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

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by stiganas

I want to build a stash of xray film before it goes extinct. Is easy to buy film locally; Carestream, I already bought the regular, cheap, MXG film and I want to buy more but I prefer, of course, a sigle sided film.

All mamo film available, Carestream Min-R S, Carestream Min-R 2000, Carestream Min-R EV are double sided according to the datasheets:

- MIN-R 2000 Plus Film is a medium speed, dual coated,
- MIN-R S Film is a medium speed, dual coated,
- MIN-R EV Film is a medium speed, dual coated

and yet I read on this topic that Min-R film is single coated. It is a different film ?

I don't know yet if the Fuji UM-MA is available locally but intend to find out.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kiwi7475

I am also interested in knowing if there’s other single sided x-ray film still available — I don’t know the answer to your question, but I do know that UM-MA comes in 18x24 cm (and 24x30) which based on what I researched, will not fit an 8x10 holder, it will fall out. You would need a 18x24cm (7x9”) holder and a back that supports it. For these reasons I stopped considering UM-MA.

The only single sided X-ray film I’m aware of right now is (and it even has antihalation) is Agfa’s Radiomat Duplicating X-ray such as the one found here:

https://www.graylinemedical.com/prod...er-box-pcd1114

But its price competes with non X-ray film, so why bother.

(Care stream also has a comparable duplicating film:
https://www.carestream.cn/de/de/-/me...g-film-tds.pdf)

It’d be nice to hear if others are aware of other single sided options still available.

---

there's at least three or four brands of 5x12 dental duplicating film available on ebay.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by maltfalc

there's at least three or four brands of 5x12 dental duplicating film available on ebay.

---

Right— thank you!
However for my part I’m looking for options compatible with 8x10 and 11x14 (even if trimming is required).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by stiganas

All mamo film available, Carestream Min-R S, Carestream Min-R 2000, Carestream Min-R EV are double sided according to the datasheets:

- MIN-R 2000 Plus Film is a medium speed, dual coated,
- MIN-R S Film is a medium speed, dual coated,
- MIN-R EV Film is a medium speed, dual coated

and yet I read on this topic that Min-R film is single coated. It is a different film ?

---

I read a flyer (don't remember if it was from Carestream or Kodak) about these films and they explain that dual coated mean a fine coating and a coarse coating. It was not clear if the two coatings are on the same side or on different sides of the support. But they explained which coating has to be oriented to the light. (As I remember it was the fine one.)
I also contacted Carestream, asking to clarify if these films are coated with two layers both on the same side of the support or each on a different side of it. They did not answer. Maybe somebody else will try to contact them?

On the other hand, the technical data sheet says:

"Processing MIN-R 2000 Plus
Film (Emulsion up versus down)
As with all current Carestream mammography films, we recommend processing MIN-R2000 Plus Film primary emulsion side down in the MIN-R, 270 RA, 3000 RA and M35 series processors as well as in other manufacturers’ shallow tank processors.
Processing non-uniformity, characterized by uneven optical densities on radiographs may occur due to the accumulation of processing by-products adjacent to the film emulsion inside the developer rack.
Processing the film primary emulsion side down allows the developer solution to reach the primary emulsion more efficiently, reducing the occurrence of non-uniform development."

Also read page 13 (page 15 of the PDF) in this very detailed brochure: http://www.medimat.hu/data/2013/0913...ide_M3-103.pdf

Interesting, I dug through Kodak technical pdf and found this::

Processing the film primary
emulsion side down allows the
developer solution to reach the
primary emulsion more efficiently,
reducing the occurrence of nonuniform
development.

So it looks like two different layers on the two sides.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Eugen Mezei

I read a flyer (don't remember if it was from Carestream or Kodak) about these films and they explain that dual coated mean a fine coating and a coarse coating. It was not clear if the two coatings are on the same side or on different sides of the support. But they explained which coating has to be oriented to the light. (As I remember it was the fine one.)
I also contacted Carestream, asking to clarify if these films are coated with two layers both on the same side of the support or each on a different side of it. They did not answer. Maybe somebody else will try to contact them?

---

Interesting… so is this film notched? Is the other layer an antihalation only? (That’s probably wishful thinking but I’m not sure why they’d want to coat two different emulsions on each side….)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kiwi7475

Interesting… so is this film notched? Is the other layer an antihalation only? (That’s probably wishful thinking but I’m not sure why they’d want to coat two different emulsions on each side….)

---

the front emulsion is right up against the intensifying screen, so it uses a finer, higher resolution emulsion. the light that makes it through the front emulsion and base to the rear emulsion has lost some fine detail, so the rear emulsion can use a coarser, higher sensitivity emulsion.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by maltfalc

the front emulsion is right up against the intensifying screen, so it uses a finer, higher resolution emulsion. the light that makes it through the front emulsion and base to the rear emulsion has lost some fine detail, so the rear emulsion can use a coarser, higher sensitivity emulsion.

---

Thanks! I appreciate the explanation.

I think this means however that if using that film we are 1) still susceptible to scratches on both sides 2) sacrificing resolution in contact printing due to the second emulsion separated by the film thickness (maybe now even worse if the other emulsion is coarser, compared to identical coatings on both sides?) and 3) still without antihilation; so maybe these represent no real advantage to the other options such as Fuji HRU, etc….

https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/...12373511_b.jpgMINR XRay Test 1 210mm Componon F22 Two Pops C171 by Nokton48, on Flickr

18x24cm Kodak MIN-R Mammography film cut into 4x5s. Sinar Norma Broncolor C171 with Broncolor Pulso Beauty Dish. Two strobe pops with Sinar Norma Shutter, multiple pops are no problem. Schneider chrome Componon lens at F22. Lisco Regal 4x5 film holder. Legacy Mic-X film dev 8 mins at 68F Aristo 8x10 #2 RC print Multigrade dev

https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/...9bb6948f_b.jpgSinar Norma 18x24 Lisco Holders XRAY by Nokton48, on Flickr

https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/...ed0d99f0_b.jpgKodak Min-R Single Sided Mammography 18x24cm by Nokton48, on Flickr

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kiwi7475

Thanks! I appreciate the explanation.

I think this means however that if using that film we are 1) still susceptible to scratches on both sides 2) sacrificing resolution in contact printing due to the second emulsion separated by the film thickness (maybe now even worse if the other emulsion is coarser, compared to identical coatings on both sides?) and 3) still without antihilation; so maybe these represent no real advantage to the other options such as Fuji HRU, etc….

---

the rear emulsion is likely there to boost density or dynamic range and the front emulsion should capture plenty of fine detail and may transfer it well in contact prints. it wouldn't be optimized for one sided illumination if they weren't trying to maximize fine details. it does seem to have an antihalation layer over the rear emulsion. but who knows.

Yes, the two emulsion do indeed boost dmax, but I think the main reason is that it doubles the amount of silver halide, which increases the film speed. It is best to develop this type of xray film in flat-bottomed trays, using very gentle agitation. I never get any scratches this way (including 14x17). As far as contact printing goes, you cannot see any difference in resolution, unless you do a side by side comparison with a single-sided film print, and even then, it is subtle.