-
Re: Use of X-ray film: technical discussion with example images
[QUOTE=mohmadkhatab;1545883]
Quote:
Originally Posted by
koraks
Haven't tried it I think, but it should work just like with any other film.
But in your opinion, what is the available x-ray film size that fits the (5x7) camera? From your point of view?
I don't think 5x7" xray film is available, but you can get 18x24cm or 8x10" film and cut it down to fit 5x7" holders. Of course there will be some waste.
Quote:
And will this camera accept that this 4x5 film stand be installed assuming that we will find it individually one way or another depending on luck or the like?
That depends on the camera. You may need to modify the camera and/or the reducing back in order to make things fit. Also, a reducing back generally adds a bit to the distance between the lens and the film, which means there can be problems with focus and movements when short lenses (90mm and shorter) are used. With longer lenses it's usually not a problem. But again, it depends on the specific equipment involved.
Quote:
- Regarding my question about converting the X-ray film to positive transparency, I mean that is done directly.
Yes, that can be done, just as with any other type of B&W film. You'll have to figure out the processing chemistry and parameters yourself, but that's just a matter of systematic testing, with which I think you are already familiar.
Quote:
- The file with attachments, and of course the photographic researcher designed this process on the basis of identification with the original process (AGFAscala)
Attachment 202365, but with great regret, he erred in that he designed everything on the basis that it is intended to work on a machine (JOBO) only, and with a capacity (260 ml) Only ml.
Therefore, if you want to prepare one liter, you will fall into the trap of complicated calculations that I failed to calculate, because if you prepare 4 packages, each one is a capacity of (260 ml), and you add them in one container, then the result will become an increase in the concentrations of chemical elements by 300% of the original process design, so I am very confused in this regard.[/B]
Converting to roughly 1 liter doesn't have to be complicated. Just multiply everything in the pdf by 4. This way you end up with 1040ml, which is close enough to 1 liter for any application. If you need exactly 1000ml, just discard the excess 40ml.
-
Re: Use of X-ray film: technical discussion with example images
[QUOTE=koraks;1546012]
Quote:
Originally Posted by
mohmadkhatab
I don't think 5x7" xray film is available, but you can get 18x24cm or 8x10" film and cut it down to fit 5x7" holders. Of course there will be some waste.
That depends on the camera. You may need to modify the camera and/or the reducing back in order to make things fit. Also, a reducing back generally adds a bit to the distance between the lens and the film, which means there can be problems with focus and movements when short lenses (90mm and shorter) are used. With longer lenses it's usually not a problem. But again, it depends on the specific equipment involved.
Yes, that can be done, just as with any other type of B&W film. You'll have to figure out the processing chemistry and parameters yourself, but that's just a matter of systematic testing, with which I think you are already familiar.
Converting to roughly 1 liter doesn't have to be complicated. Just multiply everything in the pdf by 4. This way you end up with 1040ml, which is close enough to 1 liter for any application. If you need exactly 1000ml, just discard the excess 40ml.
God bless you, thank you for the response.
I am concerned about increasing concentrations, I feel that the calculation of atomic weight and mass will vary. I don't know, a seasoned chemist needs to be consulted, and unfortunately, the great Ron Mawry is dead.
Well, we'll see how it goes. Initially, I have to finish adapting the films on the camera first. Then we can think of other ideas.
-
Re: Use of X-ray film: technical discussion with example images
[QUOTE=mohmadkhatab;1546062]
Quote:
Originally Posted by
koraks
God bless you, thank you for the response.
I am concerned about increasing concentrations, I feel that the calculation of atomic weight and mass will vary. I don't know, a seasoned chemist needs to be consulted, and unfortunately, the great Ron Mawry is dead.
Well, we'll see how it goes. Initially, I have to finish adapting the films on the camera first. Then we can think of other ideas.
This isn't pharmaceutical chemistry. Close enough is fine, anything within 5% . with most formulas tolerance is even greater than that.
-
Re: Use of X-ray film: technical discussion with example images
Quote:
Originally Posted by
mohmadkhatab
What is the problem in blue?
What is the purpose of obtaining a positive image?
I will answer the question with a question.
- What is the goal of obtaining a negative image?
My last question: Have you ever tried and tested this strange idea?
There is no problem with blue, I was just curious.
As for what is the goal of obtaining a negative, so that I can make an enlargement. The final print is the goal to me, the negative is the road to that goal.
