I believe you are thinking too hard. :-)
Printable View
I believe you are thinking too hard. :-)
You are a wise man mdarnton and very perceptive.
All this LF is so new to me, and I am probably trying to run before I can walk, but I am victim to information overload that the internet provides but what option do I have?
I suppose in the old days it would have been like a scene from the Karate Kid where you would have learned these skills at the side of "The Master" but nowadays we have an electronic master who provides all the information but none of the guidance :-(
It'll work just fine, don't sweat it ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by Sweep
Expose as EI 50-80 and develop for 7 minutes or so in 1+100 and see what you get. Adjust time and dilution to suit your taste. You will get an image at the EI, time and dilution I mentioned and most likely it'll print just fine somewhere between grade 2 and 4 and it will scan perfectly alright in any case.
this stuff will develop in pretty much anything, d76 is good as is ilfosol 3
I suppose as I have so much of this stuff on hand I can afford to do a bit of experimenting.
I will load up the film holders this weekend and make, say, four exposures at ISO50 and another four at ISO80 and then develop one at a time and see how it goes. 'Unfortunately' I am using Jobo tanks so will have to experiment with the timings blind.
One good thing about 100+1 dilution is that I wont run out of dev.
The good thing about having lots of Rodinal is it keeps practically forever. Even when it turns dark brown & yucky looking, it just works. And it's cheap, so you're not out much cabbage.
I went back to re-shoot Fair Park in Dallas (heavy overcast) after botching development above vis a vie divided Pyrocat, Speed Graphic 127 Ektar. This time I went back to 1:1:100 but increased the number of fuji green negatives (ISO 100) from 4 to 6 (so 12 sides of emulsion) in the Jobo using 600 ml of solution. So, this is well below the recommended minimum amount of solution, but I did increase my normal time from 6 to 8 minutes in hopes I could use every molecule of developer and got usable images (at least for scanning).
So: 20-21C, 5 minutes prewash, 8 minutes 1:1:100 PCHD, normal stop and fix, Jobo 2551
Using the "fuji NHGII" pre-set to automatically remove color cast in Silverfast resulted in showing the Pyrocat brown stain nicely I think.
https://c1.staticflickr.com/5/4270/3...834abdf7_c.jpg
Considering the green sensitivity of the x-ray film, what kind if scene should I use for my test shot? I do have a Spyder cube with white/grey/black patches which I can include in the scene but am concerned that I will not be able to accurately interpret the results due to the characteristics of the film. What I'm trying to say is what colours should I include and what should I try to avoid?
Just don't shoot a scene with a lot of red, as that won't register. Also avoid overly red light (e.g. the magic hour), as that will throw you off balance a bit during testing. But you can really shoot anything. I usually just use daylight for testing, preferably under light clouds, but sunshine works as well (it just gives more contrast, so measure your scene so that you know what kind of brightness range you're dealing with).
Alan, excellent image, I really like the toning! I wouldn't have known it was xray if it wasn't in this thread ;)
Thanks Koraks,
Just loading film holders now. The weather is pretty much as yo describe and my backdrop will be green privet hedge.
Wish me luck :)
That being said, it is probably a daft idea to focus on anything less than infinity as I might introduce another variable, that being bellows extension :(
Good luck ;) Don't worry too much about the bellows unless you're working at a very close distance and with and long lens. You can use and bellows correction calculator to determine how far off you'll be, but generally at a couple of yards the problem pretty much disappears for all practical purposes. Variations in you shutter are likely to be more significant anyway.
Eight sheets exposed, four at ISO64/15th sec/f45 and four at ISO80/15th sec/f45.5. The CL81 and Rodinal should arrive tomorrow so I can continue the experiments then.
I will start at 7minutes at 20degC and process one of each of the two settings at the same time. I did, however, forgot to add the reference Spyder cube to the first four shots but this will actually make it easy to identify the two different settings.
By the way, these are the first ever 10x8 exposures I have ever made and have got to say I did feel a bit of a berk with the dark-cloth over my head in full view of the neighbours. Does this feeling wear off over time? :)
...Sweep
Hi Sweep, if its anything like my first time, yes I felt very self conscious, but that seems to dissipate as the confidence grows. Exciting times producing your own images, my hat off to for giving it a go
...Andrew
Well, the first two sheets are out of the tank, and whilst these are only test sheets, I am a little underwhelmed.
