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

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Randy Moe

Now where is that live model...

---

The way I started getting people to sit for me was to start a defined project with an end goal. In my case, it's portraits of Oklahoma musicians (past & present) shot on 4×5″ x-ray film. Once you get a few to sit for you they start telling their friends. I use social media to find more subjects.

I spent a lot of time being timid about actually getting live models over here. Lots of excuses to myself. "I need to nail down the lighting. I need a different lens. I need to improve my darkroom technique." It was time wasted. Just do it.

My point is, make a project for yourself and then go out an find the subjects you need for it — it's much easier than it sounds.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by seezee

The way I started getting people to sit for me was to start a defined project with an end goal. In my case, it's portraits of Oklahoma musicians (past & present) shot on 4×5″ x-ray film. Once you get a few to sit for you they start telling their friends. I use social media to find more subjects.

I spent a lot of time being timid about actually getting live models over here. Lots of excuses to myself. "I need to nail down the lighting. I need a different lens. I need to improve my darkroom technique." It was time wasted. Just do it.

My point is, make a project for yourself and then go out an find the subjects you need for it — it's much easier than it sounds.

---

Good advice and I have done that.

I will get going again.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Randy Moe

Yes, next time I bracket widely.

First time.

---

My suggestion for bracketing low light shots is to double for each exposure. The laws of reciprocity cause these to be not quite one stop apart.
Example: 1,2,4,8,16. . . whether seconds, minutes or hours.
Jim

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jim Noel

My suggestion for bracketing low light shots is to double for each exposure. The laws of reciprocity cause these to be not quite one stop apart.
Example: 1,2,4,8,16. . . whether seconds, minutes or hours.
Jim

---

Thanks Jim!

That was my plan, but I got cold and very nervous in the isolated spot 'down by the river.' Looks civilized, but Chicago can be dicey.

I will shoot that location again when it warms up. I think a lot of Chicago river shots are done by boat as I cannot find the best angles on land.

I have shot from our water taxi, but it vibrates a lot and moves quickly, however cheapest boat ride anywhere.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Randy Moe

Thanks Jim!

That was my plan, but I got cold and very nervous in the isolated spot 'down by the river.' Looks civilized, but Chicago can be dicey.

I will shoot that location again when it warms up. I think a lot of Chicago river shots are done by boat as I cannot find the best angles on land.

I have shot from our water taxi, but it vibrates a lot and moves quickly, however cheapest boat ride anywhere.

---

theoretically you can do it from spots where water is not scary deep by using tripod in water. But yes, there are dodgy places along the riverwalk. Bring people with you, Randy ;) Don't be loner ;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SergeiR

theoretically you can do it from spots where water is not scary deep by using tripod in water. But yes, there are dodgy places along the riverwalk. Bring people with you, Randy ;) Don't be loner ;)

---

Understood. I am not shooting the downtown River Walk but much farther North. I am a loner. But when one is alone, you meet more people and make new friends. That's why I prefer to travel alone. Works for me. :)

Late Afternoon Light

The winter sun sets a bit too fast.
The window of time between beautiful afternoon light with long elongated shadows, and the moment the sun sets behind the hills in the west, is very short.
If you don't pay attention, you can easily miss it.
Especially with the time it takes to set up the LF camera.
But it's worth it.

18x24cm camera
Fujinon W 250
Agfa CP G+ (x-ray film) at 100asa.
Tray developed by inspection in Ilford MG 1+100 at 22C for 7min
Scan from negative, finished in PS.

https://farm2.staticflickr.com/1505/...245ce310_b.jpg

Okay, so I got a Wratten no. 44a filter on ebay, cut it down to size, placed it in a cokin gelatin holder and, with the aid of adapters, slapped it on my spot meter. Now that my spot meter is "seeing" roughly what the EB/RA Carestream single-side emulsion film does, I'd like to establish a static ISO approximation. Has anyone narrowed it down with a similar setup as mine? Or do I just figure it out by experimentation?

I think most now believe ISO on this film changes by angle of Sun. I see people choosing 50, 80, 100. I shoot it 'now' at 50 under studio strobes. Which is working for me in studio.

But most advice here on ASA is find your personal EI.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by senderoaburrido

Okay, so I got a Wratten no. 44a filter on ebay, cut it down to size, placed it in a cokin gelatin holder and, with the aid of adapters, slapped it on my spot meter. Now that my spot meter is "seeing" roughly what the EB/RA Carestream single-side emulsion film does, I'd like to establish a static ISO approximation. Has anyone narrowed it down with a similar setup as mine? Or do I just figure it out by experimentation?