-
Re: Use of X-ray film: technical discussion with example images
You can cut X ray under a dim red light, typically. If you do it right 8x10 --> 2 sheets 5x7's and a 1" strip which fits into a 35mm camera. I've made a few tiny format images that way. The image window is 24x36 mm and 1" = 25.4mm it just barely fits the image window, not the sprockets. Don't expect film advance to work well, the film is way too stiff. But it's not complete waste. It can also be used to test fixer.
-
Re: Use of X-ray film: technical discussion with example images
[QUOTE=Jim Noel;1546076]
Quote:
Originally Posted by
mohmadkhatab
This isn't pharmaceutical chemistry. Close enough is fine, anything within 5% . with most formulas tolerance is even greater than that.
Your view is correct and logical in theory ,,
But in reality I have some frustrating experiences regarding the reverse process. Is it a very sensitive and very complicated process, so I wanted to be very careful about everything about that process ,,
I am tired of wasting chemical raw materials.
I want to have some successes. I am fed up with failure.
-
Re: Use of X-ray film: technical discussion with example images
Quote:
Originally Posted by
blue4130
There is no problem with blue, I was just curious.
As for what is the goal of obtaining a negative, so that I can make an enlargement. The final print is the goal to me, the negative is the road to that goal.
I'm sorry, it seems that my weak language did not make me able to explain my point accurately.
- I mean, if you get a positive film sheet, measuring (8x10) inches, you will not need to print.
- Why do we print the negative ,,?
First, because negativity cannot be seen, nor can we distinguish its features from being negative.
Second: In order to obtain a larger size (suitable for commenting on the walls as a final image, it is also suitable for participating in art exhibitions)
After you get this measurement as a positive image, you now do not need to print the image on paper. I'm done where a sheet of paper can be put into a stool and frame and make a white sheet as the background of the slide.
I don’t know if I could explain that strange point of view or failed again.
-
Re: Use of X-ray film: technical discussion with example images
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Fr. Mark
You can cut X ray under a dim red light, typically. If you do it right 8x10 --> 2 sheets 5x7's and a 1" strip which fits into a 35mm camera. I've made a few tiny format images that way. The image window is 24x36 mm and 1" = 25.4mm it just barely fits the image window, not the sprockets. Don't expect film advance to work well, the film is way too stiff. But it's not complete waste. It can also be used to test fixer.
Thank you very much, Mr. Mark, may God bless you.
I am very impressed by your insistence on detailing a slide for the 35mm camera - this enthusiasm deserves respect and appreciation.
I really like you, man.
But, is it worth it?
- I had two inquiries, Mr Mark. I hope that your chest will expand for me.
First: Is there one of the forum colleagues who tested these films with the developer (HC110)? May I see the results?
Second: Did anyone from the experience of those films for development use the original developer for which they were specially prepared ?,
Here I do not want to use any of the photographic formulas (which are designed for photography), I am talking about the original form of X-ray acids that are sold with the films and in the hospitals accompanied by the films in the X-ray room,
- Actually, I'm thinking of some of those powerful formulas.
I prepare and sell them to hospitals and x-ray centers attached to hospitals.
- Does anyone want these tests,?
I am ready to publish some formats, not the original Fuji format cinema.
-
Re: Use of X-ray film: technical discussion with example images
Quote:
Originally Posted by
mohmadkhatab
Thank you very much, Mr. Mark, may God bless you.
First: Is there one of the forum colleagues who tested these films with the developer (HC110)? May I see the results?
Second: Did anyone from the experience of those films for development use the original developer for which they were specially prepared ?
The developers used by hospitals are intended for use in their rapid development machines. I don't think you'd get the same result by, say, tray developing or developing in a daylight tank meant for home use.
Off the top of my head, I think people on this forum have used every common photographic developer. Pyrocat HD and Rodinal (=Adox Adinol) are particularly popular, but I've seen mention of HC-110, Diafine, and many others.
-
Re: Use of X-ray film: technical discussion with example images
Quote:
Originally Posted by
seezee
The developers used by hospitals are intended for use in their rapid development machines. I don't think you'd get the same result by, say, tray developing or developing in a daylight tank meant for home use.
Off the top of my head, I think people on this forum have used every common photographic developer. Pyrocat HD and Rodinal (=Adox Adinol) are particularly popular, but I've seen mention of HC-110, Diafine, and many others.
There are two types of developers that can be used in hospitals.
There is a type called (automatic) which is used by an acidizing device. And it is really very fast.
There is another type called (manual), and it is still used manually in poor hospitals that do not have this automatic acid developing device.
The second type is slow and depends on the expertise of the radiologist in developing x-rays. He develops under the red light and knows when it was developed and finishes the process.
