'm only testing the film in 8x10, it's really for my 14x17 camera that I am considering this film. The cost in that size will be about $2 a sheet versus $10-15 for regular film. If the price and availability were the same I'd use FP4+! Also this film and Pyro have potential for alt processes - and if I'm going to shoot lots of duplicates - I'd rather the film be cheap.

[Andrew O'Neill]

Yes, I'm getting exactly the same thing, but only if I develop in a tray using geometric agitation cycle (using Obsidian Aqua). Continuous agitation in BTZS tubes and everything is fine...

[angusparker]

Scott - I assume you mean Adonal the Rodinal clone?

[Carl J]

For 8x10 and up, price certainly plays a role, but once you discover what it can do it's more than that. Sometimes I'll go out with the sole intention of shooting x-ray film. Usually, though, I'll have at least one, and more likely two, holders loaded with x-ray in the pack. I often like to see how it compares to the same shot taken with panchromatic film. With some subjects I like the results better, or they are very close, but it's not for everything. It's also great to have on hand when I'm not sure and don't necessarily want to use a sheet of TXP 320 or HP5+. Then after setting up and exposing a sheet or two of X-ray I may decide to shoot 'real' film, or not. I haven't lost anything, so it's great that way and I learn more and more about its characteristics (more limited tonal response, etc.). At other times when I know more clearly what I want or the subject matter doesn't lend itself to ortho film I won't think about shooting with it at all.

There's a lot I don't know about its behavior given the fact I haven't yet tried development by inspection. With the high cost of ULF film, x-ray opens up lots of possibilities for experimentation, at the very least. I'm sitting on 50 sheets of 11x14 Ilford FP4+ and being new to the format x-ray will let me supplement that without worrying about the cost of each sheet, so I think it will make a good combination.

FWIW, I'm also interested in doing portraits using studio strobes, so, again, x-ray, besides it's own unique properties, would allow for more flexibility to experiment and burn a lot of sheets than if I was only using more expensive panchromatic film.

On the other hand, if I was shooting nothing larger than, say, 4x5 or 5x7, I might not bother because panchromatic film in the smaller sizes is still affordable enough. So even though I have a 4x5, and 4x5/5x7 backs for the 8x10, my workflow mainly revolves around using the 8x10 and soon more 11x14, as well as some medium format (6x7).

Just my .02... :)

[StoneNYC]

Scott - I assume you mean Adonal the Rodinal clone?

For the hundredth time, Adox Adonal IS the last generation Rodinal, not a clone, the other R09 formulas are the only potential clones, some of those are older formulations of Rodinal and some are clones, but Adonal IS Rodinal (in the formula in it's last years being sold as Rodinal).

[Curt]

Sizes available.

[angusparker]

For the hundredth time, Adox Adonal IS the last generation Rodinal, not a clone, the other R09 formulas are the only potential clones, some of those are older formulations of Rodinal and some are clones, but Adonal IS Rodinal (in the formula in it's last years being sold as Rodinal).

Just that it was spelled Adinal.....

[angusparker]

Sizes available.

Thanks Curt

[Andrew O'Neill]

For the hundredth time, Adox Adonal IS the last generation Rodinal, not a clone,

So, it's really Rodinal, and not a clone? ;)

[StoneNYC]

So, it's really Rodinal, and not a clone? ;)

That's correct, it's the real deal, that is the Adox brand version, not the others though (there's a ton of others like Blazinol and R09 which are either older versions of the formula, or clones but not the official one)

Adox Adonal is Rodinal.

Someone once argued with me that I was wrong, simply because the dust in the factory that it was originally made in back in the day was a different dust then the stuff in the new factory, and so it couldn't be exactly the same and asinine comment to say the least however some people actually believe because he doesn't have the same crazy bad environment that it's not the same, but trust me the formula is the same, and now in a sterile environment instead of I just filled factory...


Just that it was spelled Adinal.....

Sorry, yes I see what you meant now.

[ScottPhotoCo]

So are you using a Jobo processor or just the expert drum? How do you make it move in one direction?

I am using the drum with a Uniroller that has been modified to only run one direction. I flip the drum every minute.

Tim
www.ScottPhoto.com

[ScottPhotoCo]

Scott - I assume you mean Adonal the Rodinal clone?

Apologies. Typo on my part. Adonal it is.

Tim
www.ScottPhoto.com

[Curt]

I mix Adonal with Rodinal 50:50 which creates Radonal. Everything old is new again, and Rad.

[StoneNYC]

i mix adonal with rodinal 50:50 which creates radonal. Everything old is new again, and rad.

lol! :)

[angusparker]

Scott - you didn't say how you rated the film speed?

[ScottPhotoCo]

Scott - you didn't say how you rated the film speed?

I have been rating at 80 ISO.