---

I understand what you are saying. The thing is that the filter I chose is cyan (discovered it as a "minus-red" filter), which should be blocking the majority of the red light coming through to the spot meter. Regardless of my source of light, the meter ought to be giving me readings that are consistently parallel with the specific sensitivities of the film, no? I figured this would allow me to establish a baseline ASA/ISO.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by senderoaburrido

I understand what you are saying. The thing is that the filter I chose is cyan (discovered it as a "minus-red" filter), which should be blocking the majority of the red light coming through to the spot meter. Regardless of my source of light, the meter ought to be giving me readings that are consistently parallel with the specific sensitivities of the film, no? I figured this would allow me to establish a baseline ASA/ISO.

---

I cannot advise on your scenario.

Why not try it both ways? This stuff is cheap. I cut to 4x5 and run through a bit finding my way through the smoke.

That's an interesting statement. I thought every photographer knew ortho films speed changes with sun angle and latitude. Yes, the film is faster at the 50th latitude then at the 45th latitude. Sun angle is directly connected with the amount of red in the light, ortho film is insensitive to red, so the redder the light, the slower the film at that time.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Randy Moe

I think most now believe ISO on this film changes by angle of Sun. I see people choosing 50, 80, 100. I shoot it 'now' at 50 under studio strobes. Which is working for me in studio.

But most advice here on ASA is find your personal EI.

---

How would I go about establishing a fixed number by experimentation? Do I set different ISO's on my meter, then take pictures, and compare the results against my little gray card by eye?

EI calibration is a big topic, and it depends on how much you want to delve into the Zone System. Here's a good place to start on the LFP site:

http://www.largeformatphotography.in...-meter-cal.pdf

I highly suggest reading Ansel Adams' "The Negative" back-to-front as well. But the extremely watered-down version is yes, set a few different ISOs on your meter (a.k.a., bracket) on the same photo and find out what EI works best for your setup.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Corran

But the extremely watered-down version is yes, set a few different ISOs on your meter (a.k.a., bracket) on the same photo and find out what EI works best for your setup.

---

"Expose for the shadows, develop for the highlights" is the rule to remember when judging your test exposures.

Or expose for the mid-tones, develop for the shadows and agitate for the highlights - see Minor White.

Perhaps this sun angle thing is why I don't find BTZS to be accurate for x-ray film. My cold light probably puts out more blue light in testing while the sunlight here has more red.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by j.e.simmons

My cold light probably puts out more blue light in testing while the sunlight here has more red.

---

It's that influence that I'm trying to eliminate by leaving the minus-red filter on my spot meter. No more red-variance corrupting the readings and making all this guesswork necessary.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Michael E

"Expose for the shadows, develop for the highlights" is the rule to remember when judging your test exposures.

---

no its not. Its only when you follow certain school.

Sorry, got dragged away by work things.. :)

--

Question of correct exposure is vast and outside of the scope of Xray imho.

In general Randy is totally right. Experimentation is key to get things to your liking. Not to someone else's liking. To yours. Xray is fairly forgiving and cheap, so why not just go and play with it.

I don't know what certain school that would be. But for the Ortho film school (X-ray film is one) it is a very good process to start with. With Pan film, it is much more difficult to do.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SergeiR

no its not. Its only when you follow certain school.

---

One example would be Mortensen's "Expose for the highlights and develop for the shadows" method.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by premortho

I don't know what certain school that would be. But for the Ortho film school (X-ray film is one) it is a very good process to start with. With Pan film, it is much more difficult to do.

---

Let us be like Chinese proverb "may thousand flowers bloom, may thousand schools prosper".

I for one never expose for shadows.

People can cook bacon in great many ways. And it will be still tasty in most of them.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Peter J. De Smidt

One example would be Mortensen's "Expose for the highlights and develop for the shadows" method.

---

yup. thats one other way to do it. Except for occasions of great outdoor contrast where he caves in (its in his "Outdoor portraiture") ;)

Other way is to figure out midtone placement & etc.

I honestly think that artistic vision is more important than technical perfection. Never should technical aspect be driving solution. After that it just becomes more of common sense derivative..

Anyway.. Too much talking. Too technical.