I think this type is very important if it is lightened by a large percentage perhaps giving us another vision that we did not know.
-
3 Attachment(s)
Re: Use of X-ray film: technical discussion with example images
Quote:
Originally Posted by
mohmadkhatab
First: Is there one of the forum colleagues who tested these films with the developer (HC110)? May I see the results?
Attachment 202465Attachment 202466Attachment 202467
There are all Fuji x-ray developed in HC110
-
Re: Use of X-ray film: technical discussion with example images
Quote:
Originally Posted by
blue4130
Amazing results, my dear friend
You are a true creator.
I was hoping for a positive reversal picture, transparent
-
Re: Use of X-ray film: technical discussion with example images
Quote:
Originally Posted by
mohmadkhatab
I was hoping for a positive reversal picture, transparent
In case it hasn't been clear, no one here seems to be pursuing positive images from x-ray films, for reasons already enumerated. You are on your own, so test, test, test, and let us know how it goes so we can copy your process.
-
Re: Use of X-ray film: technical discussion with example images
Quote:
Originally Posted by
mohmadkhatab
There are two types of developers that can be used in hospitals.
There is a type called (automatic) which is used by an acidizing device. And it is really very fast.
There is another type called (manual), and it is still used manually in poor hospitals that do not have this automatic acid developing device.
The second type is slow and depends on the expertise of the radiologist in developing x-rays. He develops under the red light and knows when it was developed and finishes the process.
I think this type is very important if it is lightened by a large percentage perhaps giving us another vision that we did not know.
I did not know about the latter type. You would probably get decent results with it after some trial-and-error.
-
Re: Use of X-ray film: technical discussion with example images
Mohmadkhatab,
I recommend that you check posts # 4873, #5389, and #5391 in this thread, you might find them to be helpful and informative. Best of luck!
-
Re: Use of X-ray film: technical discussion with example images
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Corran
In case it hasn't been clear, no one here seems to be pursuing positive images from x-ray films, for reasons already enumerated. You are on your own, so test, test, test, and let us know how it goes so we can copy your process.
You are absolutely right ,,
Acids are available, I prepare it from scratch.
The camera is still not clear yet, and I did not settle for one while I am confused about this and that and the prices are different and Corona caused total paralysis in the country.
-
Re: Use of X-ray film: technical discussion with example images
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Dugan
Mohmadkhatab,
I recommend that you check posts # 4873, #5389, and #5391 in this thread, you might find them to be helpful and informative. Best of luck!
God bless you and thank you very much for the advice.
-
Re: Use of X-ray film: technical discussion with example images
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Justin K
A friend of mine is a physician and recently unearthed the xray film photo I've pasted below when cleaning out an old medical office. I know nothing about xray film, so I'm curious if anyone knows how an image like this one may have been made--a large positive image on xray film. We also have no idea who took this and where or when it was taken, so if any boating or marina experts out there detect and clues, please share.
Thanks for any insights on this!
Attachment 173228
I am currently trying to do these tests to convert the X-ray film directly into a positive film without re-imaging during printing or the like.
I am currently in the stage of collecting information, maybe using the method of our colleague in the forum who relied on the positive Ilford (PQ) recipe, or relying on the process Agfa Scala ,,, under study and research, we will see ..
-
Re: Use of X-ray film: technical discussion with example images
Mohmad, I just did a quick test (I had to wait for my girlfriend to get ready for breakfast...)
http://www.koraks.nl/galleries/zut/t..._EBRAr_01w.jpg
This is Ektascan B/RA xray film, single sided. Exposed at around EI 12 or so (I normally rate it at 50 for negatives).
First development: in paper developer (a mix of leftovers), ca. 90 seconds - development essentially to completion.
After stop bath (acetic acid) turned on the lights for further processing.
Bleach: dichromate + sulphuric acid
Redevelopment: same developer as for the initial development, again to completion.
Notice a few things:
* The image is fairly dark. This is basically because there's way too much silver halide left after the first development step (and bleaching), even despite the pretty dramatic overexposure.
* The edges are too light. This is due to the use of a concentrated developer and a suboptimal agitation scheme in the first development step. Can easily be resolved by using a more dilute developer and intermittent agitation. But I just did a quick & dirty test.
* Contrast is on the low side, but it's also a low contrast scene to begin with. So overall quite realistic.
