I suspected as much, and have been wanting to try it while wondering why more people haven't tried it already. Seems like an excellent match, as your portraits showQuote:
Originally Posted by SergeiR
Printable View
I suspected as much, and have been wanting to try it while wondering why more people haven't tried it already. Seems like an excellent match, as your portraits showQuote:
Originally Posted by SergeiR
Like I said before, x-ray film was made for alt processes! :)
I mentioned developing in Rodinal 1:200 for 6 minutes which I tried with dental X-ray film exposed in a 35mm camera.With the film developed in a tank I was agitating for the first 45 sec & then 15 sec per minute. The film was in 600ml of developer. However there was just traces of a negative. Maybe the film would have developed properly if I had given a time of 10 min, or if I had agitated continuously for the whole 6 min. Both need to be tried
A 1:100 dilution works fine with the agitation I mentioned. It certainly seems that D band dental film is around 100 ASA
The film may be 100ASA, but is seems rather grainy. Is that likely to be because it is double-sided coating?Quote:
Originally Posted by Neil Purling
The image is taken from x 30x40mm dental X-ray film used for research purpose in getting a closer approximation of the dev time before I use large-format X-ray films.
Sergei, these are lovely prints.
--
The cuttings from our newly planted vineyard are coming to life.
Speed Graphic with Optar 135 at f8
Agfa HDR mammography film
Developed by inspection in deep tank, in Ilford MG 1+50 at 22C for 8.5min (semi-stand).
Scan from negative, finished in PS.
https://farm2.staticflickr.com/1550/...2e097b65_b.jpg
is this true? I don't remember seeing it mentioned but I was offline quite a bit last fall. Fuji HR-T X-Ray Film Discontinued
I think so. I have switched to HR-U, no problem. The last I looked there was still some HR-T available on Ebay, but I thought I'd rather buy newer film than familiar film, since I'll have to make the switch sooner or later. The curves aren't very different.
That figures, I'm always the last to know. I've only ever bought one box of x-ray, and its still 3/4 full. I finally got my first acceptable image and by the time its gone I'll finally know what I'm doing and I won't be able to get anymore. I'[m tempted to just throw it in the freezer and move on to HR-U right now.
Use up the HR-T---you won't see a difference, I don't think.
In Europe, we can get Super HR-E 30 and Super RX: are they OK?
I went to the windmill at Skidby yesterday.
I was going to take a walk along a footpath into the village & back, but I saw this huge bank of lead grey clouds coming.
The last thing I wanted was for my Graflex to get rain on it, so I went home.
I had time to make the images below. In the hedgerow shot you can see the heavy grey clouds.
This is the first of the Crontex MRF-21 I used. It is single-sided and has some kind of back coating. The proper developement time for this seems to be 8-9 minutes in Rodinal dil 1:100.
Nice, Neil, it works! You do seem to have some issues with uneven development, especially along the edges. You might want to check your agitation scheme and eliminate any possible causes of light-induced fog. But agitation would be the first place I'd look.
Most likely an anti-halation dye.Quote:
Originally Posted by Neil Purling
It is something that happens with the Fink-Roselieve tank if one tries to develope too many sheets of film at once. However, in this instance I was distracted from my duties.Quote:
Originally Posted by koraks
I usually develope no more than four sheets of film at a time and follow the normal agitation pattern of 1st min continuous and then 15 sec/min.
Hmm. Getting a little peeved with Bema-kg who have not delivered film in three weeks and are not responsive to phone or email.
Neil
I have been using Ektascan for VDB and Palladium for about 2 years. It's orthochromatic contrast is ideal for these and other UV processes. The major problem is that the film base density is so low it prints too fast.Quote:
Originally Posted by Wayne
what is your light source?Quote:
Originally Posted by Jim Noel
This looks interesting:
http://www.largeformatphotography.in...d-development:
Is anyone trying this with x-ray film to control contrast?
11x14 Contact print 2-sided Kodak
https://farm8.staticflickr.com/7482/...db39d3f5_b.jpgMacro 11X14 by moe.randy, on Flickr
Nice image Randy!
Thank you!Quote:
Originally Posted by jon.oman
Either fluorescent tubes or NuArc mercury vapor unit depending on which process, and negative size.Quote:
Originally Posted by Wayne
Anita, who is in Berlin this week, finally managed to talk to someone at Bema-kg. He was not particularly helpful, said he didn't have it in stock, didn't know if that size was still made, didn't know when he'd have some, yadda yadda yadda. Apparently he is to refund my payment... I'll believe it when I see it.Quote:
Originally Posted by barnacle
She wasn't really in a position to ask if he had any other options in that size, but I think I'll be avoiding them in future.
Meh.
Neil
Sorry for the bad deal, Neil.
I never have had problems with them.
Ritchie
No blame to you, Ritchie.
I don't know why they don't seem to want to sell to me, even in Germany. Anita reported her exchange with them as not particularly pleasant (and she's a native German speaker).
Shame, because the website looked so good.
Neil
Answering my own question here: I spent today doing tests. I started with the high end of potassium ferricyanide concentration listed in the article which, after all of the super-stock>stock>working solution dilutions, figures out to .5gm per 5L, (I think--I'd be happy if someone checks my math on this!), and moved up to 4gm per 5L via 1gm and 2gm. . . and the 4gm was with no potassium bromide at all because I wasn't seeing any fogging. All I saw was a very tiny loss of speed, and I'm not even sure of that. So unless my math is wrong and I'm using too weak of a solution, this isn't going to work on Fuji HR-U.Quote:
Originally Posted by mdarnton
I have one sheet of the test scene left, and I might do something really gross with it, lots of ferricyanide, but not today.