8x10, Kodak CSG, R09 (aging) 1:100, 12 minutes rotary, 360mm Heliar @ f5.6, light metered at f11 (-2 stops down to compensate for bellows extension, which i sometime miscalculate)

https://farm2.staticflickr.com/1683/...05cf8d1b_c.jpgLana by Sergei Rodionov, on Flickr

Outstanding, Sergei! (and Lana, of course!)

Lana is looking great. Nice to see!

Thanks, guys. She wanted new headshot, to sort of document progress on hair growing :)

Yes and very nice hair. We all love Lana. You too Sergei!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SergeiR

Thanks, guys. She wanted new headshot, to sort of document progress on hair growing :)

---

Hey SergeiR,

If you don't mind my asking... What temp are you processing at with R09 at 1:100 for 12 mins? I've always sat in awe of the smooth tonal range you're ability to pull out of x-ray film. In all my use of Ektascan, I've not even come close to your results. Really thinking about giving the Kodak CSG film a go now. Lovely portrait!!

Thanks!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alan9940

Hey SergeiR,

If you don't mind my asking... What temp are you processing at with R09 at 1:100 for 12 mins? I've always sat in awe of the smooth tonal range you're ability to pull out of x-ray film. In all my use of Ektascan, I've not even come close to your results. Really thinking about giving the Kodak CSG film a go now. Lovely portrait!!

Thanks!

---

Thank you.

No secrets about it - its just tap water, around room temp, which for Dallas is about 70 degrees on typical day.

(Dallas is awesome like that, most of time you can do C41 or E6 processing without any true water baths :))

I use two rotary processors - Jobo CPE on film setting (1 i think it is) or Unicolor (single setting) that is a bit faster. I love Unicolor for being water-less and taking less space, but its really annoying trying to catch tank all the time, as it keeps trying to run off the processor ( i am sure i can hack something for it, but oh well)

Kodak BioMax XAR Film, I shot as ISO 35, (f4.5, 1/15s) then I ran it through a tray of X-ray film T2 developer (diluted 3 times) for just one minutes. The film was transferred to the water tray and after fix for 5 min. After fixation film was washed for 10-15 minutes in running water.
Carl Zeiss 21cm f4.5 210mm Tessar, Improved Seneca View Camera (1906), 5x7 https://www.flickr.com/photos/126027...7646002305868/
Attachment 148481

I have a couple of questions for those who might have actually done their fixing/washing tests homework:

First question: I notice that it takes less than 10 seconds for xray film to clear in the fix. Given the traditional advice to fix for twice the clearing time, does this mean that 20 seconds in the fix is adequate? Has anyone done any chemical tests to confirm anything about this?

Next question: does the quick fixing imply that the film needs less wash time? Has anyone done any tests to determine the proper washing time for xray film, based on the usual chemical tests?

Finally: what's different about xray film that it fixes so quickly? It appears, by the density, that it might have more, not less silver than conventional films, so it would seem that the opposite might happen: slower fixing.

Thanks for any answers.....

Might depend on fixer. I also notice very fast clear times with TF-5 and it seems to last a very long time.

Michael, there is a fix from Tetenal called Super Fix plus; it fixes normal film in 20 to 30 seconds, too, but Tetenal says 2 or 3 minutes.

Fixing a film until he is clear means, that the not exposed bromsilver is removed, and this can happen fast.
But this process brings new chemical connections; they must be removed, too, so I believe in Tetenal's 2 (or 3, I'm not sure) minutes.

Otherwise I have found, that old thin layer film fixes fast, too, but fixing more than 5 minutes destroyed the image in my negatives.

Ritchie

That's interesting. I've been fixing for about two minutes, in spite of the clearing time. Maybe I should give a bit more.

Also, I was wondering if it would wash faster, both since it clears quickly, and also is in the fix less time. Not that this matters, because I wash with changes and over-wash even by that plan, since it's so easy.

It was made for use in automatic processors which zip along, Inthink a friend said either 2 or 4 minutes insert to developed, fixed, dried. But this is hearsay.

Has anyone tried processing Ektascan in XTOL? If so, what was your process and how well did it work for you?

I think the quick fixing times are because the emulsion swells very readily, unlike the somewhat harder emulsions on regular films. Also, I think the emulsion is one layer (per side) only and the physical structure of the grains may have something to do with it as well. Either way, since the emulsiom absorbs fluids so readily, I suspect that washing times don't need to be very long either. I usually fix for one to two minutes, then rinse the film thoroughly under a ranking tap and finally let it soak for 5 to 10 minutes in water with a bit of photoflo. I doubt the longevity of my negatives, but it doesn't worry me too much, to be honest.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mdarnton

That's interesting. I've been fixing for about two minutes, in spite of the clearing time. Maybe I should give a bit more.

