I just happen to have a couple gallon bags of D-19. I know this is x-ray developer, but does it work for pictorial uses of x-ray film? I guess I need to re-read from the beginning for developers that y'all use. Besides Diafine.
Printable View
I just happen to have a couple gallon bags of D-19. I know this is x-ray developer, but does it work for pictorial uses of x-ray film? I guess I need to re-read from the beginning for developers that y'all use. Besides Diafine.
D-19 isn't x-ray developer but it works fine for x-ray applications. X-ray developer gives a very long tonal scale without high contrast. X-ray applications require all the subtle tones to be reproduced but with good separation. D-19 is a higher contrast developer but quite different than any x-ray developer I've used. My applications require a contrast boost for some subjects and D-19 does that very well if used straight. In 1:1 or 1:2 it can produce very nice negs. My guess it would be fine for pictorial use if you work out the time and dilution. For my needs I've even considered D-11 with HP-5 but I haven't tried it yet.
A couple of questions from one completely ignorant about these films...
Are they notched so you know which side is which?
My developing method is strictly for one-sided film. Are mammography film and industrial x-ray film the only films we're talking about here that would be appropriate for my methods?
How do these films handle human skin? Blotchy, smooth, or fairly normal?
And I assume they fit the standard film holders? (My 11x14 Fidelity Medical Cassettes are the same size as my Fidelity film holder.)
Thanks muchly!
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mark Sawyer
All common inexpensive X-ray films are double sided (emulsion on both sides) thus they do not need a notch to determine side. The 8x10 size does fit 8x10 film holders such as Fidelity, Lisco, etc. I haven't tried 11x14 yet, but have some and will soon.
The mammography film is single sided, but it doesn't seem to be available in the common pictorial film sizes such as 8x10..so it would have to be cut to size. It is also more expensive (for some reason).
Quote:
Originally Posted by venchka
Xtol, HC-110, D76 all work fine. Your developing time will have to be determined by trial and error.
I have taken to notching the xray film as I load it with a paper punch, so I always know which way is up.
Mark, I bought 8x10 Fidelity holders from a hospital that was using them for x-rays. I don't have 11x14 fidelitys but the film fits nicely in 11x14 sterling/graflex holders.
Since I cut the 8x10 sheet into 4 4x5 sheets, I end up with 4 rounded corners and I use the rounded corner as a "notch," mostly so that I always load the film in the same direction and can keep the commonality (routine) of loading and handling all my 4x5 film - - not because I need to worry about which side the emulsion is on. I started off with a paper punch making my own notch, but then I realized that i was using the rounded corner as a guide to the placement the punch... DUH, so why not use the rounded corner as the "notch"... But if you use the single sided film, then the rounded corner idea would not work.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jason Greenberg Motamedi
By avoiding the 2-sided common X-ray film, you are eliminating the main reason for using X-ray film, and that is cost. The common blue-sensitive and green-sensitive 2-sided films are the ones that are cheap. If you are going to attempt to use the much more expensive mammography and/or industrial xray films, you might as well just use conventional private label sheet films from a vendor such as Freestyle.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mark Sawyer
Of course, the tonal rendition of a blue and/or green sensitive film is different than a panchromatic or orthochromatic film and that is another reason for using common x-ray film, as a creative tool, to interpret your vision in a different way.
Xray film is not panchromatic.
Your eyes will tell you, under a red safelite, if indeed there is any difference at all.
And if you use a tent or change bag- it doesn't matter- that's why no notches
X-ray film may not be Panchromatic, but I have had some fogging trying to develop by inspection under a red graphic-arts safelight. (This was blue-sensitive film)Quote:
Originally Posted by EdWorkman
Forgot to ask this earlier. Are there any reciprocity numbers with the x-ray film? I mean at f-64-90 we are looking at some long exposures. Curious if someone has info on this. Thanks.
Jim
Since reciprocity is not a factor in using these films for Xray applications, I doubt the manufacturers actually publish data such as this. I think it would be more trial and error. Boy I don't know many people that expose at f90. I generally go down to about f32 with 8x10.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jim Fitzgerald
Gene, thanks. I figured some testing was in order. i normally shoot Efke 25 in 8x10, 11x14 and 8x20 and I am usually shooting at F- 32 to F-90 or even 128. I like to take a walk during some of my multi minute exposures. I can see fun and games ahead with x-ray film. Thanks.Quote:
Originally Posted by Gene McCluney
Jim
I forgot to ask if there is any issue with this type of film being a couple of years out of date. Is it still good if it is past expiration? I use regular film past date with good results, just wondered if this holds true for x-ray film. Thanks,
Jim
I have routinely made exposures ranging from 1/8 of a second to a minute using the CXS green-sensitive x-ray film have have not noticed any sort of reciprocity failure.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jim Fitzgerald
Jason, this is awesome info. Thanks. Have you used any expired stuff. I have some 2 year old stuff on hold pending what everyone says here. Does this stuff hold up past its use date? Thanks.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jason Greenberg Motamedi
Jim
I can't say, all of my film is still in date...