The excess overall density is the main issue, and it can be solved by adding a silver solvent (e.g. sodium thiosulfate) to the first developer, or, alternatively, partly fixing the negative in a dilute thiosulfate solution before the first development step. The exact parameters (thiosulfate concentration + fixing time) need to be tailored to the film and the desired contrast. I did not do any of this testing; it involves a systematic approach. As I did this test in a matter of half an hour or so, I didn't bother with it. But to optimize the results, it is required.
Here's the same piece of film held up to the window and photographed with my crappy phone:
http://www.koraks.nl/galleries/zut/t...BRAr_01ssw.jpg
-
3 Attachment(s)
Re: Use of X-ray film: technical discussion with example images
Quote:
Originally Posted by
koraks
Mohmad, I just did a quick test (I had to wait for my girlfriend to get ready for breakfast...)
http://www.koraks.nl/galleries/zut/t..._EBRAr_01w.jpg
This is Ektascan B/RA xray film, single sided. Exposed at around EI 12 or so (I normally rate it at 50 for negatives).
First development: in paper developer (a mix of leftovers), ca. 90 seconds - development essentially to completion.
After stop bath (acetic acid) turned on the lights for further processing.
Bleach: dichromate + sulphuric acid
Redevelopment: same developer as for the initial development, again to completion.
Notice a few things:
* The image is fairly dark. This is basically because there's way too much silver halide left after the first development step (and bleaching), even despite the pretty dramatic overexposure.
* The edges are too light. This is due to the use of a concentrated developer and a suboptimal agitation scheme in the first development step. Can easily be resolved by using a more dilute developer and intermittent agitation. But I just did a quick & dirty test.
* Contrast is on the low side, but it's also a low contrast scene to begin with. So overall quite realistic.
The excess overall density is the main issue, and it can be solved by adding a silver solvent (e.g. sodium thiosulfate) to the first developer, or, alternatively, partly fixing the negative in a dilute thiosulfate solution before the first development step. The exact parameters (thiosulfate concentration + fixing time) need to be tailored to the film and the desired contrast. I did not do any of this testing; it involves a systematic approach. As I did this test in a matter of half an hour or so, I didn't bother with it. But to optimize the results, it is required.
Here's the same piece of film held up to the window and photographed with my crappy phone:
http://www.koraks.nl/galleries/zut/t...BRAr_01ssw.jpg
You are awesome, man.
Very very great ,,
God bless you ,
- If you allow me ,,
I have some remarks, I hope your chest expanded to listen to it.
I find myself more inclined to use potassium thiocyanate instead of sodium thiosulfate, as it means more accurate results.
- I think that the idea that the first developer is the same as the second developer has proven to be a failure of that idea a lot,
- The first developer should contain potassium thiocyanate or sodium thiosulfate (I prefer the first), while the second developer does not contain this component.
- The image still has a lot of silver, as the bleaching is not sufficient, (the time of bleaching is small or the focus of the bleach is weak or both reasons)
The second re-exposure was weak as I thought and relied only on completing the steps with room light (as I think), and this is not enough, the second re-exposure should be done in a concentrated manner and preferably chemical and not dependent on room lighting because re-exposure is using Room lighting will not result in equal and equal exposure in all parts of the film, and accordingly, the image will be a hybrid of negative and positive anonymously.
This is what I thought happened to you,
In any case, you are a great and wonderful man. You were thrown in a stagnant pool.
- This experience will excite the rest of the colleagues to provide more tests, and this is very amazing.
- I got a piece of the camera and the rest of the camera is not available yet, and I want to consult you, what is that piece and is it compatible with all cameras?
God bless you
NB :
Regarding the re-exposure step.
I support the chemical method.
By adding one gram of tin chloride to the second developer.
Work in complete darkness in all steps.
Attachment 202599
Attachment 202600
Attachment 202601
-
Re: Use of X-ray film: technical discussion with example images
Quote:
Originally Posted by
mohmadkhatab
You are awesome, man.
Very very great ,,
God bless you ,
- If you allow me ,,
I have some remarks, I hope your chest expanded to listen to it.
Many thanks, Mohmad, for your kind words and for sharing your thoughts. Please allow me to respond on them:
Quote:
I find myself more inclined to use potassium thiocyanate instead of sodium thiosulfate, as it means more accurate results.
- I think that the idea that the first developer is the same as the second developer has proven to be a failure of that idea a lot,
- The first developer should contain potassium thiocyanate or sodium thiosulfate (I prefer the first), while the second developer does not contain this component.
Yes, I agree. The first developer should ideally contain a silver solvent, or alternatively a separate silver solvent process step should be performed before the bleach step. I think the choice between thiocyanate and thiosulfate is perhaps a personal one; why would you prefer thiocyanate?
