To me the lighting is what makes or breaks a good portrait of course having a lovely model helps too :)
Printable View
To me the lighting is what makes or breaks a good portrait of course having a lovely model helps too :)
Starting to like X-Ray more and more
Attachment 138334
Alright, most of you probably already know this, but I'll post my recent experiences here so that others may learn.
I had serious issues with fogging when using green-sensitive x-ray film. Initially I was using a Kodak OC safelight in my darkroom, which was safe enough for paper and also for blue-sensitive x-ray film. It would fog green-sensitive film horribly though, so I bought a couple of red led bulbs thinking I had solved the issue. But some fogging remained. I recently put a piece of rubylith over one of the red led bulbs and I've been using that single light for the past week. So far, it seems that my fogging issues with green film are gone (fingers crossed).
what kind of red bulbs?
Please list exact make model and source. Thanks!
Kodak GBX2 filters were used in x-ray darkrooms with ortho (green sensitive) film. "Ortho" was the term applied to green-flashing phosphor screens and green-sensitive film. The blue stuff was termed "Regular".
Ralph
I'm interested in which exact bulbs failed your requirement.Quote:
Originally Posted by koraks
I am aware of Kodak's recommendations.
These particular bulbs were Showtec 19-led red bulbs in E27 fitting. They are probably 635nm wavelength leds. If I compare the hue of the LEDs with and without the rubylith, the rubylith filtered light looks a deeper red. Not just darker (obviously that too), but a deeper red color.
And like I said, no problems with the blue-sensitive film when using the red LED bulbs (without rubylith), suggesting that it really has to do with the spectrum emitted by these bulbs. In my experience so far, there's a little less than a stop of difference in speed between the blue and the green film I use. This renders a different source of stray light an improbable cause.
Does anyone have a similar experience, or is this a unique occurrence?
For some time i have been using and recommending these in red. https://www.superbrightleds.com/more.../attributes/13
Look at their spectrum chart.
I notice no problems with Ektascan and Kodak CSG.
I did have a problem with a Home Depot red led. http://www.homedepot.com/p/EcoSmart-...0-BL/205351458
It's funny, as the standard wavelength of a red led is 635nm. Weird how some bulbs apparently fog more than others. It may have to do with the current the leds are being driven with; especially with green leds a shift in the output spectrum is easily witnessed if they're driven too hard.
Vanbar Imaging here in Australia are advertising red LED globes that have been tested darkroom safe. They are on feebay and are rated at 620nm?? Was looking to make the change to led
I have to disagree.Quote:
Originally Posted by premortho
I was photographing and processing both at home and for a photography store in the 1930's when panchromatic films were just being introduced for the amateur. Most films were orthochromatic. D-72, the predecessor of Dektol, was used ONLY for paper. By the way, Dektol is not a basically hydroquinone developer, it depends on metol to hold down the contrast. The most common developers available packaged for film were D-76, and its derivatives from manufacturers other than Kodak. A very popular one for all films was Panthermic.Many advanced workers developed their orthochromatic and panchromatic films in Pyro ABC, or its derivatives. In the store where I worked in the darkroom we developed ALL FILMS in D-23 stored in a deep tank. All films were developed to completion.
An article in a popular magazine in the early 1950's, I have forgotten which one, had a title similar to "Developing Film in D-72". This article has been quoted and misquoted dozens, or hundreds of times.
Can x-ray and other orthochromatic films be developed in Dektol or other paper developers? Yes.
Was it the developer of choice in "ancient" photography? No.
