Same exact film?
Quote:
Originally Posted by photoevangelist
Printable View
Same exact film?
Quote:
Originally Posted by photoevangelist
These are with no filter. I tried a Tiffen #12 yellow before on landscapes and wasn't too thrilled. This was way back when I was trying to figure out my film speed on 8x10 though. I liked yellow filter on my portraits however, and green even more (but caused a two stop difference, instead of one with the yellow - so I vouched for the yellow).Quote:
Originally Posted by Carl J
I was shooting two exposures on these images. One was no filter and the other exposure was with a circle warming polarizer. I added two stops to my exposure bit they came out thinner than the ones without a filter. I thought a polarizer my help with a sky on xray film like it can with color... no cigar. I'd like to try yellow and green filters again, but I question how much they would actually benefit the image.
It's really fun to go out with a big camera and take a lot of care to compose each image. A whole lot of work goes into it. It really sucks to process the images and there be problems like scratches or uneven development that would most likely not exist if I was shooting conventional film. I've been wondering if I should just be using regular film (I've got two boxes of HP5 now, and one box of FP4 coming in the fall), but when it's gone - it's gone. I'm using xray film because I got amazing results with studio portraits and I've seen stunning landscapes by Bryan, Holden, and others. Perhaps I should load my holders with HP5+ on one side and xray film on the other. That way I get two variations of the same scene and can determine wether this xray film is worth spending all the extra effort to deal with.
The first 7x17 film I was using was expired HR-U that I received for free. I switched to a new freshly dated box of HR-A, which is the same emulsion that I was using for my portraits - familiar territory. However development problems were the same. Rodinal just isn't working for me in 7x17.Quote:
Originally Posted by Randy Moe
Without a filter I get no sky detail with single-sided Kodak B/RA.
FWIW, I always go out with both X-ray and conventional film. Personally, I think knowing you've got some 'real' film with results (processing-wise at least) you can be reasonably sure about has always helped with the sometime frustration of dealing with the quirks X-ray film. IOW, I'd want to shoot a little bit, at least, of that Ilford, too. :)
Totally understand your concerns about the limited supply of Ilford 7x17, but maybe you could ask around and locate a bit more if you begin to run out prematurely. Plus, by that time you'll probably have long-since solved the x-ray film problems and can better figure out what works best for which type of subject matter.
Just my very humble .02. :)
Quote:
Originally Posted by photoevangelist
8x10 Kodak CSG, Yellow-green filter, Symmar 300/500 @ 300mm
rotary dev, rodinal 1:100, 15:00
http://farm6.staticflickr.com/5491/9...0acf81fe_b.jpg
Scan-130720-0003www by Sergei Rodionov, on Flickr
http://farm6.staticflickr.com/5455/9...5199c4cf_b.jpg
Scan-130720-0004www by Sergei Rodionov, on Flickr
and if you REALLY careful...
8x10, Kodak CSG, 1s, Yellow/Green filter, Symmar, 8m in 1:100 R09
http://farm6.staticflickr.com/5442/9...14bafee9_b.jpg
Scan-130721-0004www by Sergei Rodionov, on Flickr
Shit happens...
Quote:
Originally Posted by SergeiR
Just awesome!
Quote:
Originally Posted by sergeir
What is Kodak CSG?Quote:
Originally Posted by SergeiR
http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7420/9...593728aa_c.jpg
Beppe platinato di Filippo Natali, su Flickr
Platinum/Palladium toned Kallitype, made from 14x17" Kodak Tmat Xray negative developed with Pyrocat-MC, Apo Ronar 600 F/9 (...or maybe Xenar 420mm F/4.5, I don't remember exactly)
Thank you all for the tons of helpful tips in this thread!