Quote:
- The image still has a lot of silver, as the bleaching is not sufficient, (the time of bleaching is small or the focus of the bleach is weak or both reasons)
I do not think the bleaching was insufficient. It was essentially complete, and this was easily verified visually since bleaching was done under normal light. Additionally, dichromate bleach is always very fast and effective in my experience.
Quote:
The second re-exposure was weak as I thought and relied only on completing the steps with room light (as I think), and this is not enough, the second re-exposure should be done in a concentrated manner and preferably chemical and not dependent on room lighting because re-exposure is using Room lighting will not result in equal and equal exposure in all parts of the film, and accordingly, the image will be a hybrid of negative and positive anonymously.
In the image shown, I turned on the room lights after the stop bath and kept them on for processing. Note that my room lights are very bright indeed and exposure to them will fully expose any film, no matter what speed, within a second or so. In a subsequent experiment I reduced the exposure by a controlled one-second exposure to my room light. The effect was identical. This suggests that the fogging exposure was complete in both instances.
Quote:
Regarding the re-exposure step.
I support the chemical method.
By adding one gram of tin chloride to the second developer.
Yes, I would prefer a chemical fogging step as well. Sadly, I do not have any tin chloride on hand. I might give it a try with sepia toner, but this of course modifies the image tone and adds some density as well on top of the silver image alone.
As to your question on the equipment: it looks like a grafmatic 4x5" film holder. I have never used them, but as far as I understand, it is basically a standard 4x5" film holder with a little number dial that can be used to identify individual holders by exposing a number on each film sheet. I know that one or more people on this forums use these holders. I don't know in which cameras they may or may not fit. I mostly use Lisco Regal film holders.
-
Re: Use of X-ray film: technical discussion with example images
Quote:
Originally Posted by
koraks
Many thanks, Mohmad, for your kind words and for sharing your thoughts. Please allow me to respond on them:
Yes, I agree. The first developer should ideally contain a silver solvent, or alternatively a separate silver solvent process step should be performed before the bleach step. I think the choice between thiocyanate and thiosulfate is perhaps a personal one; why would you prefer thiocyanate?
I do not think the bleaching was insufficient. It was essentially complete, and this was easily verified visually since bleaching was done under normal light. Additionally, dichromate bleach is always very fast and effective in my experience.
In the image shown, I turned on the room lights after the stop bath and kept them on for processing. Note that my room lights are very bright indeed and exposure to them will fully expose any film, no matter what speed, within a second or so. In a subsequent experiment I reduced the exposure by a controlled one-second exposure to my room light. The effect was identical. This suggests that the fogging exposure was complete in both instances.
Yes, I would prefer a chemical fogging step as well. Sadly, I do not have any tin chloride on hand. I might give it a try with sepia toner, but this of course modifies the image tone and adds some density as well on top of the silver image alone.
As to your question on the equipment: it looks like a grafmatic 4x5" film holder. I have never used them, but as far as I understand, it is basically a standard 4x5" film holder with a little number dial that can be used to identify individual holders by exposing a number on each film sheet. I know that one or more people on this forums use these holders. I don't know in which cameras they may or may not fit. I mostly use Lisco Regal film holders.
Hello my dear friend. God bless you .
Happy Easter Holiday .
First, there are many experiments that have proven that potassium thiocyanate works with better accuracy than sodium thiosulfate. Experience (the worksheet I attached before that pertains to the process, Agfa Scala indicates this).
Second - bleaching is strong, but inaccurate. For this, speed does not necessarily mean accuracy, you should increase the time a little, perhaps an additional minute (trust me), or use potassium permanganate because it is very accurate in dealing with all the nanoparticles.
Third - If you want to get a transparent sepia of dark brown, then you will not need to use (re-exposure solution) nor will you need to use the second developer.
You will only need to use ammonia solution.
It consists of:
Deionized water
150 g ammonium chloride
200 ml ammonium hydroxide solution 20%
Water up to 1 liter - used as follows.
Initial wash with lukewarm water
The first developer
Stop Bath
Quick wash
Bleach
Quick wash
Cleaning Bath
Quick wash
Ammonia solution three minutes bath with rapid and violent stirring
wash
wash
Fix
Final wash. Staples
Dealing with an ammonia solution will require wearing a mask mask and safety glasses - working near the ventilator hood. It is a very stupid and evil solution.
Finally, I think working in total darkness is a good thing.
-------------------------------------------------- ----------
I brought a data sheet ,, a seller from Ukraine sent me and told me that this type of industrial X-ray film is good quality ..