Well,I'm quite a bit younger than you are. I'm 78, and I started developing film when I was 8 years old (1946). We, my grandfather and me, used D-72 Dectol for film, and so did lots of other people. It was written on the can it came in "for developing plates and papers". There was no developer of choice in 1946. You used what you could get. We couldn't get Rodinal, but we could easily get Dectol, so we used it as I described in my post. We mostly shot Plenachrome which is an ortho film, more or less like x-ray film. Plenachrome was a multi-coated emulsion, which made it easier to use than x-ray film.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jim Noel
http://www.blackandwhitefineart.net/...or-highlights/ Hope this helpsQuote:
Originally Posted by SuXarik
I think it is one stop under-exposed. Can't be under developed when you develop by inspection, right? Unless you haven't learned yet to leave it in the soup a little beyond where you think it's developed enough.Quote:
Originally Posted by andrewch59
Yes it can be under-developed. one has to learn which side of the film to view, and it does vary with the kind of film, even more critical is the importance of learning what a properly exposed negative looks like under the very dim safelight. I see too many "experts" on this and other forums giving out misleading information about this technique. When I learned how do develop by inspection I had to learn to do it correctly or get fired. I won't go into the details here because full and accurate information is quite lengthy. When I taught it students were expected to attend sessions twice a week and practice at least two time in between. The best way to learn is find someone who truly knows what they are doing and pay their price to learn from them. It is not learned in an hour or two. Maybe an hour or two every day for a month for most people.Quote:
Originally Posted by premortho
While I learned to do this about 70 years ago, by no means am I an expert. I thought the third sentence in my reply covered that little detail. But of course it is not a little detail. When I had to learn how to do it from my grandfather, I either learned how to do it correctly, or I got no more film to shoot. While I was learning, my grandfather gave me one sheet of film to shoot. Until I learned to develop at least adequetly, that was it, one sheet of Plenachrome. Only then was I allowed to develop roll film. by the tray method. I was fascinated by the development process because to an eight year-old it seemed to be magic.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jim Noel
Quote:
Originally Posted by SuXarik
Would be easier to figure out if gave us information on
- developer
- time
- type of development
- curves of scanning
- scanner
- what is the meaning of life
There are great many variables. I would stick with underexposed a bit but it also could be result of ba scanning :)
Here is what happened with Fuji HR-T at ISO 80, in Sprint Systems 1:9 for 6 min.
https://farm1.staticflickr.com/615/2...8553c13c_b.jpg8x10 HR-T008-1 by Alex C, on Flickr
https://farm1.staticflickr.com/599/2...c226e4ef_b.jpg8x10 HR-T007-1 by Alex C, on Flickr
https://farm1.staticflickr.com/669/2...7381798e_b.jpg8x10 HR-T005-1 by Alex C, on Flickr
Going to try and use a more dilute developer and less agitation next time around.
Amfooty,
If you are trying to home in on the best development time for you, do one or the other, not more dilute and less agitation in the same test.
Thanks, I'll keep that in mind.
definitely less agitation, it made a world of difference with my xray negs.
A lot has been said here about the fact that most x-ray film has emulsion on 2 sides, and that the mammography film with only 1 emulsion layer is hard to source & expensive. I see that ZZ Medical has this single emulsion film at $80 for 8″×10″, which works out to 400 sheets of 4″×5″ after cutting/trimming. That's 20¢ per exposure. The thing that's puzzling me is that it's described as 'video' film. Has anyone tried this film? How did you like it? Did you use a tray, a Jobo, or hangers? If you used a tray, was scratching a problem?
It's a wonderful film. It can handle fine detail and has an anti-reflective coating on the back and is blind to the red LED bike tail light that I use as a safelight. It can be readily developed in 1:100 Rodinal or Pyrocat HD and probably other developers. I rate at ASA 100 mid day. Early AM or late afternoon on you need to give extra exposure because the light is more red and less blue out doors. Not done the tungsten v. Daylight balanced lights in studio test I think I read somewhere that's 1 or two stops. Outdoors 10 am -3 pm as rated, after/before 1 stop every hour or two. YMMV. Reciprocity seems to track with Tmax100 on option 1 on the reciprocity calculator app (which also has good corrections for bellows and filters). With the right safelight you can cut the film and develop while you can see what's going on. It is supplied with a notch but Indont bother re-notching cut pieces because it is really obvious under the safelight which side faces out of the film holder. I use it at 4x5 and 5x7 primarily. But I'm continually tempted to use it 8x10 and they also sell it 14x17" which might "force" me to build another camera which after comparing my 8x10 attempt with a Sinar P, I said I'd never do. Back to questions: I usually develop in trays but I am pretty sure people are using rotary processing and film hangers too.