Let me repeat: if anyone finds a math error, I'd love to hear about it.
https://c8.staticflickr.com/8/7792/2...71a1bea9_h.jpg28X62 X-Ra7 5-24-2016 2-43-51 PM 2448x3264 by moe.randy, on Flickr
This is an older image for me. Started as greater than 1-1 macro on 5X7 X-Ray. Later contact copied to 4x5 FP4 eliminating negative space.
Last night enlarged from 4x5 onto 5 sheets 14X17" X-Ray.
To be taped together, translucent backlit for my storefront window. A conversation piece.
DIY LED 5X7 head for 3 seconds at f45 150mm lens 60" above baseboard.
Developed in paper strength Ilford PQ, citric stop, Arista Fast fixer. 2 min dev, 10 sec stop, 2 min fix, 2 min wash. Obviously I lost count on upper left.
Cool!
All the ortho films of the past were not the same, just as all current pan films are different. I will have to search for a negative which I have kept from the 30's and ppost it when I do. it was made on Verichrome and developed to completion, as were most films of the era. the skin tones are quite normal, not ruddy at all.Quote:
Originally Posted by Peter De Smidt
Good to know, Jim. Thanks!
Nice work, Randy!
Thanks Andrew and Peter.
That's really neat Randy. I like it!
There's an interesting discussion of the old film types and response charts starting here: https://archive.org/stream/pictorial...e/n74/mode/2upQuote:
Originally Posted by Jim Noel
Thanks Pali!Quote:
Originally Posted by Pali K
Ok, the Agfa green got here, and the guillotine got here, so hopefully I should have some film in holders by the weekend (I have to wait until after midnight to lose the street lighting around here).
Quick reminder for exposure and possible starter time for dev in RO9, please?
Neil
Try 50 ASA for daylight or strobe, in Rodinol/RO9 1/100 for 8 minutes. Then as they say, adjust!Quote:
Originally Posted by barnacle
nicely done, Randy.
How did you project it, if you don't mind me asking? :)
--
i need to develop film.. got about 10 holders full of film laying around ;(
Thanks Randy!
Neil
FOTAR 10X10 enlarger with DIY head LED Shop light from Costco $40, 3500 lumens. Too powerful, so I stopped way down with one layer of LD Makrolon diffusion. Needs 2 layers.Quote:
Originally Posted by SergeiR
150mm Componon. 4X5 interpositive at 60" filled entire baseboard.
My test strips were 8x10 X-Ray.
Not tanks, tray developed one at a time.
Great Pic. I'm a Harley guy myself. Was this a contact print, or a scanned? What was your exposure time, and development time?
Again, nice job looks like my 03 Sportster. West Cost Randy.
97, but I have 3 sets tins, 1995, 97, 03. It's an iPod shot of RC paper contact print. The 11x14 X-Ray CSG double sided developed in Rodinol 1-100 tray for 8 minutes. No scanning, I prefer prints.
Quote:
Originally Posted by rdelung
Thats a big one :) Thanks for detail :)Quote:
Originally Posted by Randy Moe
What size are normal 4x5 negatives, exactly? The guillotine I'm using isn't very sharp or precise, and my negatives end up rather irregular. It's preventing me from being able to use the 2509n Jobo reel I've got. So far I've just been chopping about .25 inches off each edge and they barely fit the holders. Is that incorrect?
I use a 'real' 4X5 neg as template, especially when I can't see the ruler. Lights out.Quote:
Originally Posted by senderoaburrido
0.25" off 4X5 is way too much. I suggest trying 4.9X3.9" as a start and most likely that is too small also. 1/16th off is about right.
I measured HP5, but my device is poor. Looks like 4.93X3.93,
Getting the film squarely cut can also be an issue.
Tape a perfectly 90 degree stop to your cutter. Cut 12 pieces to that size. Put them in a very darkplace, reset your production stop for the other dimension and it should work.
Use 2 pieces of white Dymo label-maker tape to mark the cut width and length on you guillotine cutter, using a sheet of real 4×5 as a template for placing the marks. Work under a red safelight, located not too close to your work area (even safelights can fog film).Quote:
Originally Posted by Randy Moe
I use a Dahle 15E Vantage Series Trimmer, which has a rubber clamp that drops onto the workpiece when you make the cut and keeps it from shifting about. It also features a moveable stop. I'm sure there are other, comparable cutters available, but this one has served me well.
The guillotine I bought was/is a pile of poo; it won't cut square and the guide is basically pointless. It's similar to the Dahle you mention but lacks the clamp; without that clamp it wants to move the work around as it cuts.
Chopping the 8x10 in half makes it too wide.
Neil
I use a 12" Dahle chopper, the holder-down thing is absolutely the best I have seen and does not damage emulsion. If fact I bought an 18" also. Here (USA) they are very affordable. German company I believe and made in China I assume, but cannot find out either...Quote:
Originally Posted by barnacle
I have a Made in UK Rotatrim, but it's better for other things, not negatives. Nice trimmer but different.
I second the vote for the Dahle, guillotine. The hold down thingy works great, mine has a rotating blade guard to reduce amputations. I bought mine 30 years ago works great. I haven't cut film but it always did a nice job on paper.Quote:
Originally Posted by Randy Moe
Best Mike
As an aside - I managed a couple of shots yesterday on the Agfa Green.
An image stuck to the film but it's so far less than wonderful: exposed at 64 ASA, one interior and one exterior, and both look seriously underdeveloped - eight minutes in R09 at 100:1 - mind you, the R09 is somewhat ancient and rattles when I move the bottle. I've discussed this before.
I think it's time to splash out on some new developer :)
I have images taken at the same time on Adox CHS50 which I have not yet developed, so it'll be interesting to see a comparison.
Neil
p.s. the film has an interesting blue colour in the base.