Could you please take a look and tell me what you think is this paper please.
God bless you i
-
Re: Use of X-ray film: technical discussion with example images
Quote:
Originally Posted by
mohmadkhatab
Your link is malformed; it should start with "http://" but it starts with "ttp://". In any case, I was able to look at the datasheet & it doesn't provide a lot of useful information. The film is medium speed but that doesn't translate directly to an ISO/ASA film speed; as noted elsewhere in this forum you'll need to do film speed tests yourself to determine the film speed. And remember that x-ray film speed changes under different lighting conditions due to its narrow spectral sensitivity.
The only other noteworthy data are that it is high contrast (most or all x-ray film is) and fine-grained, and that it comes in a variety of sizes.
Regarding the film holders, you're better off (for now, at least) with a standard film holder sized appropriately for your camera or reducing back. You'll find Regal, Lisco, Fidelity Deluxe, Riteway, Eastman Kodak, and Toyo are all readily available. I prefer the Toyo holders as they are very precisely manufactured and they weigh less than some of the older holders, but any of these will work.
Here is a discussion of film holders from this forum.
Since you'll probably be cutting down larger film to fit your holders, remember that the nominal size is a bit larger than the actual film size needed to fit. For instance, 4″×5″ film is actually closer to 3⅞″×4⅞″. I put white tape on my paper cutter to act as a guide when I'm trimming x-ray film.
-
Re: Use of X-ray film: technical discussion with example images
Quote:
Originally Posted by
seezee
Your link is malformed; it should start with "http://" but it starts with "ttp://". In any case, I was able to look at the datasheet & it doesn't provide a lot of useful information. The film is medium speed but that doesn't translate directly to an ISO/ASA film speed; as noted elsewhere in this forum you'll need to do film speed tests yourself to determine the film speed. And remember that x-ray film speed changes under different lighting conditions due to its narrow spectral sensitivity.
The only other noteworthy data are that it is high contrast (most or all x-ray film is) and fine-grained, and that it comes in a variety of sizes.
Regarding the film holders, you're better off (for now, at least) with a standard film holder sized appropriately for your camera or reducing back. You'll find Regal, Lisco, Fidelity Deluxe, Riteway, Eastman Kodak, and Toyo are all readily available. I prefer the Toyo holders as they are very precisely manufactured and they weigh less than some of the older holders, but any of these will work.
Here is a discussion of film holders from this forum.
Since you'll probably be cutting down larger film to fit your holders, remember that the nominal size is a bit larger than the actual film size needed to fit. For instance, 4″×5″ film is actually closer to 3⅞″×4⅞″. I put white tape on my paper cutter to act as a guide when I'm trimming x-ray film.
God bless you, my dear teacher.
You are a very nice man.
Greetings to all of you, all respected Oklahoma City metro.
I benefited greatly from your wonderful response.
Regarding the movie stand.
This piece was given to me by an Egyptian doctor who bought it from America a long time ago and does not want it, he had known that I was looking to buy a large camera, and for this he wanted to give it to me and says that this piece can carry up to eight slides at once and switch between them after Every picture.
I actually don't really know, and I'm still looking for a cheap camera and it's complicated in light of the emergency imposed in the country.
God bless you
Greetings to you, dear sir.
-
Re: Use of X-ray film: technical discussion with example images
I checked the datasheet of the foma xray film. It seems to be intended for direct exposure with xrays, not with visible light. The emulsion is likely still sensitive to at least blue light and perhaps green, but some testing would be required to figure out if and how it can be used for photography. Frankly, I'd skip this film and choose a film stock that is known to work with normal light.
-
Re: Use of X-ray film: technical discussion with example images
Quote:
Originally Posted by
mohmadkhatab
Third - If you want to get a transparent sepia of dark brown, then you will not need to use (re-exposure solution) nor will you need to use the second developer.
You will only need to use ammonia solution.
It consists of:
Deionized water
150 g ammonium chloride
200 ml ammonium hydroxide solution 20%
Water up to 1 liter - used as follows.
Initial wash with lukewarm water
Mohmad, thanks for sharing. I'm curious to know from where did you get this formula. And have you used it?
-
Re: Use of X-ray film: technical discussion with example images
Quote:
Originally Posted by
koraks
I checked the datasheet of the foma xray film. It seems to be intended for direct exposure with xrays, not with visible light. The emulsion is likely still sensitive to at least blue light and perhaps green, but some testing would be required to figure out if and how it can be used for photography. Frankly, I'd skip this film and choose a film stock that is known to work with normal light.