And no, scratching is not a problem in trays any more than it would be with "normal" film.
I also use the single-sided stuff. Very sharp in Pyrocat-HD and Obsidian Aqua. By the way, I also use the double-sided stuff in flat-bottomed trays, and have never had issues with scratching. Another thing I like about the single-sided stuff, is that I can develop it in BTZS tubes.
Is that because of the tanning developer?Quote:
Originally Posted by Andrew O'Neill
You answered my unstated question, which was about renotching. But for fun, if anyone out there does renotch, how do you do it? With scissors? a paper punch? or something else? For trimming 8″×10″ to 4″×5″, to you use a guillotine cutter, or a rotary cutter? Do you just cut at the center or do you trim off a little extra to fit the 'real' film holder dimensions (slightly smaller than nominal)?Quote:
Originally Posted by Fr. Mark
I cut using scissors and start by drawing the dimensions using a template. It's okay for small batches.
I use a rotary cutter. I have put tape "fences" on the cutter board to size the film in each dimension, so it's very fast. I don't notch, but if I did I'd use a circular hole punch, since I already have one for marking the 35mm frames I want to print. If you don't have a good safelight for this, let me tell you, cutting under a safelight, loading holders, and developing is a LOT easier under a safelight than it is doing those things in the dark!!!
Practice with stiff paper. Do all steps and even load holders.
You will find size tolerances are not tight, however too tight or large a 'negative' will load poorly or not at all. Too small and one side may fall out.
Take your time, sit down and everything you learn using paper, will make red LED cutting easier and then one day you will be cutting 'real' film in full dark, which is easy if you have practiced.
I cut 8x10 Ektascan and FP4+ as small as 6x6mm for Hasselblad single side holders. That does take precise cutting.
Just begin the adventure. :)
I thought so at first, but I also develop in very dilute Xtol, and D-19.Quote:
Is that because of the tanning developer?
I cut it with a guillotine cutter because I can borrow one from work occasionally. I use a small block of maple and a c clamp to make a stopper. I have a piece of cardboard or card stock the size of a 5x7 film which I use to position the stop block. I cut the (approx) 1"x10" strip off first for a bunch of sheets then reposition the stop for the 5" cut. Takes three cuts to make two sheets. More/less same for 4x5. This cutter is nothing like so nice as a rotatrim master cut with the rotary cutter, but I find that one sheet at a time making sure to mildly force the cutter against the base makes good cuts. Working under safelights helps a lot. I don't know that I would want to use a guillotine cutter in the dark.
Attachment 140830
The light lines are light leaks from my holder. Vageeswari 10x12, Ross 3A portrait lens at F22 1/10 sec, green xray film
Alex, it looks like you are using hangers. In my experience, very gentle agitation was the key, especially with xray. Even with a dilute developer, gentle agitation. I don't even pull the hangers out of the developer.
There are a couple of types of hangers. I bet yours aren't Kodak. Kodak tracks have a V-shape to them that prevents the metal from touching film. Other brands are a square U shape, with sidewalls that can stick to the film and mess up developing around the edges. That's the funny marks I see on the left sky edge on the photo of the prop plane.
I do exactly the same thing. It pretty important to get the short edge cut right. The film width is not so important but the length is. Just a millimeter off and the sheet’s edge will overlap the plastic stops at the bottom of the holder.Quote:
Originally Posted by mdarnton
About notches, my film has rounded corners. I just use the round corner after cutting into four sub-sheets as a "notch".
Me too.Quote:
Originally Posted by towolf
I use Dyno label tape, 2 pieces on top of each other give enough feel to use as a guide.
I have a cheap rotary cutter marked out for 4x5 and 3 1/4 x 4 1/4.
I just ordered a box of that Carestream 8x10 B/RA film to give it a go.
