No Image at all, totally blank.
Printable View
No Image at all, totally blank.
http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7311/8...d1af01e9_c.jpg
A quick outing on a sunny afternoon to see the tolerances of this development technique with sunny day images. Dektol handles the light very nicely. I think I will adjust the exposure some in the sun, but I should be able to make photographs in more conditions now.
1903 Eastman View No. 1 - Schneider Symmar S 240mm - f/45 - Kodak B/RA X-Ray Film - 8x10 Film - Dektol 1+10 - Unaltered Negative Scan
I have sympathy. been there, done that...
Prove to your family you can do it!
Quote:
Originally Posted by Raffay
This is the unfortunate negative, any thoughts on what could have gone so wrong.
Attachment 94733
Cheers
Raffay
Raffay, looks heavily fogged to me. Is this the first sheet you've used from the box? Try developing an unexposed sheet from the box - as Roger said, it should be completely clear. Did you handle this sheet under safelight? - a bad safelight could be the cause of fog.What about your film holders, are they light-tight (although a poor film holder usually doesn't result in total fog. It also looks as though your development may be uneven, and there are scratches evident that indicate rough handling. Hope you find this helpful. Don't lose heart, we all have these trials and hopefully come through them wiser.
Barry.
Darkslide pulled before the shutter preview was closed?
Wouldn't there be some sort of image?Quote:
Originally Posted by Woodturner-fran
Well, the neg is black = exposure + development
Either the film is fogged before it ever got to the camera, or else it was exposed in camera. If enough light reaches the film, it will just go completely black?
I'm no expert on xray film (or anything!), so YMMV, but I would do two things:
1. handle and develop a new piece in the same way (without exposure). If it looks the same then the handling or film is suspect
2. take a second piece of the same film and take a shot and develop and see how it works.
I think the same OP had an issue with an iphone safelight, could be the film got fogged somewhere along the line?
Let us know how you get on!!
Fran
Here's a thread with a bunch of work I shot on Kodak Industrex MX125:
http://www.largeformatphotography.in...125-x-ray-film
http://forum.mflenses.com/userpix/20...30001WEB_5.jpg
Apologies if this has been asked before but 87 pages is a lot to trawl through!
Has anyone played with coloured filters and the blue senstive film? I am interested in enhancing skies giving more contrast between the clouds and sky as I often get skies that are almost plain white when using blue sensitive Kodak Industrex MX125.
http://forum.mflenses.com/userpix/20...60001WEB_1.jpg
Yes, but I forget who or what. Look for the Wiki coming in 2015.
I agree that fogging before the film got into the camera is the most likely bet. The shot posted by Raffay is dark grey, not black, indicating heavy fog as opposed to gross overexposure. Also there would be some hint of an image at this level of 'exposure' if this had happened in the camera.
Barry.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Woodturner-fran
First I would check that the chemicals are all good! Second, If the developer temp. is to low--than the incomplete development process plus fixing can give you a gray film.Quote:
Originally Posted by Raffay
Just the thoughts of a X-Ray Tech. since 1975. Hope this helps. Thanks, R.Delung
Ian, Sergei (sp) I believe has some images in this thread that were taken through, perhaps, a yellow/green filter...? I seem to remember one image of a building and cars with a nice dark sky above. I have yet to play with filters myself. I shoot almost exclusively green latitude film. I know for a fact that it is sensitive to red, but perhaps just not very sensitive.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ian Greenhalgh
Cheers Randy, I'll try a yellow filter first and see what happens. I'll shoot the same scene with and without and post my results.
Anyone got any suggestion as to how much to compensate for a yellow filter with a blue sensitive film? I'm guessing 1 stop should be enough.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Woodturner-fran
why wouldnt you use light meter and get reading?Quote:
Originally Posted by Ian Greenhalgh
Because I use a handheld meter and to get a reading with the filter, that would need to be done with a TTL meter.
eh? Just stick filter on top of your sensor. For spot - on spot. See how far it now off from "clear" reading. You got yourself compensation.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ian Greenhalgh
8x10 kodak csg, @100, 1:100 Rodinal for 6.30 minutes
http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7427/8...5f578f8c_o.jpg
Scan-130511-0003www by Sergei Rodionov, on Flickr
You have the most interesting imagination. Thank you for posting your many images in this thread.Quote:
Originally Posted by SergeiR
Mike
Exactly Ian, I routinely hold my filters over my handheld meter because I can never, ever remember how many stops to compensate for. Just take a reading without the filter, then meter the same subject with the filter held over the meter lens and take another reading. Works every single time for tired brains....or...do it once for every filter then make a list. I keep forgetting to do that.Quote:
Originally Posted by SergeiR
[QUOTE=SergeiR;1025080]8x10 kodak csg, @100, 1:100 Rodinal for 6.30 minutes
Nice dof and proof anything can make an interesting image. I have been trying to find a still life I want to shoot, and here you show us chips!