4 min soak, 7min at 20degC with 100:1 Rodinal, Ilfostop,
The first thing that struck me was the track lines down each side which appeared to have been made by the Catlabs CL81. Hopefully this is just a consequence of the x-ray film having emulsion,on both sides, and not the CL81, as I will be devestatec if I lose nearly 1/4" off each side when I start using Ilford. Someone please tell me this is so.
When I started out some time ago with Carestream CSG double sided 8x10 film I was a bit frustrated with the results in spite of trying various methods of processing. I got some Carestream EB/RA single sided and while much better it still left some things to be desired as regards evenness and consistency in development. I recently decided to try again with a different method. Now I consider it licked and it was so easy to accomplish. I picked up a Teflon coated baking tray from Walmart (13 3/4 x 9 3x4 interior dimensions). I put 400 ml of developer (Rodinal 1 to 100 distilled water 70 to 72 degrees) in the tray. With a red LED on (E27-R8-G from superbrightleds.com in a reflector about 6 feet away - although it probably doesn't matter as I use the same light for loading and for cutting film to smaller formats) I take the film from the holder and slip it into the tray with the developer. I gently rock the tray end to end and side to side for 6 to 6.5 minutes (I hold the tray under the light at 5 minutes and decide for the time). I dump the developer and flush the film in the tray with a bit (about 400-450 ml) of tap water for 3 10 to 15 second washes as a stop bath. I dump in 450 ml of film fixer and fix the film then rinse again with water in the developing tray and put the film in another tray with gently running water on it until the next sheet is ready to wash. Remove, hang and dry. So simple and so consistent. I may even be tempted to try the double sided again although if I can't be guaranteed quality results with it, it won't be worth my time.
If you like the Carestream as much as I do , stick with it, at least for the 1st 100 sheets. No one is going to guarantee you anything when it comes to using double sided film. It is all up to you.Quote:
Originally Posted by Chauncey Walden
Reading some of the documented ways of taming xray in previous posts might help
Chauncey, that's about how I do it with double sided film as well, but that's much more challenging, as I find I have to flip the sheet over every 20 seconds or so to get both sides to develop evenly. I'd stick to single sided film if you have access to it. It's not really worth it to go back to double sided in my opinion.
So, the reason I switched to double-sided film from Ektascan was because I wanted a blue-sensitive emulsion. I want that 'colorblind' look, rather than the 'ortho' look of green sensitive film.Quote:
Originally Posted by koraks
I'd gladly pay more for a single-sided blue sensitive film, if I could find it. Anyone know if such a beastie exists?
I've never heard of a single sided blue sensitive xray film. You could use a green sensitive film and fit a blue filter on the lens. You'd have to reduce the EI by 2/3 to 1 stop, I suppose.
You could fix out some Xray film and coat it with a color blind emulsion on just one side. See Diane Ross and the lightfarm.org
I've thought about doing that. Anyone else try this already?Quote:
Originally Posted by koraks
Dear All,
I could not find any information about developing and fixing of on-hand x-ray film nor in this forum nor elsewhere on the net.
I have:
1. Film: Blue Fuji RX-N X-Ray Film
2. Developer: Developer Concentrate AGFA (G101c) 5 Liters
3. Fixer: Fixer Concentrate AGFA (G354) 5 Liters
Anyone tried this set?
Is it possible to get moderate quality image by using these set? Unfortunately, I live in a country where have access only for these stuff. If anyone tried or thinks that it is possible?!
It'll work, no doubt. I'm not familiar with that developer, so you may have to experiment a bit to get a usable development time. It's probably a rapid process developer, so maybe you need to dilute it e.g. 1+3 to get a more reasonable time. The fixer is probably usable as is; xray film tends to fix out easily. I'd just expose a couple of sheets at iso 80 in daylight and then develop the first, adjust development time to suit your taste for the next sheet, and so on.
You can also use any regular b&w developer, such as rodinal or d76 or whathaveyou.
Here is an image from a recent set up. This is an 8x10 carbon print. The Carestream single sided x-ray film was developed in Rodinal 1:60 for 12 minutes. The image is of a 110 year old Capiz window from a schoolhouse from the Philippines.
This exert was copied from another site. It was easy enough to find.
