Welcome!
Printable View
Welcome!
If you go back more than 7-8 years (15?), you'll see a post where I try yellow and green filters. The film always looked better when a yellow filter is used instead of none. I believe I also talked about the zip lock bag method but abandoned it in favour of flat- bottomed trays. Zero scratches. I do up to 14x17, always double sided green. Double-sided will always be slightly unsharp compared to single-sided, but it still has a look that I really dig. I have a few videos on my YouTube channel, and will add many more in the near future! :o
Welcome to the forum!
Thanks, Analog Andy and Tin Can for the welcome. It was your Analog Andy youtube videos on this topic that got me interested in xray. The one using your custom 14 by 17 with yellow filter and contact printing VanDyke Brown. I enjoy your videos, especially the carbon printing series.
I have read in this record length thread others using cheap plastic 4x5 daylite tanks for double sided film processing. Kinda like having a dozen cut film holders. My old Doran has been in storage for 20 years along with all my other film photography gear. Many example photos on flikr using 4x5 HR-U look sharp enough for 3-4X enlargement, so am heading that direction.
Andy IS an expert!
I just try to have fun
I use a DIY Gas Burst system with Rodinol, distilled water and TF5
I use KODAK hangers only
4 up 8X10, 8 up 5X7, and 16 up 4X5
The most fun is 2X3 sheet in a Can with waffle, an actual rare method
10 in a SS can, usually roll film
Next up 14X36" X Ray 2X
I see saw that in a tray
and of course weak Red Led safe light on all X-Ray
I even dry in the can
I’ve always used a K1 or K2 filter with green X-ray film.
Tin Can and xray film repurposers,
I've been using these 6W LED Lamps as ortho safelights: https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B0...0?ie=UTF8&th=1
Current price is $5.99 for a two pack. These lamps are internally true red LED and have red bulb filter as well. Do not fog ortho litho film at 3 ft. distance. Do not fog FUJI HR-U indirectly at 8 feet with film exposed face up for 12 minutes.
The are not claimed to be safelights but work very well. FYI I continue to use caution. Thanks for all the information.
I use 1 or 2 watt and bounce it
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan Townsend
Another though I've concerning repurposing xray film for photography concerns light meters. This comment relates to orthochromatic films in general, not just green xray. Some use a cyan filter over tradition silicon meter cell. If only some smart phone app would turn off that pesky red channel data.
CdS photocells are still available in the US. I just got a bag of 30 on Amazon for about six bucks. These are outlawed in Europe now and will likely be unavailable in the US soon. Stock up soon. Many older cameras and light meters use them.
These cells have a similar frequency reponse to light as does orthochromatic films, blue and green sensitivity with little red response. They make excellent ortho light meters. All you need is a CdS cell and a electronic multimeter set to read ohms and a way to calibrate it. Find the reciprocal of resistance by dividing 1 by the resistance and you get the conductance of the cell, which is nearly linear with respect to light input over a broad range. Good for camera meter, darkroom enlarging meter, densitomer, etc. Acurrate enough for most uses when used with some some care, and dirt cheap in price, kinda like xray film.
Many years ago, guessing 45, I had a Popular Science, or was it Science and Mechanics photo meter, which consisted of several CdS cells, a meter unit with a needle, and a circular slide rule gadget that allowed using this for camera, enlarging, or densitometer. It was very cool in it's time, and worked well. Any body out there remember these? Just a few thoughts.
I shot 35 color for many years using Kodak instructions INSIDE the box
No meter from the 50's
Almost all slides perfect and I still have them
Tin Can,
Oops those instruction must have fallen out of my box of Fuji HR-U cause I didn't find them. :)
I agree it's good to use simple ways when possible. In my woodland photography, I'm almost never in full sun, or even open shade, or anywhere else on that box. In the field, I don't like to use the zone system. Instead, I under develop and overexpose about a stop and then use the zone system in my darkroom in making enlarged negatives to match a particular alternate process. Currently, I'm using the Liam Lawless reversal process of ortho litho film to do this but will probably experiment with xray film for this in the future.
I need an accurate darkroom meter to do darkroom zone system, which I've always believed in, but rarely actually done. My CdS cell and ohmeter provide this. This is a big advantage of enlarged negatives, the opportunity to adjust contrast to match printing papers. Darkroom trial and error exposure and contrast control can be extremely time consuming.
Ortho Litho film in the camera, even with lowest contrast development, gives too much contrast for the Liam Lawless method to adjust down to a 1.4 density range. This is the main reason I am now experimenting with xray film is its much higher sensitivity and much lower contrast.
I do not want to start using Fomapan until I absolutely have to.