Also, I was wondering if it would wash faster, both since it clears quickly, and also is in the fix less time. Not that this matters, because I wash with changes and over-wash even by that plan, since it's so easy.

---

You can't really wash "faster". Washing is a soaking out process, so speeding up the water flow has little if any effect.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by plaubel

...Otherwise I have found, that old thin layer film fixes fast, too, but fixing more than 5 minutes destroyed the image in my negatives. Ritchie

---

I have a box of 14x17 Agfa X-ray (old and fogged) that I fix-out to use as support material for making carbon tissue. Perhaps I am over-fixing it, as the emulsion on both sides comes off under any pressure. Is that what you mean by your image being destroyed?

mdarnton: Some photo material, and depending on how they are processed, do wash faster than others. But I think you would see the greatest effect of that with fiber base photo paper, with the paper base soaking up fixer. Since the film base does not soak up any chemicals, wash times are much shorter - with unhardened gelatin emulsions probably washing a little faster than hardened emulsions, but as you said, probably not significant in the normal over-washing we tend to do.

QUOTE=Vaughn;1318443]I have a box of 14x17 Agfa X-ray (old and fogged) that I fix-out to use as support material for making carbon tissue. Perhaps I am over-fixing it, as the emulsion on both sides comes off under any pressure. Is that what you mean by your image being destroyed?
[/QUOTE]

No, I meant a kind of bleaching - if I remember right, it has been long ago.
But I can remember the not desired results, and the following better results after fixing short.
A friend of me gave me the tip of shortening the fixing time depending on the thin layer film.

Is there anywhere one can buy X-ray film in the UK? Either cut down to 4x5 or in original boxes.
It is just that I do not know if there is a place locally with a darkroom and a guillotine so I can cut the film down myself.

You don't need a "darkroom"; you need a dark room. I use my laundry room, with a black t-shirt over the window, at night, and a $4 LED red light for a safelight. You will save the cost of a cheap rotary cutter with your first box of film.

I have been looking around but the best bet looks like getting it from the states... for some reason the UK suppliers are remarkably discreet about how much they charge but one where I did find a price was asking for over two hundred quid a box, which rather defeats the point of the exercise.

Neil

Neil,
depending on size of film, I can give a german source, but here we use the metric sizes.
And concerning darkroom - why not have a bit fun there while cutting film:-)

Ritchie

Hi Plaubel,

Being lazy, I'm looking at the Agfa Green 8x10 (20x25cm) which I'll have to cut down to my 4x5 slides. US prices on a well-known auction site are around thirty dollars for a box of a hundred, but about the same for postage.

Seems a bit silly to have to get it from the States when it starts a lot nearer home.

Neil

edit: perhaps FotoImpex are missing a trick here...

Yes, I went and checked Ebay UK earlier today, and all of the vendors of xray film were American! That's strange, isn't it?

Sorry, Neil Barnacle, I was talking to Neil Purling; my mistake.
Neil P. asked for buying in UK, and this is just a jump from germany...

Barnacle Neil, Impex ,Maco and other photo-stuff dealers do not sell Xray in germany.

No, that isn't the whole truth : Hans Mahn CoKG has sold the Xray film worldwide, but almost to countries like India, Afrika and so on.
If they do it today? I don't know. Of course not in small demands, and not to private persons.
But if Ilford and others don't offer film anymore, you can expect that Maco will sell xray as a fantastic photographic film :-)

I always have to buy from medical-stuff dealers, and a lot of them are not willing to sale at private persons. A few are willing...

Ritchie

In the US X-ray film is usually bought from medical sources, not photographic suppliers.

Ritchie, no worries - both Neil P and I are in the UK, so the same issues apply to both of us. I mentioned Impex because I'm fairly regularly in Berlin (and planning on retiring near there, in the next few years) and so have access.

There are medical suppliers in the UK but as I mentioned, the prices are not cheap. My whole intent for x-ray is experimentation, so £0.10 a sheet of 5x4 (cut down from 10x8) makes it worth the wait from the States, I think. I just grudge paying as much for the postage as the film, even though the film is cheap!

Neil

[QUOTE=barnacle;1319292 I'm fairly regularly in Berlin (and planning on retiring near there, in the next few years) and so have access.

l[/QUOTE]

Then you could use one of the german medical sources.
Do you have a german base/adress for shipping reasons?