Wouldn't it be in opposite corners for 2 of the sheets, thus not helpful in determining which is the emulsion side?Quote:
Originally Posted by towolf
When using single sided film such as ektascan br/a, yes. With double sided film, this is not an issue of course.
When you use a flat bottomed tray for double sided film do you oscillate the tray during development? And if not, how does it develope in the side in contact with the glass?Quote:
Originally Posted by Andrew O'Neill
I use a guillotine cutter, and I am always afraid of hurting me when operating in the dark, and even under deep red light, since I must press the film quite near the cutting area..Quote:
Originally Posted by mdarnton
I am considering the purchase of a rotary cutter, but I do not know if all cutters cut cleanly the Xray film, which seem to me quite strong.
Even my guillotine cuts only fairly; I must press the blade against the cutting edge to cut and not bend the film.
Does rotary cutter behave cleanly?
I flip the sheet over every 10 agitations. But I use continuous agitation, I have to add. Flipping less frequently resulted in overdevelopment at the edges and intermittent agitation also caused uneven development with me, so I have now arrived at this approach. Dunk the sheet in, do 10 gentle agitations, flip the sheet over, and so on. I get very even development, but high contrast.Quote:
Originally Posted by salvatore
I'm very open to other options, so I'm curious to hear how others go about preventing uneven development. Btw, I use rodinal 1+100 mostly. I'm considering some form of two bath development or maybe a metol developer to further tame contrast, as well as preflashing. Can anyone comment on either of these options or a combination thereof?
My rotary cutter is a cheap Fiskars, and it does a beautiful job. I can stack three or four sheets and get through them in several cuts without anything moving. I have no experience with good rotary cutters.
Ah, but then you don't actually need notches.Quote:
Originally Posted by koraks
Possibly for film identification purposes.
Oh, of course. Didn't think of that. I keep a log of my shoots, so I don't use the notches to ID the film.Quote:
Originally Posted by koraks
I ran a test yesterday. For one sheet I never turned it over. For the second I turned it over every two agitation cycles. The images were identical and I can't discern any difference inany part of the film either visually or with the densitometer. I was testing HC110 diluted 1+79 in a flat bottomed tray.Quote:
Originally Posted by koraks
With Ektascan B/RA film anyway, you don't need notches: one side is pink and somewhat matte (the emulsion) the other side is black and a little shiny (anti-halation layer) they are easy to tell apart under a safelight. N.B. you want a deep red safelight not orange or yellow or whatever. I am currently using a bike tail-light high intensity LED that runs on 2 AA batteries. The LED's are red as is the cover for them and the electronics. The LED's give off only red light that doesn't have enough energy (wrong wavelength) to fog the film. Batteries last a LONG time. Others have posted on one of the Xray threads about 110V LED screw in (lightbulb type base) that have similar narrow spectrum red output. Makes me think that regular safelights are basically obsolete. I also have a notch code for the film holders so I know what film holder was used with what negative (to check for leaks, to cross reference with notes), but I don't notch the films I can handle under a safelight.
If I understand correctly you have however agitated the bath in both cases.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jim Noel
By agitation do you mean lifting one side of the tray?
And how long was the development with HC110 so diluted?
I also use HC110 but diluted 1:50, for 10 minutes.
To avoid scratching, in case of small specimens (around 4 by 4 cm) I made a holder as follows.
I cut two strips of plexiglas of 5 by 100 mm about 3 mm thick, and passed a file on one edge of each at about 45°.
I then glued the two strips on a sheet of plexiglas in such a way to create a guide on which to place the specimen.
The distance between the strips is a bit smaller than the specimen, so this lays a bit curved.
The sheet is then immersed in the developing bath which covers the whole device and the curvature of the sample allows clear circulation of te developer..
The agitation can be provided by lifting one side of the tray or lifting the sheet throug a handle I glued on it.
I hope to have been clear.
I found no problem with this size of specimen, and, given the stiffness of the xray film it could work also for larger sizes, may be up to the full sheet 18 by 24 cm I use.