"If anyone else is looking for information I'll just post this response I got from Agfa:
G101 is a developer from our graphic department and is designed to develop line films. The recommended temperature (for lithographic films) is 35°C and the developing time should be approx. 25 seconds.
The G3231c is a microfilm developer. Standard conditions : temperature 38°C and developing time 12".
It should be possible to develop films as Tmax in G101 and G3231 but indeed the contrast will be higher and the film will be a bit more grainy.
We did never test these combinations but I recommend to make a test with a (much) lower temperature (f.e. 20°C) and a developing time of a few minutes.
hi,
for what it's worth,
couple of years late, but have been using the g3231c with technical pan at 100iso, diluted 1+63 for 6,5min @ 20dgrs. centigrade and getting pretty nice results...more testing needed, but definitely the right direction"
A couple of vintage shots.
Dallas Heritage Villiage
Half Speed Blue X-ray/ Graflex Super D/ Petzval
Jobo w. 1:1:100 Pyrocat HD for 6 minutes at 74F.
https://c1.staticflickr.com/5/4283/3...2c7c54c6_c.jpg
https://c1.staticflickr.com/5/4241/3...2a4e0183_c.jpg
This is a shot with Green full speed, ISO 100 I decided to develop it a little longer (10 minutes vs my usual 8) with Pyrocat HD 1:1:100 in jobo (six negatives, 600 ml). Predictably the contrast did go up quiet a bit, so will go back down to 8 next time. I dropped the contrast and increased mid tones quiet a bit in the scanning software:
https://c1.staticflickr.com/5/4245/3...7b0bd095_c.jpg
re: using blue gel to change response
I've done this with chromogenic BW film. The results were a bit more subtle than true blue-only. I used a full CTB gel which has some green/yellow in the passband.
Been a while since I shot any X-ray...this is on 8X10 green, homemade 13" lens...in my back yard...
https://www.dropbox.com/s/r0fmui9ko6...g845b.jpg?dl=1
Interested in details on your homemade lens.Quote:
Originally Posted by Randy
I had a bunch of Series 7 filter adapters and had a +3 close-up filter in that size, so I just made a lens out of the +3 filter and a stack of about 5-6 of the adapters (screwed together makes a black tube of about 30mm in length) , mounting the lens at the rear of the tube and making an aperture out of black construction paper, and mounting that at the front of the tube...kind of like an unscientific attempt at copying a Wollaston Meniscus lens (concave side of the close-up filter facing the subject)Quote:
Originally Posted by desertrat
Anyway, wide open it is about f/7 but is very soft, so the aperture I made comes out to about f/16 - still soft'ish but doesn't create a lot of "glow" in the image. The aperture is about 20mm in front of the glass - guess I should experiment by moving it closer to see how that affects the image quality - just haven't gotten around to it.
Note - since the filter adapters are 55mm, I purchased a 77mm-55mm step down ring and used that to make my mounting flange - just drilled three holes in it for the screws to mount it to my wooden lens-board.
Good morning (although it's probably evening in your part of the world). The developer you listed is a lith film developer that would work but may not give the results you've been seeing here. Others here are guaranteed to give you more information on this subject as I've never used the stuff only read about it.Quote:
Originally Posted by sinus2001
However, if you go to this site you - http://www.drfrankenfilm.com/diy-rodinal/4575179217 -you will find a recipe for a do it yourself Rodinol which should make your life much easier in regards to developing your x-ray film to match what you're seeing in this thread.
Good Luck
mike
Some have had good luck developing X-ray in coffeenol as well - just google coffeenol for recipes.
This was a 4x5 transparency, put in the enlarger and enlarged onto a sheet of 10x12 green xray film into a negative, then contact printed as a Kallitype.
Attachment 166671
Coogee Beach, Sydney Australia, judging by the costumes around the 1920's
I have tried a couple of times to "print" onto X-ray film and have never had it work. Even a step wedge that wasn't stepping. What type of light source and how much light? ThanksQuote:
Originally Posted by andrewch59
I used to do something Dean Collins called "white light printing" where you measured the white light (no neg) coming from the enlarger. That way you could enlarge, reduce, or use another enlarger and get the same print. Miss my darkroom. A glossed over explanation is in this video called Black and White Standardization at the 4:55 to 5:44 mark - https://youtu.be/4aNysC-X8T0?t=293
I now use an opal bulb in a veggie can hung from the ceiling. In the half of the bathroom that is the laundry area. Yep, the dustiest and hairiest place in the apartment to print film.