Good day all. Following on reading this I investigated what could be found in my area of Victoria Canada. Home depot had a color selectable led light with a red setting. I find this to be way to bright in my grow tent darkroom. I found a FEIT 4.5 watt red led light bulb at Lowes. It has the advantage of being dimmable. I also found a Lowes an extension cord equipped with a led dimming switch. Together I am able to go from off to barely on and then steplessly to full on. In a reflector housing this gives me all the light versatility I need. I corresponded with FEIT electric and requested a spectral emission data for this bulb. I reproduce this below. I have also added the spectral sensitivity for the Fuji X-ray film I use as well as that for Ilford ortho film for comparison purposes.Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan Townsend
Regards
I usw my Sekonic spot meter all the time for falloff afd make simple center filters for enlarging
simple masks too
Excellent! Thank you for the link to the LED bulbs!Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan Townsend
I was at the dentist for cleaning and checkup yesterday. I was pleased to see that they still use xray film. :)
My previous dentist went digital, missed a cavity that went undiscovered until my new dentist saw it ON FILM. Sensitive tooth is now fixed.
Sorry to hear about dental problems. The FUJI HR-U I recently purchased 100 sheets 8x10 from an ebay dealer for $42 with shipping included comes from Australia, according to box information.
While here in the US, most medical use is shifting or has shifted to digital, this is not happening worldwide for obvious economic reasons. In the US, we have the worst medical care at the highest possible cost of any country on earth. I'm sure that China and India will remain xray film users for many years. Countries with national health care system, may also do the same for cost control in various degrees. In the US, rural health care, and portable services will continue its use. I believe xray film will be around for quite some time, maybe 10-20 years or more. Also veterinarians.
Fortunately, Xray is a contact printing process, since xrays are not imaged with lenses, so requires very large films. From my reading, xray film exposes patients to less radiation, provided a single exposure is adequate. Xray use recycles silver very effectively well, since they do scan the xrays for archiving. Imagine the cost of a 14 by 17 digital sensor.
What about using a red laser as darkroom light? I see laser modules on sale for different wavelenghts, including red ones. They are specified for an exact wavelenght, so this could be an advantage.
Is my idea stupid or could it work? I see some of the lasers are unfocussed, I guess these have a larger beam and oriented to the ceiling maybe it could work.
Eugen, that could work provided they output a few watts of light. Are they affordable at that power level? Also, the laser speckles could be a problem, since they make it harder to see details.Quote:
Originally Posted by Eugen Mezei
I don’t think a red laser would be a good choice for a darkroom light: too bright, too focused. Lasers want to be linear. A few watts of laser light would be extremely dangerous because of the focused nature. Light bulbs radiate in all directions, so they don’t get dangerous at a few watts. Laser pointers are 1/1000th of a watt or so, I think. This thread has at least one discussion of LED low power red bulbs as darkroom lights. I’m pretty sure you will need to order them from a special dealer on line.
Eye protection was one of my concerns. Therefore my question if pointing the Laser to the ceiling or otherwise dipsersing it would still leave it dangerous?
The big advantage is ofcourse the exact wavelenght.
Laser modules are all over the place on eBay and Aliexpress. Different powers, different wavelenghts. I thought buying one that is less powerfull. I saw some that are offered without focusing lens, specially mentioned that they are for wide radiation. It is true those are mostly for IR, intended as IR luminators for IR googles.
I will post some links later.
As a first try I could see how a laser pointer works. (Especially how to disperse it.) But there I do not know the wavelenght. Did anybody already tried this?
A Laser is always dangerous
It can reflect
just don't
kill eyes
Well, in the end it is just light. If not concentrated, how does it affect your eyes? The things are in discotheques (clubs they call them nowaday) and there they are a concentrated beam, still approved for public use.
What I find online, is that the red lasers today are limited to about 5mw, which is very low. You can get a bag of 20 for low price, this is much more expensive than the red led bulbs I referenced and am using and there is no advantage for darkroom use. The focused beams could like fog film. Used indirectly, laser speckle is a real problem.
I did see violet/blue 405 nM lasers available for $20 that are 100mW. Those would work for dichromated gelatin holography within the limits of their short coherence length.
Anbody interested in holography? Not me anymore but have at it.
Alan Townsend
I went to Chicago's HoloGram Museum some years ago
Hello.
AGFA mamoray hdr-c plus.
cut to 4x5
I do not have much experience in using Agfa, but maybe someone will be interested...
Attachment 240980
ISO 50, Kodak D-23 1:1 9 min. in Jobo 2500 constant agitation.
Attachment 240981
ISO 50, Kodak D-23 1:2 5.5 min. in Jobo 2500 constant agitation.
I see X-ray film has gone up about $12 a box and there is no longer a discount for case lots.
Still very cheap Ortho
Stock up
Quote:
Originally Posted by j.e.simmons
I just bought the ISO 10 Orthochromatic film from B&H and am trying to locate developing times for PMK Pyro. Anyone have anything on this combo?
Thx,
David
Another silly question: Could those ir lamps used for heating be of use in the lab? They emit red light but I dont know if only that or white light also.
Bounce the light on a cd/dvd surface and see if there are present other colors than red.Quote:
Originally Posted by Eugen Mezei
Why do you not order those:Quote:
Originally Posted by Eugen Mezei
https://www.fotoimpex.com/darkroom/a...oom-light.html
I have them installed in simple IKEA lamps and they work fine. To be sure I illuminate the white ceiling and walls with them only.
Hope this helps.