With the junk I have, maybe I can find an interesting widgit.
Nice lesson!
(K2) Medium Yellow comp. would be 2 for regular B&W film. With double sided film I'm afraid you will have to go by trial and error. Hope this helps. Randy Delung ( the other Randy )Quote:
Originally Posted by Ian Greenhalgh
Ah, now 3 Randy's.
Thank goodness I chose to use my full name, and it's short, maybe I will change to R Moe, as many call me that. The nice ones at least...
Quote:
Originally Posted by rdelung
Finally able to digitize one of my first XRay shots:, and it is actually one of my first 8x10 shots.
Fuji HRT, Processed in Sprint -Std 1-9-_ in a Beseler Drum. I had to strip the back side with bleach because huge spots didn't develop (think I'll stick to trays from now on). Scanned in 4 segments with an Epson 4870 - looking for an 8x10 scanner now!
http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7321/8...8f9ba8f7_o.jpg
From what I've seen of the spectrographs, blue x-ray film is mildly orthochromatic, green is fully orthochromatic. My old Ansco data guide says for Super Plenachrome and Plenachrome <similar to green x-ray film>, for sunlight use a 5X factor, for tungsten, use 3X, I would start with 3X and move on to 5X if necessary. 3X, for the younger set, means three times the normal exposure with a medium yellow filter
Wow! nice image, and I love how it looks like a miniature!
[QUOTE=gdi;1025240]Finally able to digitize one of my first XRay shots:, and it is actually one of my first 8x10 shots.
Fuji HRT, Processed in Sprint -Std 1-9-_ in a Beseler Drum. I had to strip the back side with bleach because huge spots didn't develop (think I'll stick to trays from now on). Scanned in 4 segments with an Epson 4870 - looking for an 8x10 scanner now!
Quote:
Originally Posted by md99
thanks, guys ;) To be honest - it was byproduct of me, trying hand with old C-22 stock, (1st attempt - major failure).. Shot this as just an idea, spurred of ye old Weston's peppers some time ago.Quote:
Originally Posted by Randy Moe
Cheers Randys etc for the advice. It's an old Zeiss Ikon 40.5mm yellow so not sure what it is. I'll try to pit it over the cell on my weston but the filter is quite a lot smaller than the cell so might be problematic.
Ok, I am starting to get something. This is just a boring focus test, but it is so much more. This is 8X10 Kodak CSG shot taped inside a copy camera, it took me all day to adjust T distance for the GG and wacky huge holder. Shot with RD Artar 19" wide open. This camera can hold 11X14 and maybe a little bigger.
I am just happy to see focus this good. Also 1/100 RO9 10 min with little agit.
http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7396/8...87c2bb20_c.jpg
I've had a bit of time to return to my mammo film experiments. Mammo film is slow and very contrasty, and it builds density brutally fast. I've been studying low contrast developers and this is from my first attempts at getting the density in a manageable range for silver gelatin prints. I normally use Pyrocat HD in a Jobo at 1:1:100 and I lowered the developing agent and doubled the carbonate as per some advice in the Film Developing Cookbook. This is 18x24 Fuji AD-M film in 1:4:200 Pyrocat HD, rotary processed for 5 minutes at 70 F. The density is starting to get reasonable, but I may have lost film speed--looks like my EI is 3 or 6. I may be experiencing reciprocity, but in any case the EI is very low. My further experiments will try to up the film speed without increasing contrast.
I tried my brand new 210mm Graphic Kowa--this lens is super sharp, very small, and has a ton of extra coverage on 8x10.
http://img546.imageshack.us/img546/3...ca1fujiadm.jpg
Great Seneca
Test 2 today. Almost everything the same, notice the tape mark at top, but I get all the film, no holder marks on the sides. f45 10 seconds, straight out of scanner. No adjustments or spotting.
http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7421/8...7f43a6c4_b.jpg
Quote:
Originally Posted by Randy Moe
Thanks Randy, I am so glad I found this info on Xray film - 50 cents a sheet makes it a lot easier to practice and experiment than 4 dollars a sheet!
Also, seeing your self portrait makes me want to try it - but my darn lens require such a long release plunger that my bulb release won't trip it!!