Anyhow, I got some really nice results yesterday with 11x14 CXS Green. At twilight at f22 for 28 seconds. I developed them for six minutes in Rodinal 1:200 at 21C and they look great. Best I have had so far. If I can ever figure out how to scan my 11x14s without stitching four together, I will post them...
Jason sounds great with your results. Like I said i have 500 sheets that I have on hold because the seller forgot to tell me it was past date by 2 years. It will be a good deal but I have never used expired x-ray film and thought I would ask. Does anyone know? If not I may reconsider. Thanks.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jason Greenberg Motamedi
Jim
My 2 cents. I use Kodak Green or any of the rebrands of the same. Also Agfa. I rate at iso 100. I develop in Beutler High Def. dilluted at 1:1/2:8 1/2 for 6 min. at about 68 degrees I find this gives me the best contrast control and gradiation. I don't have a scanner so I can't post any of my results. As a side note, I found this combination also works well with Edu Ultra 200.
Jim,
My first batch of 8x10 x-film was 8 years past date and it worked very well. Contrast was excellent, I couldn't find any defects except for my own ;) Exposure times in the nuarc were pretty short to start out, so no noticeable base fog. That's what got me hooked.
I see no reason that black and white Xray film would be any more prone to age effects than conventional b/w film. It is a slow film (ISO 100 approx). So it should have the same keeping qualities as FP4+ or Plus-X. Remember-it is just double sided b/w film-sensitive to either blue light, or blue & Green light (Ortho), and it is on a blue base, rather than clear base, but other than that, it is not exotic in any way. If I recall, some Foma 120 size roll film is also on a blue base. It is so cheap to purchase fresh and new, I would be hesitant to purchase any old film unless you could get it for 10 cents a sheet or so for 8x10. I just ordered 100 sheets of Green sensitive 7x17 for $56.
Guys, thanks a lot! i just got 500 sheets of green sensitive for .15 a sheet that is 2 years past date. I'll tell the seller to send it. Looks like I'll be stocked for a while!Quote:
Originally Posted by Gene McCluney
Now to get some 8x10! too bad there is no 8x20!
Jim
ok, stupid question coming up...
I'd quite like to try this at some point-
but that will probably mean having it shipped, or brought over from the states...
stupid question-
How do you think it might be affected by airport security scanners?
They don't use x-ray film in the EU?
Well, They probably do, I've just been doing a search-
nothing come up for Ireland so far...
If it came in from abroad, it might be scanned anyway-
The point is, those prices in the US are affordable,
and might make it worthwhile-
I'm sure the price for similar material here would be multiples of the prices referred to in this thread...
X-ray film is used worldwide. You should be able to find a vendor in Ireland, or the EU easily. You should inquire at a local health clinic or Doctors office.
Will do, thank you...
It's getting more difficult to obtain X-Ray film at least here in the Czech Republic, and I think it would also be true for the rest of EU. The reason is the progress of digitalization - all the university hospitals here and some of the smaller ones have "upgraded" (?) to digital X-Ray machines that do not use film.
The one film that was used for photography (or better, was reported to be used as such. I haven't used any of them yet), Foma Medix PT was discontinued without supplement...
While the market is shrinking, I don't think it has evaporated. Small clinics can't afford the digital equipment. They get their X-ray film from somewhere. It would be informative to inquire around with those still using X-ray film.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jiri Vasina
While researching sources, I came across Konica-Minolta and Sony x-ray film. I wonder who is actually making it? Fuji?
Nerdy question: Since the film is coated on both sides, should we treat the film as two sheets for minimum developer and fixer life? That seems abundantly clear, but wanted to get confirmation.
Thanks!
Konica-Minolta, Agfa/Gevart, Kodak and Fuji are the primary sources it seems.Quote:
Originally Posted by venchka
I would also think that you replenish for the square inches of emulsion. If it is on both sides of a film, then you figure 2x the replenishment of a single coated film.
Thanks Gene. I use one shot developers. I'll double up on the volume.
If Konica-Minolta can stay in the x-ray film business, why not the scanner and wonderful wee 35mm lens business??????????????