I see they are good for paper, but I don't see a reference to X-Ray film. Have you tested with film and found them safe?Quote:
Originally Posted by the4x5project
The reason is, I already have the IR lamps. (And can buy more of them locally.) Ordering from Fotoimpex would mean around 30 €.Quote:
Originally Posted by the4x5project
Besides that, I am curious.
I have bought a kit (developer + fixer) for X-ray film. Looking at the chemical composition I see in neither of them a hardener. I thought X-ray film is hardened when developing, either in the developer or at least in the fixer.
I think X-Ray film is just prone to scratches when wet. I doubt hardener in fixer does much good as the film has already been wet in the developer and stop for several minutes. I think being careful with process is better than depending on chemicals.
Still hardener for fixer exist. On the bottle of the Tetenal hardener they even give the time for X-ray film. (They are longer as for normal film.)
Did I have with you the discussion on Flickr? (In the Polypan-F group.) As there were also two posters thinking that the hardening effect dissapears after the film is dry.
I don't use Flicker. I don't say the hardening effect disappears. The film becomes really prone to scratching when wet - thus it can scratch in the developer and stop long before it gets to the fixer. Hardening fixer is fine to use but may not stop scratches.
Yes, I did. Works fine with x-Ray and all things orthochromatic.Quote:
Originally Posted by j.e.simmons
Things I like about Xray film, other than cost. (green HR-U)
1. After processing, this film lies flatter than any film I've ever used (4x5), even though it's a bit thinner than normal photo film. Likely due to being equally coated on both sides. Open frame negative carriers in enlarger work OK. No need for single glass carriers.
2. Loss of sharpness compared with normal photo film is likely due to halation. This film doesn't scatter light very much but is very reflective compared with normal films. This favors use of very small f-stops like f-32 over larger, due to smaller cones of light. I get pretty good sharpness from 3x enlargements.
3. Develops nicely with low agitation. This allows semi-compensating developers to produce better sharpness. D23 at 1:7 dilution for 20 mins. at STP works well at ei 100 in Doran developing tank with 12 films at a time. Almost a stand development. Yankee tank would be similar.
3. Fixes quickly (5 min.) in low concentration plain fixer. I use about 30 grams sodium thiosulphate per 52 fluid ounces. This low concentration washes out very fast as well.
4. I remove films from tank after washing and hang to dry. Drying in tank holder takes too long, about 4 days, so I stopped doing that. Careful and slow extraction gives few scratches or mars along edges.
Alan Townsend
Fujifilm UM-MA xray film.
Wehner Developer
Pre exposure with zone 2
Illumination with two LED light sources.
Rodenstock Aplanat 8/320mm @f/22
Ratio 1.2:1
Cutted 9x12cm sheets.
Sinar Norma 4x5
https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/...2b689b66_k.jpg
Winter work!
Quote:
Originally Posted by arri
Arri,
How do you make the Wehner Developer? Are you developing the HRU as positives? This is eye opening.
So you are preflashing the XRAY film with a Zone II value? I imagine that would build up the toe.
OK. I know Robert. Thanks.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tin Can
I´am using the standard B&W developer from Klaus Wehner, my stnadard, it works perfect for me with every film.Quote:
Originally Posted by Daniel Unkefer
I tested the film with preflashing with different values. In this case Zone II gave the best results. it must be in relation to the contrast in the object. The same problem we have with every film but the xray film is working with more contrast. That´s why I´am using only uncoated lenses to lighten up the shadows and using pre exposure.
I have only tested it with this film, maybe the other xray films are working different.
In the early 1990th I used lith films with uncoated fast lenses like the Xenar 3.5/240mm and it were possible to get a grey scale with this extrem high contrast films.
I find it is much easier with a xray film.
It were bad weather work, we have had rain for over two weeks, it were ok, we need the water and I used the time for lens and film testing.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tin Can
AGFA mamoray HDR-C plus.
cut to 4x5.
ISO 50, Kodak D-23 1:4 6 min., 20 (ºC), in Jobo 2500 constant agitation.
Attachment 243007
Quite lovely.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ivan Pisarev
Wow, so 645 pages in and this topic is WELL covered. Many thanks to those who have done the hard, and apparently somewhat controversial legwork.
I am an experienced photographer in many ways, and won't say much more than that. I am however, new to shooting X-ray film in a camera. I have a box of the Fuji Green in 8x10 coming this week. I will be playing with it alongside paper negatives which I have been shooting since the 90's.
I am very comfortable mixing developers from scratch and doing my own testing. My densitometer is stuck in storage in Utah right now, so I won't be able to plot the x-ray film and compare developers. My end goals are to make both GSP's as well as pt/pd contact prints. I have a 'Dorff 8x10 and a Korona 12x20 as my main landscape cameras.
So, the question is, has anyone done any curve testing of the green and/or blue film with the various developers (and apparently yellow is the filter of choice with the green film)?
If this is ground which is well trodden, I apologize. I have found many threads where each practitioner has their developer/filtration/developing method of choice, and am having a difficult time deciding which developer to use. I will tray develop them one sheet at a time.
Thanks again and bravo to the brave ones who have stuck with this media for so long.