Tim
www.ScottPhoto.com

[angusparker]

I have been rating at 80 ISO.

Tim
www.ScottPhoto.com

Thanks - just did 8 bracket exposure and pretty much agree 80 sounds right.

[Tin Can]

Have you tested the imposters and discovered any real life differences?


That's correct, it's the real deal, that is the Adox brand version, not the others though (there's a ton of others like Blazinol and R09 which are either older versions of the formula, or clones but not the official one)

Adox Adonal is Rodinal.

Someone once argued with me that I was wrong, simply because the dust in the factory that it was originally made in back in the day was a different dust then the stuff in the new factory, and so it couldn't be exactly the same and asinine comment to say the least however some people actually believe because he doesn't have the same crazy bad environment that it's not the same, but trust me the formula is the same, and now in a sterile environment instead of I just filled factory...



Sorry, yes I see what you meant now.

[Carl J]

Thanks, Curt. Having the full product number is a huge help. Do you have a URL? For ex., merryxray.com has 11x14 in their 2013 catalog but seems like they don't actually carry it any longer when I go to the actual order page I'll keep looking....

[Tin Can]

I signed up with Merry last night, but they make us wait till Monday to approve us as buyers and see an actual price list.

I sure hope they have 11x14, but nobody else does...


Thanks, Curt. Having the full product number is a huge help. Do you have a URL? For ex., merryxray.com has 11x14 in their 2013 catalog but seems like they don't actually carry it any longer when I go to the actual order page I'll keep looking....

[angusparker]

I'm probably going to buy from these guys a case (five 100 sheet packs) of 14x17. If you want a pack at cost plus shipping in the US at $175 let me know.

http://jqlwonline.com/store/page62.html

[Tin Can]

I really want 11x14, I'm planning pinhole with 14x17. I got a box of 2 side for that. That's a lot of pinholes...

I want to wait for Monday and see what Merry says.

It would be nice to know if this stuff is end of the line, or fresh, and will it continue to be available. Particularly this B/RA film.

I wrote an email to ZZ asking that and I got no response.

Be nice to find a sales manager who could speak some truth.

If this stuff is still in high demand with medical people.





I'm probably going to buy from these guys a case (five 100 sheet packs) of 14x17. If you want a pack at cost plus shipping in the US at $175 let me know.

http://jqlwonline.com/store/page62.html

[Carl J]

Thanks Angus and Randy. Will wait and see what Randy finds out about 11x14 availability through Merry. If not, then I'd probably go with Angus's offer to buy 100 sheets from his 14x17 order and plan on cutting it down.

[StoneNYC]

Have you tested the imposters and discovered any real life differences?

This is the wrong forum for this, but essentially the Adox rep came on APUG and publicly posted that they bought the rights to the latest formula that they alone can produce, and recently bought the Rodinal name and will probably start using it to distinguish from the others. He said the others are clones or older formulas of Rodinal. There's not much point in comparing, they are all so similar it's not worth it, they all are essentially the same just minor "tweaks" to the formula. Can we drop this? If you want to read the gazillion threads join APUG, look up ADOX or Mirko (rep's name) and have a ball reading through the sea of comments to find it. Just trust me, it's the same formula as the latest Rodinal before the company closed.

[Tin Can]

I am a member of APUG and follow your adamant comments concerning Rodinal. I figure it's all the same and I am not driving myself insane with developer minutia. I use only 2 developers to keep it simple and eliminate variables. I have read on APUG of your recent developer adventures. I say scare the neighbors.




This is the wrong forum for this, but essentially the Adox rep came on APUG and publicly posted that they bought the rights to the latest formula that they alone can produce, and recently bought the Rodinal name and will probably start using it to distinguish from the others. He said the others are clones or older formulas of Rodinal. There's not much point in comparing, they are all so similar it's not worth it, they all are essentially the same just minor "tweaks" to the formula. Can we drop this? If you want to read the gazillion threads join APUG, look up ADOX or Mirko (rep's name) and have a ball reading through the sea of comments to find it. Just trust me, it's the same formula as the latest Rodinal before the company closed.

[Tin Can]

Well folks I chased a bit. Got different answers. Merry said special order 11x14 Ektascan is $314 100 box, single box, not in case lots.

ZZ just said no 11x14 available. 14x17 is $857 for 5 x 100 per case sale, only on special order.

I have been buying from ZZmedical as they have the cheapest delivered price I have found. 8x10 Ektascan is $89 delivered to me.

Angus has the best deal.




Thanks Angus and Randy. Will wait and see what Randy finds out about 11x14 availability through Merry. If not, then I'd probably go with Angus's offer to buy 100 sheets from his 14x17 order and plan on cutting it down.

[Tin Can]

I might add I just added my name and money to Angus' FS Ektascan offer.

[Carl J]

Many thanks, Randy, for the update.