I believe they sold their medical imaging business, possibly to GE. They sold their camera business to Sony. Their excellent light-meters are made by yet another company. No one makes their scanners. Many of the current Sony and Zeiss lenses sold thru Sony would be the same as previously sold under the Minolta brand. AFAIK, the current Sony digital slr cameras use the same Minolta Maxxum lens mount designed for Minolta Maxxum 35mm film SLR cameras.Quote:
Originally Posted by venchka
I just received 500 sheets of 11x14 green. Now i can play. This film is by McKesson and it is a medium speed green. With this much film for about .15 a sheet I can experiment to my hearts content. I'll post some prints of my tests when I get them done.
Jim
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jim Fitzgerald
Well hurry up, no need to sleep with that much film to consume. Get those samples up.
Here's a place in UK that sells stainless film hangers- two styles tension and regular
http://www.richards.uk.com/xraylis1.htm
It appears that the 11x14 is 17.1 poundsmoney- about $25? plus $$?? for shipping.
Take a look also at the nifty processing tank thingies
That price list is 2001. I wonder if they keep the same prices.Quote:
Originally Posted by EdWorkman
2001? Arghh Wonder if they are still in business.
Gene, I know, I know! Hell I have never had 500 sheets of film to use ever. i'm like a kid in a candy store. I'll try to post some stuff this weekend.
Jim
Jim,
You could sub-divide and recover your cost.
Dear wclavey,
With regard to your posted graph of sensitivity versus wavelength....if the user who suggested this film is panchromatic by developing by inspection under safelight were to put a UV filter in front of the that safelight might we not be able to develop under safelight conditions. We use ortho film developed in D19 under safelight. I'm guessing the UV filter would 'take the wind' out of any light that is causing his foggin.
This is a good idea and one I may consider.Quote:
Originally Posted by venchka
Jim
Okay, I just completed a simple test in my studio....er apartment. I loaded one holder with the 11x14 green sensitive medium speed X-ray film and set up a still life. Some plants in the courtyard gladly volunteered to help, well no one was looking when I did a little landscape work. Anyhow I used my big Darlot and I shot it at about F-5.6 (it opens to F-4) and I did two exposures. I metered at 100 and I took one at 2 seconds and one at 4 seconds. My lighting was daylight and a daylight balanced fluorescent bulb. Very simple set up and I did not realize that my backdrop fell down but what the heck this is a test.
I developed the negatives in Pyrocat-HD 1:1:200 @ 72 degrees in a tray for 10 minutes. I pre-soaked the film for 5 minutes and then did normal agitation for the ten minutes. 30 seconds agitation at the beginning and 5 seconds every minute. The negatives came out great and are drying. You do have to use trays that do not have raised ridges as Gene said and I did one in a tray to see what it looks like. The second negative I did I used the right tray and it came out great. No scratches at all I think in part to the hardening of the pyro.
Now, I need to get the hangers done because this stuff looks great. This will allow me to shoot a lot of 11x14 and 8x10. i have some 8x10 on the way.
I will post an example when I can. The film is still wet and I will only be able to scan a part of the image as my Epson 4870 can't do an 11x14 negative.
Jim
Good idea, I did! Share the wealth!Quote:
Originally Posted by venchka
Jim
I have another question regarding X-ray film? I normally print carbon transfer with single transfer. Normally with regular film the image is reversed. Since X-ray film has emulsion on both sides do I need to be concerned with which side I print? I mean the emulsion is on both sides even though the film has been developed, right? It just seems strange but if this is the case then this is an added bonus.
Jim
Theoretically emulsion side facing the lens would be the sharpest, but in practice it may not matter.
Gene, thanks I'll give it a try when I get a chance to print the negatives.Quote:
Originally Posted by Gene McCluney
Just took a density reading and the neg's DR is 1.96. This will work for carbon!
Jim
It matters some. I used some X-ray film and made a carbon print. While it was not nearly as soft as using traditional film printed with the negative reversed, there still was some loss of sharpness using thick, lightly pigmented carbon tissue. I also made a print from the same negative using the thinner, more highly pigmented B&S carbon tissue that was much sharper.Quote:
Theoretically emulsion side facing the lens would be the sharpest, but in practice it may not matter.
The above negative was processed at a hospital, so I don't know exactly what chemicals were used.
I have 300 sheets or so of some Agfa "daylight" X-ray film I keep meaning to experiment more with. It is 14x17...a seems bit of a shame to cut it down to 8x10.
Its effective ASA seems to change greatly depending on the light. In the open shade, it seemed to be between 400 and 800...but quite a bit slower when used in the deep forest. I'd love to have a 7x17 camera to use to play with this film!
Vaughn
Vaughn, this is encouraging news. I did not know that you had experimented with or had some of this film. Is what you have green or blue sensitive? Interesting that the ISO changes so much. Looks like I need to test it in different lighting situations.
Just think if you cut it in two you have 600 sheets of 7x17! What do I need to build a 7x17?
Jim