8x10 , kodak, csg, rodinal 1+100 for 5:30
http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7283/8...eb8d8bf0_o.jpg
Simple things: eggs and eggshells by Sergei Rodionov, on Flickr
that moment when f22 isnt enough.. :( 20s exposure
8X10 Kodak CSG strobes, something going on by right eye.
http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7320/8...55c95773_b.jpg
First time poster here, jumping into what appears to be a very long thread on the use of X-Ray film in 8x10. Having just acquired a Japanese made Horseman from maybe the 70's or 80's, I will be going out in the field and putting this beast on my Tiltall. Don't laugh, it actually holds it up, barely. But it's all I can afford. The only lens I have to put on it is my 210 Symmar-S I bought new in 1980. Hope it will cover it, and hate it being wide angle on 8x10, but it's all I've got.
Anyway I'm apparently jumping on the X-Ray film and Pyrocat wagon. Green sensitive, but don't know what film to buy. I want those cheap 50-cent negatives. It looks like all the X-Ray film out there is emulsion coated on both sides. I don't suppose there's any way around that?
I've done enough due diligence to avoid forcing you folks to re-cover old ground, but at the same time would like to avoid going through the 2000 pages of this long thread. Anybody care to bring me up to sped on what film to buy for reasonable speed for scenic-style work? Thank you.
WE are including most critical info right with the images. Save yourself a lot of headache and read this entire thread.
Quote:
Originally Posted by HT Finley
Thanks--up to page 34 an am not gleaning a great deal so far. A lot -f back-and-forth one liners between guys who obviously know one another, but nothing definitive so far. Found a link for some Kodak one-sided at $80 a box. Learned mammography film is also one sided, but no indication as to speed. ASA 50 and faster would be nice. Like the idea of loading it in my unicolor/Beseler drums and turning on the rotator. Not at all wild about having to do a stripping procedure on 2-sided stuff.
Seems some of these brands are nearly panchromatic, but know not which.
I am using kodak CSG from CSXonline.com double sided at 80 asa, not stripping.
Quote:
Originally Posted by HT Finley
#2 of 2 scratch in image upper left is on my AN. Same everything. Something different is drying...
http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7281/8...5ea9a161_b.jpg
Is Kodak 8X10 Film CSG1 Green X-Ray Film single or double sided. My mind is spinning from too much information, and cannot put my finger on this answer. Thank you.
PS-- and about corners--square or round?
to repeat,
I am using kodak CSG from CSXonline.com double sided at 80 asa, not stripping.
Quote:
Originally Posted by HT Finley
Almost done testing. This is really a test of my Levy copy camera film size potential. The image is made of two 8X10 X-Ray Kodak CSG taped inside the camera to make a 10X16" negative.
You notice the odd patterns top and bottom are camera internal edges. This mean I can easily shoot 11X14!
Now I need to buy more X-Ray...
http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7311/8...e9b33c24_b.jpg
Thank you. My first 6 hours on here and I'm to p85 of the thread.Helpful, but not definitive abundantly. Not sorry I read it though. I've named 8X10 Kodak Film CSG1 Green X-Ray Film, because of the fact I'll be doing either tray or color drum and rotating base, probably with pyro. And the price of 46.47$ is attractive at this site:Quote:
Originally Posted by Randy Moe
http://cheapxrayfilm.com/category/80-kodak-csg-1.aspx
Certainly not naming it as final choice, but still would prefer single sided, if at all possible. Randy Moe, your input is valued, as it shows up with some amouint of prominence, therefor credibility. I wounder how round that round corner are? Round corners can make your 8x10 neg into 7x9 prints pretty quick.
The process seems to yield results I could live with the rest of my life, I believe. fSomewhere the absurdity of 5 million dollars per shutter-click with pan film has to stop. I'm not a rich man.
You can see the round corners in most of my full image scans. You lose a tiny bit.
I am very new at this and by no means an expert in anything photographic.
http://www.cxsonline.com/ has it for $38.25 plus cheap shipping. I have bought from twice and it comes real quick.
Quote:
Originally Posted by HT Finley
Thanks. Having done nothing at all so far, I am leaning toward Kodak CSG 1, even though its 10 or 15 dollars higher. Single sided, if at all possible. Seems like something like that shot with the most yellow filter you can get your hands on, developed in pyro, would make you never miss pan film again. Full pan doesn't have to be EVERYTHING. I'm not Gates or Buffett over here.
Ansel Adams says in his book "The Negative" that no color filters are useful with blue sensitive films. Perhaps a polarizer?Quote:
Originally Posted by Ian Greenhalgh
Cheers for the tip, I'll try a polariser. It wasn't as misty as that to the naked eye, the blue sensitive film seems to make any haze look thicker.
Ian, if you will go back on this forum, you will find the spectrographs for bot the so-called blue film and the green film. If you check that, you will see that both of these films are orthochromatic, the blue less so than the green, but both are modifiable by filters. Now real "blue'film, like lithographic film, and copy film is only able to differentiate the uv and blue end of the spectrum. There is also an ortho-lith film that Freestyle, and others sell, that is mildly orthochromatic.