I have experimented with several "x-ray only" films and have not found one I could not use in cameras.
-
Re: Use of X-ray film: technical discussion with example images
I got it from my Austrian friend, Mr. Rudi.
Mr. Rudi, today he went to his father's funeral, Professor at the Faculty of Agriculture and he was a great man.
I really did try that recipe and came up with somewhat acceptable results, but the movie was expired and the first developer didn't get the job done best. Unfortunately, the first developer was weak, at that time I used the first process developer (AP41), which was then the developer I had today.
- But it was preliminary results indicating that the formula as a whole is correct, but the first developer must be very strong and very effective more than we thought.
- I will repeat those tests again, but I am waiting for fresh black and white films that will come to me from Ukraine soon,
-
Re: Use of X-ray film: technical discussion with example images
This is an important and optimistic narration.
-
Re: Use of X-ray film: technical discussion with example images
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Jim Noel
I have experimented with several "x-ray only" films and have not found one I could not use in cameras.
How do the 'xray only' films relate to the 'regular xray' films in your experience? Comparable, or slower + higher contrast?
-
Re: Use of X-ray film: technical discussion with example images
Quote:
Originally Posted by
mohmadkhatab
- I will repeat those tests again, but I am waiting for fresh black and white films that will come to me from Ukraine soon,
Thanks Mohmad. Much appreciated.
-
Re: Use of X-ray film: technical discussion with example images
Quote:
Originally Posted by
koraks
How do the 'xray only' films relate to the 'regular xray' films in your experience? Comparable, or slower + higher contrast?
SOme slower,some faster, and contrast dependent on developer and method. I did this experimentation 20+ years ago and have no current notes.
-
Re: Use of X-ray film: technical discussion with example images
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Jim Noel
SOme slower,some faster, and contrast dependent on developer and method. I did this experimentation 20+ years ago and have no current notes.
I was contacted by an Egyptian dealer, who was offered a green 10 x 12 cm Fuji X-ray film.
In fact ,, I am seeking to know the characteristics of each species or class through the experiences and tests of professors who preceded me in this field and have a lot of practical experience ..
- If you don't mind,
I hope you give me an overview of each category and the best way to deal with it and the best developer that is compatible with it.
God bless you
-
Re: Use of X-ray film: technical discussion with example images
All of the shots that I have posted are with Fuji green. Its called Super HR-UC
-
Re: Use of X-ray film: technical discussion with example images
Quote:
Originally Posted by
blue4130
All of the shots that I have posted are with Fuji green. Its called Super HR-UC
+1
-
Re: Use of X-ray film: technical discussion with example images
Quote:
Originally Posted by
mohmadkhatab
I was contacted by an Egyptian dealer, who was offered a green 10 x 12 cm Fuji X-ray film.
In fact ,, I am seeking to know the characteristics of each species or class through the experiences and tests of professors who preceded me in this field and have a lot of practical experience ..
- If you don't mind,
I hope you give me an overview of each category and the best way to deal with it and the best developer that is compatible with it.
God bless you
Mohmad, there are so many variables that our past experience may not apply to your exact situation with this film. Just as with regular film, it's best for you to do your own exposure tests and developer tests. However, if you have the patience to read this entire discussion (500+ pages!) you will see many examples of people using this exact film, along with exposure information and developer information.
I know it's a lot to dig through but it is worth it.
I mentioned several developers in a previous reply to you — they are well tested by forum members for x-ray film. You could get good results from any of them if you can source them (or the ingredients to make them). Best of luck to you!
-
1 Attachment(s)
Re: Use of X-ray film: technical discussion with example images
Attachment 202781
I have been useing the single sided Ektascan rated at 50, 7x17 cut down from 14x17. Processed in a Unicolor 16x20 drum on a reversing unicolor motor...7ml of HC-110 syrup to 1,000ml of water for 15 mins. This has been working good for me.
-
1 Attachment(s)
Re: Use of X-ray film: technical discussion with example images
Attachment 202783
And here is the same shot useing 7x17 Ilford FP4'
-
Re: Use of X-ray film: technical discussion with example images
Quote:
Originally Posted by
seezee
Mohmad, there are so many variables that our past experience may not apply to your exact situation with this film. Just as with regular film, it's best for you to do your own exposure tests and developer tests. However, if you have the patience to read this entire discussion (500+ pages!) you will see many examples of people using this exact film, along with exposure information and developer information.
I know it's a lot to dig through but it is worth it.
