Use of X-ray film: technical discussion with example images

I think I might be in luck. My S&S holders seem to barely accommodate the 178mm size - assuming the Fuji HR-A film is also exactly 7 inches (177.8 mm).

If it's not exactly 7" I'll eat a sheet.

If you bring me to Korea to do it!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by photoevangelist

I think I might be in luck. My S&S holders seem to barely accommodate the 178mm size - assuming the Fuji HR-A film is also exactly 7 inches (177.8 mm).

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Randy Moe

If it's not exactly 7" I'll eat a sheet.

If you bring me to Korea to do it!

---

There is direct flight from O'Hare to Seoul, btw ;) Used to depart around midnight ;)

I know you have a big bed scanner, so what is the max size file you can produce with 14X17?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Corran

Thanks for the link to the "great big camera" - pretty neat!
I'm not enamored of the landscape here in the deep south...Clyde Butcher can have it (I'm not going wading in chest-deep water to get the shot, sorry!). But if I do move somewhere that I feel speaks to me...I think a 7x17 or 14x17 is in my future. I can just fit 14x17 onto my scanner bed (!).

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Corran

I can just fit 14x17 onto my scanner bed (!).

---

Well... you know.. ;) We all hate ya.. ;)

I used to always fly at night, why ruin a day.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SergeiR

There is direct flight from O'Hare to Seoul, btw ;) Used to depart around midnight ;)

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Randy Moe

We are a tiny tiny percentage of X-Ray users, if it was the end prices would be rising

---

Only if there was demand, and we the tiny percentage are not demand. But I think this is just a price cut, not the end.

Randy, I'm not sure, but an 8x10 scan that I did at 3200 DPI was "only" 250 megabytes after tweaking and saving as an 8-bit greyscale TIFF. I think as a 16-bit color image as, I originally scanned it at, it was 2 gigabytes or something obscene.
Sergei - sorry ;)

Corran, remind me name of it, please.. i keep forgetting to put it into constant search :(

From top of me head - 8x10 scanned at 4800 is 2.2G as 16 bit compressed TIFF. I gave up on scanning them at that b/c Photoshop cant really open them. It exceeds some internal counter and poor thing dies.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Randy Moe

I'm at least 1/2 your cost with R09, DIY citric acid stop and DIY TF-3.

I use 10 ml R09 per sheet, either one sided FP4 of 2 sided kodak CSG.

Mix your own fix, it does save money.

---

I was doing 4 sheets of 8x10 with 30 ml of Rodinal (each individually). 1:50 dilution 1500ml water + 30 ml chemistry. It wasn't until the 5th sheet that I started to see a loss in contrast. Since I shot an extra sheet for each portrait I was doing, I decided to develop two different portraits first, then develop the second copies next just in case there was any contrast loss.

Once I moved up to the tank and hangar method, my contrast went up. I tried 3.8 liters (1 gallon) with 75ml Rodinal, but reduced it to 70ml for 2 sets of 4 hangars (totaling 8 negatives with 70ml chemistry. I might try reducing the chemistry some more, because that's still 10ml more than I was using before in less water.

I don't know how scientific it is, but for all practical purposes it works for me.