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

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jon.oman

Nice image Randy!

---

Thank you!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wayne

what is your light source?

---

Either fluorescent tubes or NuArc mercury vapor unit depending on which process, and negative size.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by barnacle

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

---

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.

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

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mdarnton

This looks interesting:
http://www.largeformatphotography.in...d-development:
Is anyone trying this with x-ray film to control contrast?

---

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.

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!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Peter De Smidt

X-ray film is orthochromatic and can be handled under red light. Why then does it not render skin tones darker like the ortho film of old? Skin with x-ray film looks closer to pan film than ortho. Mind you, I'm fine with that. I'd just like to understand what's going on. Is it that the ortho of old was less sensitive to a wider range of wavelengths?

---

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.

Good to know, Jim. Thanks!

Nice work, Randy!