I mentioned several developers in a previous reply to you — they are well tested by forum members for x-ray film. You could get good results from any of them if you can source them (or the ingredients to make them). Best of luck to you!
God bless you ,,
Happy Easter Holiday ,,
You are really a good man,
I am very interested in your suggestion. I think it is a very interesting and important proposal.
I am currently in the pre-trial phase, which is the stage of gathering information. Yes, I will read 500 pages. Why not. The story is a story of research, research and studies in the first place. There is nothing wrong with reading ,,
- I never asked for solutions on a plate of gold. I know that I have to strive and strive to reach the desired goals, and this is the difference between those who strive and those who do not.
Greetings to you ,, God bless you.
-
Re: Use of X-ray film: technical discussion with example images
Quote:
Originally Posted by
captainscot
Attachment 202781
I have been useing the single sided Ektascan rated at 50, 7x17 cut down from 14x17. Processed in a Unicolor 16x20 drum on a reversing unicolor motor...7ml of HC-110 syrup to 1,000ml of water for 15 mins. This has been working good for me.
These are very great results, my dear colleague.
These are amazing results,
I am very happy with these great results ,,
Greetings to you.
-
Re: Use of X-ray film: technical discussion with example images
My entry for WPPD this year
https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/...e542ec86_b.jpg2020-008_DxO by -HoodedOne-
Shot made with ONDU 8x10 pinhole camera, on fuji x-ray film. Developed in microphen (stock)
-
Re: Use of X-ray film: technical discussion with example images
God bless you - this is a very impressive and amazing success
Greetings to you
-
Re: Use of X-ray film: technical discussion with example images
-
Re: Use of X-ray film: technical discussion with example images
I have sad news: Carestream Ektascan B/RA has been discontinued. Does anyone know of any other single-emulsion films available? Or does anyone have any leftover stock they're not using? I'd come to rely on its orthochromacy for a particular project I'm doing.
-
Re: Use of X-ray film: technical discussion with example images
Quote:
Originally Posted by
meditant
Is ADM MAMO the same as UM-MA? I'm considering buying some UM-MA.
-
Re: Use of X-ray film: technical discussion with example images
Quote:
Originally Posted by
senderoaburrido
I have sad news: Carestream Ektascan B/RA has been discontinued. Does anyone know of any other single-emulsion films available? Or does anyone have any leftover stock they're not using? I'd come to rely on its orthochromacy for a particular project I'm doing.
Was this from the manufacturer? A supplier? Or somewhere else?
-
Re: Use of X-ray film: technical discussion with example images
-
Re: Use of X-ray film: technical discussion with example images
Curious where everyone's getting their x-ray film? Also, besides the difference between the blue and green and single- and double-emulsion versions, there seems to be an astounding variety of special application films (mammography, etc.). Apologies if this has been covered already, but with 500+ posts in this thread I haven't been able to find a basic explanation of what to look for in these. Can anyone briefly outline the most fundamental differences?
-
Re: Use of X-ray film: technical discussion with example images
ZZ told me the same and refunded me $320 from a case order this week
Perhaps I got the last 2 boxes last month, when I placed the case order and paid for 5 boxes
They said at that time they had some coming...guess not...or a machiavellian plot is afoot...
BUT 6 years ago I was told by ZZ 14X17" Ektascan was 86, but I and they persevered and found me a case after a long while
Sometimes there is some somewhere, but right now nobody is searching too hard, as few are working or if they are, they are maximizing their profits, just as I would...
I suggest you buy 2X-side now, before it goes, it also works fine
Quote:
Originally Posted by
seezee
Was this from the manufacturer? A supplier? Or somewhere else?
-
Re: Use of X-ray film: technical discussion with example images
I buy only from ZZ and usually only Carestream which is made by Kodak and is T grain
Double sided seems to be all there is now
8X10 and 11X14 will fit normal photo holders, the rest is a crapshoot
But I often cut it down to smaller sizes and I see right now none is FS on ZZ from this list https://www.zzmedical.com/analog-x-r...-ray-film.html
IF and I am not buying anymore this looks like a great deal https://www.zzmedical.com/analog-x-r...-ray-film.html
I have been warning for 2 years that X-Ray film is dead... soon
AND MOST OF US HAVE READ THE WHOLE THREAD
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Scyg
Curious where everyone's getting their x-ray film? Also, besides the difference between the blue and green and single- and double-emulsion versions, there seems to be an astounding variety of special application films (mammography, etc.). Apologies if this has been covered already, but with 500+ posts in this thread I haven't been able to find a basic explanation of what to look for in these. Can anyone briefly outline the most fundamental differences?