Hi Michael, my setup was fairly easy, I found the fstop on the enlarger lens that would suit the exposure I wanted for the xray film, which I rate at iso 80. I think it was about a 6 second exposure for 10x12, made a holder for my glass positive that would fit into the enlarger light tight and exposed onto the xray film. Turned out pretty well.
Thanks
Looks like the bulb may be too warm for the green high speed film. 30 seconds with only minor fogging on the step wedge. I think there is a blue or even an old tungsten black light bulb somewhere that could be swapped out...
I've tried exposing x-ray film under a normal enlarger (fitted with a bog standard incandescent enlarger bulb) and it worked just fine. I gave up on it as contrast control was a b*tch and it would take quite a bit of experimenting to work out a predictable process. But the light source itself really works just fine. Odds are something else is going wrong, because both the blue- and the green sensitive film can effectively be exposed under a regular enlarger. The fact that the color temperature is quite low doesn't mean there's nothing going on in the blue and green part of the spectrum. After all, that's also where your variable contrast paper is being exposed, and that works quite alright, doesn't it ;)
The only time I tried to enlarge onto an X-ray film I couldn't get the exposure short enough and was not sure I wanted a slide with a blue background badly enough to justify using more film.
I had the same problem to start off, just had to adjust the fstop to a smaller setting and let out less light. I think my main reason was to turn a magic lantern positive image into a larger negative for alternate printing. Hopefully the image above proves it can work for Kallitypes
I just went through the alternate printing thread and saw one you did (van dyke brown) of an axe or cleaver on a block of wood, the detail is amazing! Great Print!Quote:
Originally Posted by koraks
X-ray (single and double-sided) has worked well for me when enlarging smaller negatives for kallitype and carbon transfer printing.
Thanks! But I have to admit that that print was from a digital negative (although the original capture was on 35mm p Pan F+). The few enlarged xray negatives that I made didn't yield particularly impressive prints. But that was also because I reversal processed them (so negative - negative) and that introduces a whole new set of parameters to control.Quote:
Originally Posted by andrewch59
The company I get my xray film from have reversal film, is it any good? I guess the cheapest way would be to make a small positive, then enlarge it onto a large piece of film as a negative??
Hello
I've been lurking around here for a couple months and was wondering if anyone uses Sprint Developer? I'm in college and Sprint is provided. (I can use other developers if approved by faculty) I am mainly worried about how much grain. I'm not a fan of noticeable grain. I am leaning towards CXS Green but would rather Ektascan because antihalation. I plan on doing different types of alternative process contact prints.
Grain won't be an issue in a contact print. You may have to experiment to get development times.
I had not ever heard of Sprint developer and looked it up online. Fascinating. Not my thing... I'd never choose an all in one system like that, but I can see the attraction for a school lab. But they lost me when saying N+1 development was a "general safety factor." Sigh.Quote:
Originally Posted by Joel Whitely
Reading the material safety data sheets, it looks like this is a purely hydroquinone based developer. They are obscuring their exact formula (as if there were great mysteries in developers these days). Pure quinone developers seem to be very high contrast and slow acting. Slow is ok, but given that x-ray film is a bit prone to high contrast already, I'd be concerned about the contrast. Grain is probably less of a worry. The grain in my Rodinal (a notoriously grainy developer) processed 4x5s on green x-ray doesn't seem problematic to me until the print is enlarged to truly enormous sizes. If you're contact printing it will be a non-issue.
Give it a shot! It will be fun. I'd try diluting it heavily though if your lab is using it one-shot. If they are replenishing and you can't dilute it, you may need to try a water bath alternation if your contrast gets out of control. But you may need pretty extreme contrast depending on what your alt-process is? My experience is with fine silver printing so I can't speak to that.
Definitely take the time to profile your film, developer and paper (or paper equivalent in your process). It will save you a ton of time in the long run. I messed around for way too long before formally taking test shots and doing it right.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jason Greenberg Motamedi
This is very similar to my process. I do Rodinal at 100:1 shot at 64 asa. What agitation scheme did you land on yourself? Thanks.